Chaos_String

My DM/EA brute chains MG > Gloom > Smite > Siphon Life and did enough damage to defeat Ms. Liberty, who clearly has both a godmode and a self-heal.

Yeah, you'll have a bit of recharge issue with this build; Headsplitter is charging too slow to chain Headsplitter, Hack, Disembowel, Slice. You'll need to get Headsplitter down to 7.3ish sec cooldown to make that chain work well. Even then, it's not a top DPS chain, but it's servicible.

If I were you, I'd also be concerned with recovery and regeneration in this build. Both are pretty low, and your MaxHP isn't much to write home about, either.

The beauty of SoW is that with QR and Stamina, the endurance crash is very managable for a well-built /WP scrapper. Because of this, it's essentially a survivability boost with little or no drawback. Not an I-Win button, but it doesn't become an I-Lose button either, and it helps to plug the burst damage hole that can be Willpower's Achilles heel.

And since SoW is fully enhanceable for resistance with just a few slots, it's also a good place to slot a few Aegis or Reactive Armor pieces for a bit more typed defense.

It's skippable in the sense that you won't be gimped without it, but it's a good power choice if you can fit it into your build.

Revised build is solid enough. Now I'm down to just quibbles:

1) If you intend to fight EBs and up, try to work that Achilles Heel proc into Hack. Since the best single-target attack chain available in your build is: Headsplitter, Hack, Disembowel, Parry, you don't need Hack to recharge any faster than 6 seconds. Therefore, use 5 of the Crushing Impact set, but not the Damage/Recharge. Instead, slot the AH proc. If you're not going to be fighting a lot of tough foes, then a damage proc (like a Hecatomb or Mako's Bite proc) would be better.

2) Switch the Performance Shifter trike out for the Chance for +End proc. It will give you more endurance than anything else you can slot there, about 0.2end/sec on average.

3) IMO, you'd get a lot more mileage out of Aid Other/Aid Self than you would get from Stealth and Petrifying Gaze. If you need to be stealthy, slot a +Stealth IO in Sprint. And if you need to put a pesky minion or lieutenant on ice, hit it with Headsplitter.

4) Obliterations in Shield Charge wouldn't hurt, but if you're gong to use Parry religiously, you could live with a different set, or better yet, frankenslot for max recharge.

5) Seemingly you have a couple slots left over. If I were you, I'd use at least one of them to get faster recharge from Build Up. Then the other one could maybe go to True Grit for more damage resistance, or possibly a Regenerative Tissue unique.

Some comments:

1) When making a /SD scrapper, you should aim for the positional defense "softcaps" of 45% to melee, ranged, and AoE attacks. This means you should use sets that give you positional defense bonuses, and try to add up 45% to each position. Bear in mind that since you have Parry, you can use that to shore up Melee defense. But you'll want to put ranged and AoE at or above 45%.

2) Pick Hack, not Slash.

3) Broadsword attacks debuff defense, which by itself isn't terribly useful, but it allows you to slot Achilles Heel -resistance procs into your attacks. Against single, hard targets like bosses, EBs, AVs, and GMs it will really improve your damage. Best bet is to slot it into an attack that recharges quickly and is repeated in your attack chain.

4) The +HP aspect of True Grit is more valuable than the damage resistance.

5) You've either overslotted Stamina (the common IO is basically a wasted slot) or underslotted it (fallen short of the +def set bonus from slotting the full set). Take your pick.

6) Phalanx Fighting doesn't deserve a second slot. Drop your LotG in there and call it good. Also, bear in mind that Mids' doesn't show you the correct value of its defense boost if you're solo. Either change the power in your database to scale up from 0 rather than 1, or just turn it off and add the 3.75% base defense (which isn't enhanceable).

Frankly you've got a lot of work to do tightening up this build. Your best bet is to use your search-fu and find the John_Printemps Shield Defense guide (old links to it will be busted since the forums have migrated). That guide will show you some good enhancement strategies to softcap your defenses, and once you've got that in hand, the rest of the build will be easier to critique.

Chaos String here. Although my avatar and forums namesake is a grav/kin controller (my first lvl 50), I play in a constant state of scrapperlock, so scrappers are my favorite AT.

I'm not known for anything I'm aware of. I'm a proponent of Broadsword, though (esp. BS/SD, my current main Scrapper), and am one of the (apparently) few players to push its dps beyond 200.

I also have a lvl 50 MA/SR scrapper, and am taking the scenic route to 50 on a Kat/WP.

Clowns.

You could slot MoG better:

-Switch the LotG: Defense out for a Def/Rech
-Switch one of the common IOs to a LotG: End/Rech

Now you have a couple more seconds uptime on MoG, and are still over 100% def to all but psi (which is overkill). Also you get an additional +HP bonus from the third LotG.

Additionally, you're over the cap on +3.13% AoE def bonuses. Might as well remove a Zepher -KB from either SS or SJ and put the slot somewhere else.

[ QUOTE ]
Continuing to put the hurt on Nemesis instead of the Council does nothing to stop the Council from attacking Nemesis and catching innocents in the crossfire.

And attacking the Council does nothing to stop Nemesis from attacking the Council and catching innocents in the crossfire.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nemesis aren't attacking the Council. The Council are attacking Nemesis. They're the aggressors (for the moment) which is why you have to stop them. This is explicit, but you're ignoring it because you're in a knot about being outmaneuvered.

[ QUOTE ]
If the goal is to stop the shooting ASAP the only logical moves are a) form an alliance of convenience with the Council and take on Nemesis,

[/ QUOTE ]
So, ally with the aggressors and help them attack their targets in order to stop the fighting ASAP. Bloody brilliant.

[ QUOTE ]
b) attack both sides, preferably as LJ says by calling in more heroes,

[/ QUOTE ]
Now you're asking for a deus ex machina to save you the bother of possibly being wrong about something. Any number of tangential objectives in any number of arcs could be solved by "calling in more heroes," and this rather obvious device is never used, for rather obvious reasons. You have to stop the Council attacking Nemesis and you have to do it yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
or c) allow it to resolve itself and deal with street fighting as it occurs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Back to "I'll allow two batallions of supersoldiers to war openly in the streets and endanger civilians, instead of preventing the hostilities; just so that, in the end, I won't have been wrong about something." Inspired.

[ QUOTE ]
The plot is what it says it is, not some ad hoc fanwank conjured up to justify it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've done no conjuring. I've observed an explicit objective of one mission that remains implicit in the next. That is what it says it is, provided your ability to retain an idea extends from one mission to the next. And "ad hoc fanwank?" My, but you're a sad little curmudgeon.

[ QUOTE ]
Nemesis has zero credibility as anything other than an antiquated fossil. He's not written well even once in the canon.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nemesis is "The Prussian Prince of Automatons." Not the Baltic Baron of Battlemeks, or Bots, or Androids. Automatons.

Steam. Powered. Automatons.

It's really pathetic that a self-styled literary reviewer can't put his finger on such obvious homage to Golden Age comics kitsch, nor wrap his head around the fun and irony of its inclusion in City of Heroes.

Clearly you find the postmodern, politcially-charged cynicism and neo-James-Bond themes typical of Malta arcs more ameliorable, which is fine; and in this decade requires less suspension of disbelief--though that's rather funny in an MMO where players conjure fireballs in their bare hands and fly by force of will alone.

In the end (and this is the end), you're too egotistical and insecure to abide your hero ever being wrong about anything; and you're too pseudointellectual to appreciate kitsch in any form.

It leads to a predictible slant in what are otherwise insightful reviews.

And there's an object lesson here: to architects, and to your readers, and most importantly to you, if anyone chooses to find it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Again, if detente is the actual objective, then the course of action is logical. While it goes against Max's common sense and the player's too, it isn't as cut-and-dry as Throwing the Idiot Ball. (Let alone Jumping the Shark, which is something else altogether.)

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't help but say this. Since when did Max have any common sense?

Anyway, if you place yourself in Maxwell Christopher's shoes, the logical thing to do would be to continue to put the hurt on Nemesis instead of the Council. Nemesis, according to Maxwell, is the greatest super genius and villain of all time. When backed against the wall, he would neither be subsumed by the Council or agree to serve them. Nemesis would probably go into hiding before bowing to the Center.

I've disagreed with Venture before about Nemesis, but Maxwell Christopher is a complete idiot, and he does throw the idiot ball to you by the definition of the term. A character (In this case, the player) who has the idiot ball is acting uncharacteristically stupid for the sake of a plot. So if you think that letting Nemesis get the upper hand in the war (And you are, since it's not that hard to imagine that Nemesis would be playing weak to gain an upper hand later) is a stupid idea, you are forced to act stupidly because your only option is to do what Maxwell Christopher tells you to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Continuing to put the hurt on Nemesis instead of the Council does nothing to stop the Council from attacking Nemesis and catching innocents in the crossfire.

As I've said already, even if you are justly dubious about Maxwell's fears that Nemesis will be subsumed by the Council (which in addition to being wrong are wholly irrelevant), that doesn't diminish the need to immediately curtail the open warfare between the two factions.

Since the Council appears to be the aggressor, it's logical to destroy their munitions and/or arrest their personnel in order to halt the aggression.

Yes, this gives Nemesis an opportunity to attempt a coup against the Council--an attempt that the hero thwarts in the very next mission.

But whether or not the hero bought into Maxwell's theory that Nemesis is on the ropes and might wind up serving the Center, he or she nonetheless forces the cessation of hostilities between the two factions, thereby saving innocent lives--and furthermore deflects Nemesis' gambit by thwarting his takeover of the Council.

These suggestions simply to let the two factions duke it out ignore the estabished premise that the open warfare is tearing apart Paragon City and endangering innocent lives. And although simplistically it may seem like the "correct strategic move" to let two enemies weaken one another, just allowing two batallions of supersoliders to battle openly in the streets of a thriving metropolis is frankly more idiotic than anything Max suggests.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm glad you guys are enjoying this!
I have never seen or heard a single MST3K in my life, though, so I'm afraid the resemblance is unintentional.

...

I'm missing out on a lot, aren't I?

[/ QUOTE ]

You really are.

... search Youtube for "Prince of Space MST3K" or "Space Mutiny MST3K". Those are two of the best, and you'll probably turn up quite a few clips that'll give you some idea of what MST3K is about. ^_^

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL @ the memories.

Oh, man. "Prince of Space" was awesome.

Emperical data suggests the accuracy of my earlier contention that your weapons against me are without merit!

Good times, man. Good times.

[ QUOTE ]
If it's a valid reason for stopping the first battle, it's a valid reason for preventing a second one.

That is not the reason put before the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's bloody well implicit. If the first attack jeapordized civilians, subsequent attacks probably will, too.

[ QUOTE ]
What is actually written throws the Idiot Ball.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maxwell Christopher's personal bugbears are irrelevant. If it was true that open war between Nemesis and the Council was placing the public at risk in the first mission, it remains true in the second one.

[ QUOTE ]
And I'm far from the only person who thinks so -- in fact, you are the only person in five years I've ever heard defend this arc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Evidently I'm the only person who sees that detante remains the primary objective; that the necessity of the first mission implies the necessity of a second.

The noise about Nemesis being absorbed by the Center is admittely nonsense--an irrational fear of Maxwell Christopher, the evident purpose of which is merely to raise the stakes--but that does nothing to diminish the need to protect civillians by stopping open warfare on the streets.

Perhaps I have no problem with the arc simply because I have no problem with a story giving the Devil his due by outsmarting my guy, or merely forcing a mistake on his part, once in a great while.

I don't hate the arc. In fact I think canon demands it, or something like it. Without it, Nemesis simply wouldn't have much credibility as a manipulator behind the scenes. Or wouldn't have had any, prior to Dark Watcher's arc.

If it's a valid reason for stopping the first battle, it's a valid reason for preventing a second one. The next sentence after the passage you quoted is:

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, you can either take out the weapons stockpiles or the personnel on the base. Either should work. You also need to find some intelligence that could help us target the next strike more precisely.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, you read it as Jumping the Shark. I read it as mistaking whom is the actual aggressor in the conflict, and disabling the perceived aggressor in order to prevent an attack that would jeapordize the public in the same way that the first one did.

Again, if detente is the actual objective, then the course of action is logical. While it goes against Max's common sense and the player's too, it isn't as cut-and-dry as Throwing the Idiot Ball. (Let alone Jumping the Shark, which is something else altogether.)

[ QUOTE ]
Someone said that responding to some criticism with, "it's a simulation" was a dodge, but it's not at all (depending on the criticism, of course) It is considered a simulation.

It is not considered a simulation. The souvenir is no different from any other "normal" arc's souvenir.

[/ QUOTE ]

Inasmuch as the souvenirs are separate from "normal" arc souvenirs and can be deleted if you object to their content or to your character having been involved in the story, they are quite different.

The introduction to AE stipulates that although everything accessed through the system is in fact a virtual reality, it's nevertheless reality in the sense that the character exiting the datastream isn't the same as the one who entered.

So, yes, it's a simulation; but at the same time, characters are transformed by the experience.

Also, kills made in AE don't count toward Defeat badges. Other achievements in AE don't count toward the appropriate Achievement badges.

That's consistent with an interpretation that they aren't actual achievements and defeats.

However I do agree that a story told in AE should be internally consistent as if it were real, and externally consistent as applicable; and that the "just a simulation" argument used to obfuscate mistakes or inconsistencies is a bogus copout.

[ QUOTE ]
"The Eternal Nemesis" has the Contact (and thus the character) fall for an obvious trick. Worse, even if it wasn't a trick, the proscribed course of action is still wrong. The proper strategic move was to let the two enemy factions slug it out and then take on the winner before he could recover or consolidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's stated in the first mission of the war between Nemesis and the Council that the conflict itself is causing significant collateral damage; and therefore the objective isn't to destroy both factions in one master stroke, but to force immediate detante in order to protect the public.

Re: user-created arcs: afford me some time and I'll get back to you.

[ QUOTE ]
"Idiot Ball" is when the writer demands that a PC overlook something obvious. The writer had a set plot in mind; to him, there is only one way to travel through the story. Nevermind that I was instantly suspicious of the Contact's furtive eyes or poor acting. I'm written into a state of ignorance with no alternative but to face the final revelation cluelessly. And by agreeing to continue the arc, I end up catching the Idiot Ball.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that this is the appropriate interpretation of "Idiot Ball," I also believe Venture uses it more generally as a reaction to whenever his character is maneuvered by plot devices into doing the wrong thing.

In his most recent review, destroying what appear to be rifts between worlds winds up being the wrong thing to do, and Venture cites it as Throwing the Idiot Ball.

Personally I think it's a marginal case. I'd agree that taking Derek at his word (the Midnighters are really CoT) and killing Midnighters would be a case of catching the Idiot Ball, but in point of fact, my scrapper Supersped past Derek and didn't kill any Midnighters; I just two-shotted all the pillars, ignoring the mobs.

I suppose that killing Garik for mission complete was Catching the Idiot Ball, though. I didn't feel I had any peculiar quarrel with him, aside from what showed up in the nav bar, and had little choice but to split him from stem to stern, but as I recall, he and the Midnighters were attacking ME before I made any move against anything or anyone, so whatever I did, I pretty much had to do.

I suppose Venture wan't wrong about the Idiot Ball in this case, and he's been quite right about it in many others.

But there have been instances where I felt that Venture accuses Architects (and developers) of Throwing the Idiot Ball at him simply because the stories depict the protagonist as being otherwise from infallible.

Venture's estimation of "The Eternal Nemesis" springs readily to mind, but there have also been some user-created arcs where I've disagreed with his use of the trope.

In my opinion, it's related to his view of the protagonist as inviolate--which I respect and agree with in principle (a story arc has no business telling you what your character's motivations are, or casting you as a dimwitted sap); but I don't agree with every instance in which Venture chooses to apply that principle, and I stand by my observation that it's a peculiar ideosyncracy of the reviewer.

My first 50 and forums namesake is a grav/kin controller. The sets mesh well enough; there's a good, early ST attack chain to take advantage of Siphon Power and, later, Fulcrum Shift.

Siphon Speed helps recycle AoE controls faster, which helps Gravity out a lot.

And although Kinetics isn't known for adding a lot of safety to solo play, Singularity and Wormhole defnitely do.

Grav/kin offers very good single-target damage and (barely) adequate AoE control. Other powersets clearly have bigger and better synergism, but Grav/Kin is decent enough.

This brings up a funny (at least, to me) point about the Idiot Ball.

I'm a big fan of Venture's reviews; I've carefully read them all in each of his forum threads. I agree with him on many, many points, and if I didn't think that the reviews had much merit, I wouldn't have continued reading them.

That said, he's ideosyncratic; and one of his ideosyncracies is that he doesn't like his characters ever to be wrong about anything. If they are, EVER, then you've committed an Offense: Throwing the Idiot Ball.

Let's say that the Protagonist arrives at a crime scene too late to stop the Big Bad. Already you're in danger of Throwing the Idiot Ball, as Venture likely would have preferred to show up in the nick of time; but presumably there's simply no way the Protagonist could have known about the incident in time to prevent it.

Being too late to stop the Big Bad, the Protagonist instead scours the crime scene, looking for a clue or clues which might reveal the Big Bad's evil plan and/or current whereabouts.

Finding the clue(s), the Protagonist returns to the contact, and either the Protagonist or contact, or both together, use the clue(s) to deduce the Big Bad's next likely target and/or present whereabouts.

This storytelling device is a convention in many genres, including comic books and CoX, so the device is perfectly valid to Venture as long as it leads the Protagonist to the right place and/or to do the right thing.

If, instead, a vital clue turns out to be a Red Herring, placed by the Big Bad deliberately to misdirect the Protagonist; or if, Heaven forbid, the Protagonist and/or contact make a false assumption about the clue (i.e. that isn't a page from the Obsidian Librum; it's an impeccable forgery), and the Protagonist winds up being in the wrong place or doing the wrong thing as a result, then you, dear Architect, have Thrown the Idiot Ball at Venture and must die.

Even if the best available intel led him to the wrong place, or the most logical and reasonable course of action turned out to be wrong, it's still Throwing the Idiot Ball because the Protagonist winds up being fallible.

I mean, for goodness' sake, "The Eternal Nemesis" made him want to punch the developers in the throat. Nevermind that the protagonist uncovers the wrongdoing of Tyrone Lockheart and sends him to prison. Nevermind that the protagonist realizes Nemesis' deception before it's too late, and reacts in time to foil the Council takeover. Nevermind that the Protagonist beats down Nosferatu.

Nevermind that at every turn, the Protagonist acts in a logical and reasonable manner on the best intel available. Nemesis almost uses the Protagonist to overtake the Council, and in the end succeeds at faking his own death. That's Throwing the Idiot Ball, because it destroys the illusion of the Protagonist being infallible.

Venture doesn't like that.