Hopeling

Did somebody claim that? I haven't, that I recall. I claimed FS was twice as good as WS for a scrapper (using an admittedly very simplified comparison), versus half-again as good on brutes. That specific ratio will not necessarily hold in a more detailed comparison (as you've done, still with some simplifications), but I'd be very surprised if the advantage totally disappears or is reversed.
That's... oddly similar to what I've been saying. Dark Melee isn't outperforming almost every other melee set, though, so it's not an issue for Dark Melee.
For one thing, as DreadShinobi says, SS characters can get AoEs from outside their primary. Every epic AoE attack and every damage aura will be stronger for a SS character than the same power for a TW character, and it will be stronger by a larger proportion on scrappers than brutes. TW doesn't so much need to seek AoE from outside its primary. We could compare, say, SS + Fireball vs TW + Fireball, which will at least favor TW less than just SS vs TW, or we can compare SS + Fireball vs TW + Body Mastery, which I'd guess is much closer, or even favors SS, but TW has some endurance management on the side, and that's comparing damage vs utility, and does TW use more end in the first place and only compensate with Body Mastery, or does it actually gain an advantage in end management with Body Mastery? That's a whole different discussion, and much more complicated, and I don't care enough to get into it right now.

But to answer the question directly, will SS outperform other AoE sets by itself? Usually no. But it will underperform them by less on a scrapper than it does on a brute.

That's true. I wasn't trying to say "Foot Stomp is 23% more broken than Whirling Smash, which I arbitrarily designate as the perfect balance point", though, just using it as a benchmark. You could replace that with any other power you want to use as a benchmark, and the result should be similar; looks like that's what Bill's doing right now in his edit.
Whatever the difference is between SS performance and TW performance on brutes, or any other set you want to compare, that difference will more strongly favor SS on scrappers, is what I'm saying. I used Whirling Smash as an example/benchmark, but really a similar ratio should hold for every power, and for the set as a whole. Given the math of it, I don't see how that could possibly not be true. Can you explain?

Fair enough. I think some of the new sets play quite differently from other stuff, even the ones not using new mechanics. Time, for instance, feels very different from other supports sets to me (and is the only support set I've ever liked enough to get to 50). If you want more, though, more power to you.

That's what I'm disputing: SS on scrappers, barring changes, would be even more overpowered relative to other scrapper sets than it is on brutes relative other brute sets. Foot Stomp with 95% enhancement, 80 fury, and double Rage does 305 damage. Whirling Smash, with the same enhancement and Fury, does 208. So for a brute, Foot Stomp is about half again as strong as Whirling Smash, which seems appropriate given their recharge times. On a scrapper, with 95% enhancement and double Rage (+200% with scrapper mods), it would do 89*(1+.95+2) = 351 damage. Whirling Smash, with the same enhancements and before counting crits, does about 170. So for a scrapper, Foot Stomp would be about TWICE as strong as Whirling Smash. Running the comparison again with single Rage instead of double Rage would make the disparity smaller, but not eliminate it.
It's not just that the set would be more damaging than it is on brutes - that's almost a given for most brute/scrapper comparisons. It would be proportionally stronger than other scrapper sets by a greater degree than the same sets on brutes.

I guess we're just disagreeing on what "broken" means, then. What if I phrase my meaning in a more specific and technical way: Super Strength on scrappers would overperform, in terms of damage, to an even larger degree than it does on brutes. The current brute level of overperformance is (apparently?) small enough that the devs don't consider fixing it to be a high enough priority, or worth the potential player backlash, but they'd be reevaluating the set anyway if they proliferated it, and the higher level of overperformance on scrappers might force their hand.

That still doesn't mean they shouldn't port it, though. It just means I doubt a straight port is a good idea, and so I doubt that's what will happen.

Sets like DB, KM, and /Shield are better on scrappers than brutes, at least partly because of their persistent damage buffs, yes? They're not broken on either AT, but general consensus seems to agree that such sets are better on scrappers than on brutes, by a larger amount than just the usual difference between scrappers and brutes.

SS would be better on scrappers than brutes, for much the same reason, except by an even larger amount, since Rage can provide an even larger buff. And if it's already broken on Brutes, and would be that much stronger on Scrappers, it would be more broken on Scrappers.

That's my line of reasoning. I'm not trying to be confrontational, just laying it all out explicitly so you can identify which part you disagree with, and then we can discuss it.

It's true, though: +80% damage for an AT that runs around with 300% or more to start with is much less significant than +100% on an AT that runs around with 195% otherwise. And SS on tanks outperforms most tank sets for damage AFAIK, but nobody really cares because they're still below good scrappers/brutes.

Ideally, to me, a SS port would make the set rely less on Rage, maybe turn it into a situational power instead of an all-the-time buff, and buff the rest of the set to compensate, so that the set stays about as good as it is now by itself, and doesn't boost non-SS attacks so much. If I'm really dreaming, maybe we can make the Rage crash less annoying, too. I can't really argue against anyone who looks at what I just wrote and says "no, keep your grubby paws off my SS, I like it the way it is", though.

Yes, that's correct. It's too strong on brutes and tanks. Why do you think it's been the king of brute sets for all these years?

I mean, it doesn't dramatically overperform by itself. SS by itself is good, but not super broken. Rage boosting Burn and Gloom and et cetera is where it gets broken. Tanker base damage is lower, and Rage is less significant to a Brute since they also have Fury, so it's less of an issue for them. Porting it to Scrappers would make the problem more pronounced, and force them to pay attention to it. At best, it might end up with the set's power being spread out more evenly among its powers, rather than Foot Stomp, Rage, and to a degree KO Blow being incredibly good and the rest of the set mediocre. At worst, it would be Energy Melee II: Electric Boogaloo.

I would like to see scrappers get SS, but I would like more to not have the set gutted in the process.

I'm probably wrong, but it would be nice.

The changes to certain self-rez powers also require a respec to take advantage of, which has somehow avoided mention in this thread so far; in fact, trying to respec my /WP scrapper to grab the no-longer-trash Resurgence is how I discovered we hadn't gotten a freespec.

They could. The question you may be looking for is "why didn't they?" And to answer that, we have to look at "why DID they?" And the answer is that, presumably, they wanted to try it out, and because the PPM does not favor really fast powers the way a flat proc chance does. It kinda favors slow powers instead, considering how attack chains actually work, but not by nearly so wide a margin.

I like the PPM procs overall, but I think it's quite odd and inconsistent that the attuned versions of the procs use PPM, while the crafted versions have a flat proc chance. This means the crafted version is better in some cases, and the attuned version better in others, which seems to go against the general idea of selling sets that are otherwise identical to the crafted versions. What I wonder is "why did they make these with PPM and leave the old ones the same?" To avoid irritating players? To make the attuned versions more desirable? Some other reason? I dunno.