Sarrate

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The defense buff given to team mates is like having a built in Maneuvers. It's a perk but definitely skippable (it's not like you're giving your team a *substantial* defense bonus).

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're talking about Grant Cover, this isn't quite right. Grant Cover gives a very substantial +11.25% def(melee, ranged, aoe) to everyone but the tanker in a 15-ft. radius. Compare that to Force Field Defenders, whose Dispersion Bubble gives +10% def(all) to everyone within 25ft.

Grant Cover also provides 17.3% defense debuff resistance.

EDIT to add that Maneuvers for a tank grants +2.275% def(all) in a massive 60ft. radius.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't grant typed defense? Ick, that means it doesn't stack with sets that utilize typed defense (like Invuln, WP, Ice, etc).

[ QUOTE ]
If I slot it in Heal Other (or Absorb Pain, whichever has my Numina pieces in it) will it still proc every 120 seconds, or will it only proc 120 seconds after I use that particular ability?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the latter of the two. Passives are really the best place to put this since they basically activate the proc every 10s, refreshing the 120s duration and thus making it perma.

[ QUOTE ]
Sarrate,

If the invulnerable scrapper can handle life with unstoppable capped at 75% why can't an invulnerable brute?

Would raising scrapper cap to 80% be necessary? Absolutely not. We live with it now. By meeting the brutes at 80% I was only attempting to separate the melee from the squishy further and lessen the blow to brutes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't really thing that dropping them all the way to 75% would be the right approach since there are some sets that seem to be designed with capping a res type in mind (ex: Electric, although it could be tweaked separately - which is why I said just dropping the cap and calling it a day wouldn't be wise). I just don't think Scrappers are hurting from the 75% cap. (I'll touch on this later.)


At any rate, I think the "one cap fits all" is too restrictive; I wish there were two different res caps - one you could sit at permanently (X), and the other you could only situationally boost yourself up to (Y).

Examples:
X - Things like IOs, pool powers, reliable effects (toggles, outside buffs, etc) would cap here.
Y - Situational buffs like inspirations / t9s would allow you up to this value.

This way, you could set Brutes to say 80% permanent cap (X) and 90% temp cap (Y). This would allow Brutes to still be buffed to be quite sturdy, but they could temporarily push past it if the need arose. A Scrapper might be 75% / 80-85%. I'd say a Tanker would be 90% / 90%.

(It'd be neat if it were possible to split res buffs between the two. For example, say the devs wanted Unstoppable to cap a Scrapper at 80%, they'd change it from +52.5% res to +47.5% res and +5% 'above the cap res.' Along as similar vein, they could change it from +10% res to +7.5% res and +2.5% 'above the cap res' to make it take several oranges to cap.)

This is a very rough idea - I originally came up with it for defense, so I haven't worked out any kinks / oddities for res. I also fully admit it's likely impossible / would give Castle a gigantic migraine. :P

[ QUOTE ]
But if lowering brutes to 75% is what must occur, fine. However, I still think that's crap. I do not believe that scrappers and brutes should have the same cap as squishies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even at the same cap, meleers will be significantly more survivable than squishies. They have more tools to stay alive, more hp, status protection, etc. Further, most Scrappers (aside from SR / Regen) have decent resists to stack with, so it's easier for them to hit the res cap than it is on squishies.

Besides, if you think sharing the 75% res cap is bad, you must hate Force Fielders soft capping the entire team, right? Nerf that def soft cap! (I kid, I kid..)

I'm not sure we'll ever see eye to eye on this, though. If that's the case, let's agree to disagree. (Obvious joke, but I must point it out because you know how text based communication goes...)



[edit: Btw, I'm not overly concerned about Brute balance. They can hit those caps, but it's not something I'd expect to happen on a regular basis (outside the mentioned sets). I don't really play Brutes much, so I can't say how often they're buffed to it... but I'd wager it's the exception rather than the rule. Brutes may be theoretically better, but I still can't stand them.]

[ QUOTE ]
Scrappers would be happier with that extra 5% possible dam-res and take their place as melee specialists with caps above the squishies.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think raising the Scrapper res cap is necessary. Scrappers still have loads more hp than squishies, not to mention other perks (status protection) and avenues of keeping themselves alive (heals, def).

Suppose you're on a team with two Sonics (res cap to everyone so long as they're in one of the big bubbles). Scrappers would have:

DA - status toggles, def, dark regen, specials (+perception, stealth, end drain res), psi res
Fire - healing flames, specials (res to slows)
Invuln - def, DP, specials (res to slows/end drain/defense)
Regen - regen, recon, DP, MoG (def)
Shield - hp, dmg debuff, def, specials (+perception, def resistance)
SR - def, specials (+perception, def resistance)
WP - hp, regen, def, specials (res to regen/def, +perception), psi res

The sets with res on them also tend to hit the cap easier. (Sorry, I don't see enough Sonics / Therms to buy the fact people hit the res caps frequently anyways. :P)

[ QUOTE ]
Most brutes wouldn't notice the difference in survivability.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some sets will weather that better than others no doubt, but I know Electric would be boned. (Loss of energy superiority and admittance of double damage while in Power Surge.)

Other effected sets would be Invuln (Unstoppable), Fire (fire res), and Stone (Granite + Stone Skin + Tough).

That said, I don't think Brutes should have the 90% cap, but I also don't think that it's as simple as just dropping the cap to 80% and calling it a day.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't know that AV/EBs resist the damage debuff, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK they dont

Using DN against an AV works out very well since it lowers incomming damage which makes your resist that much better

[/ QUOTE ]

AVs don't get any special debuff resistance for damage debuffs, but they can (and do) reduce it's effectiveness just like any other mob. There are two primary ways this happens:

<ul type="square">[*]Mobs that resist the same damage type they deal. Damage debuffs aren't global, they're applied to every damage type individually. If a mob has resistance to a damage type (say, smashing) then the smashing damage debuff is reduced proportional to their resistance (50% smash res = 50% lower smash dmg debuff). If a mob deals that same damage type (like BABs) then you'll notice it being less effective. This also means that if a mob can somehow hit 100% res to a damage type, they'll completely ignore the dmg debuff.
[*]Higher level enemies resist the debuff due to the Purple Patch just like every other debuff[/list]
Having said that, damage debuffs are one of the more potent debuffs that can be used against AVs. Is it better than OwtS? Well, pros and cons:

Pro:
*) Darkest Night is always available, while OwtS will always have downtime.
*) Darkest Night doesn't just increase your survivability, but anyone on the team that mob attacks.
*) The tohit debuff can act as a buffer for tohit debuffs. (Essentially useless vs AVs, though.)

Cons:
*) It costs additional endurance while OwtS gives you endurance.
*) OwtS's +res is stable and won't vary depending on what you're fighting.
*) If you're softcapped, it provides less mitigation than OwtS to s/l. ex: OwtS is 22.5% s/l res enhanceable and Darkest Night offers 21% dmg debuff which is resistible. OwtS also offers a +MaxHP buff. (It is likely stronger vs exotic damage, but I haven't done the math for that.) Also remember that dmg res stacks additively towards the cap while res + dmg debuff stacks multiplicatively. (Simple example with made up numbers: 50% res + 50% res (capped at 90% res/mitigation) is stronger than 50% res * half damage (75% mitigation).)


I refrain from saying either is vastly superior to the other (for one thing, I don't have the in game experience to do so), but there doesn't look like a clear winner, in my book. It'd depend on your build / what you want it for.

Did you truncate the last Tenebrous Tentacles log? It's showing only 7 ticks where the others have 8.

At any rate, that one is pretty easy to explain. Take a look at its CoD listing:

[ QUOTE ]
* 8 * 4.17 Smashing damage over 7.10 seconds (after 1 second delay) PvE only
* 5.63 Negative damage PvE only
* 8 * 4.17 Smashing damage over 7.10 seconds (after 1 second delay) PvE only, If Scourge
* 5.63 Negative damage PvE only, If Scourge

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that there are two Scourge checks - one for the neg energy damage and one for the smashing. I don't think there's any way to link the two to use the same roll. If they wanted to make it all or nothing, they'd have to roll all the damage into one line (all upfront or all dot, not a split between the two). It's why other dual type attacks, like Energy Blast, only have one Scourge tick that's deals the combined damage of both types (Smash + Energy).

All other powers (even dots like Gloom) only have one Scourge check. The only other power I found with the same quirk was Short Circuit vs Electronic targets. Everything else looks fine.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm fine with that. If it's working as intended then the text is bugged and needs to be updated to show it and CoD needs to be updated as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just one of the things that CoD just doesn't list at all right now - effects within a power can have a different radius than the power itself lists. Take a look at any Tanker attack - they're all AoEs, but only the taunt portion (Gauntlet) splashes. Likewise, take a peek at Thunderstrike; it's the same deal, an AoE with only the energy portion splashing.

Trust me, I'd love to see the different radii of the effects for a power, but it doesn't look like that's a feature it currently supports.

[ QUOTE ]
Elude Only last 2 min

[/ QUOTE ]

Minor correction - it lasts 3 minutes. Your point about not being able to kill AV Recluse within that time frame is still valid, though.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, Fire Sword and Cremate do less DPA than Gfs

[/ QUOTE ]

Cremate has higher DPA than GFS

[/ QUOTE ]

<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> dot avg no dot
Scorch 0.96 0.91 0.71
Fire Sword 1.09 1.04 0.83
Cremate 1.19 1.19 1.19
Incinerate 1.35 1.35 1.35
GFS 1.37 1.29 0.97

dot - Dot is applied.
avg - Averages in 80% of the dot's damage.
no dot - Just the guaranteed damage, no dot damage.</pre><hr />

Incinerate and Cremate both have static DPA, since their dot is always applied. (Well, Incinerate is just a dot, but you know what I mean.)

(Also, this assumes that the dots are an 80% chance for the whole stack, not 80% chance per tick.)

[edit: Yes, this counts server ticks.]
[edit: Those are Brute numbers -they'd be completely different on a Scrapper.]

[ QUOTE ]
Now I guess the question is does it do enough damage? Jupiter raises some points but I think they were addressed? I don't know. I would bet that the damage ticks get overwritten. Maybe they stack though? Does anyone know the answer there?

[/ QUOTE ]

DoTs stack for Fire Melee as a Tank, there is no reason it shouldn't work that way for Brutes.

Btw, you can tell if something will / won't stack by checking CoD and checking for a "Effect does not stack from same caster" flag. If it doesn't have that, then you're good to go.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as people blaming death on "lack of tankage" or complaining about a brute or tank not using taunt, you probably need to learn to survive on your own instead of depending on other ATs and people to protect you. (That wasn't directed at anyone here really, it is just something I encounter sometimes.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Just my observation is that people can survive on a team without tanking, but it goes smoother with it. The less people have to worry about keeping themselves alive and focus on defeating the mob faster, the smoother things go.

(I reject the whole "mobs die in 10 seconds" mentality; they can drop that fast, but there are too many instances of fights lasting a while for me to buy it's the standard. Besides, if a spawn drops that fast, then the extra damage a Brute has is likely overkill.)

Remember that Brutes don't have access to CP, so if you're aiming for an AV soloer (with the same limitations of no insps, etc), then your end management will have to be really tight.

If you're just going for fun, not so much.

Haven't tested it, but Combat Shield's def bonus isn't flagged as unenhanceable, so I'd say it should be possible.

[u]Which would you rather play?[u]

I'd rather play a Tanker than a Brute. The Brute playstyle (in my limited experience) is frustrating to me. I dislike the constant chasing of Fury, not to mention the sheer variability of it. (Spreadout spawns, control heavy team makeups, etc.)

Likewise, Brute survivability is variable - they can have Scrapperish survivability (slightly more due to higher base hp) or they can have Tanker level with the right buffs. I like tanking, and the "oh, this team might not have the right combination of support to handle that" really sucks. The ITF in particular is brutal in this regard due to their high order def debuffs for most sets. A WP Brute friend of mine (who specifically tried to make his WP as tanky as possible) has a lot of problems in there where my WP Tank has no issues.

All that "what ifs" and "possible, but not guaranteed" stuff turns me off. When I play a character, I like knowing what to expect. I strongly dislike that gigantic performance spread with so much riding on outside factors. Tankers may not deal as much damage as a Brute, but I know I can hang into a fight and actually finish it.

The only thing that Tanker damage is preventing them from accomplishing is soloing AVs. (Even that has been done with certain combos.)

[u]Which would you rather team with?[u]

A smart player. I'd rather team with an AT that is suboptimal for the task at hand if I know there is a brain behind it.

[ QUOTE ]
The DPA of that attack is one of the worst, if not the worst in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jab is pretty dang bad, but there is one power that still manages to best it. The amazing thing isn't that there is a worse power, it's that it has 70% the DPA of Jab (0.356 scale/sec vs 0.51 scale/sec).

I present to you, Barb Swipe.

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, I'm not a fan of the fury mechanic.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's me, in a nutshell. I've tried it before (many times) and it just doesn't work for me. I might try a Brute again after Rogue, but I don't hold any hope of it getting far.

(To be honest, I don't play Scrappers much anymore either. They're too... narrow in scope for me anymore. I tend to play Tanks/Defenders and now my one Corruptor more.)

Against an even con lvl50 AV? Roughly 4.375 dps.

[ QUOTE ]
Against me he's always using his ranged attacks, while the Blue Tower is up.

You've used an invul scrapper as well, so I've got no clue what the difference might be. It could be because I'm too slow to engage, making him see me from far away and locking into ranged mode.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heck, I always pull Recluse away from his starting position, so he gets off ranged attacks on me before engaging, so that's not it.

These are older demos (sadly I don't have any new ones), but I've never noticed any different behavior since then.


[edit: Here is the cohdemo of me tanking him on my Invuln. Note that a couple of his attacks (like Spider Strike) don't play their animation in the demo, but Suppression/Channelgun still animate. (I'd position him a lot differently now, but I think that was pretty much the first time I ever tanked him at all.)]

[ QUOTE ]
The only Regen Debuff I could see Tanks getting is if they added Rad Armor/Melee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I really don't see Castle going for it, but since it was brought up and I had put some thought into it before I wanted to share.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, sorry, I mixed something up there -- I remembered having tested Disruption Arrow, but now I see that it's flagged as "ignores buffs and enhancements", not as "unresistable". Nevermind that part.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay! I was going to say, that would have been really, really weird if you were right.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, debuff oriented sets lose a lot of their luster against +4 AVs. Darkest Night, normally an extremely powerful debuff, is at less than half strength for the -DMG part (even worse if the AV has resistances against the damage type the AV is dealing, such as Ghost Widow or Lord Recluse), and the to-hit debuff portion becomes all but inconsequential.

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew that the purple patch effects debuffs and that it really hits debuff sets hard; the only surprise to me was that it effected unresistible effects. (This is still something I want to test myself. I don't think you're lying or anything, but I want to confirm it.)

[edit: Actually, my math against +4 AVs is correct for resistible debuffs, I only got it wrong for the unresistible debuff since I didn't factor in the purple patch.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What I find really interesting about that video is how often Recluse actually uses his energy attacks while fighting you. I've fought him soo many times on the STF and he rarely ever uses them in melee with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, what makes you think cause this behavior ? STF Recluse keeps using his energy attacks against me. Usually, all I do is stand still in melee and spam Aid Self, using phases as needed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I should have said is "ranged attacks," not just "energy attacks." At any rate, two things I learned doing some research before answering:

1) Recluse still does use his energy attacks, but very, very infrequently. (As in, between 1-5 minutes between uses.)
2) Recluse only has two energy attacks. One that I personally thought was energy (Spider Strike, his pbaoe) is smashing damage. (So I was accidentally correct in my statement above about energy attacks.)

The only two energy attacks he has is Suppression (very very flashy one) and Channelgun (a single leg shooting at you, this is the one with an end drain). Everything else is smash/lethal. The reason STF Recluse isn't using those attacks is because the Blue Tower buffs his recharge to the point he always has a melee attack recharged. Without the Blue Tower, his attack selection is much sparser.

I watched two of my demos while timing his ranged attacks:

*) Me tanking Recluse on my Scrapper. The only thing effecting him was Invincibility and my futile attacks (they kept missing).
*) My first time Tanking Recluse on my WP/Fire Tank. (It's a bad demo, hah!) This time, the only extra in the fight is Rad Infection is on him. Otherwise, pretty much the same as above.

He almost never uses his ranged/energy attacks. Certainly not with the frequency he did in PF's video.

[ QUOTE ]
Video is up!

[/ QUOTE ]

What I find really interesting about that video is how often Recluse actually uses his energy attacks while fighting you. I've fought him soo many times on the STF and he rarely ever uses them in melee with me. In a weird way, the Blue Tower might increase my survivability in that respect... (WP has next to no resistance vs energy, so when it hits, it hurts, not to mention it makes his end drain a non-issue since he doesn't use it.) Yeah, that includes buffs/inspiration use, though.

Nice work!

[ QUOTE ]
That is not entirely true. The purple patch will affect even unresistable debuffs (this is because the purple patch effects are combat modifiers, not actually resistances).

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh really? That's interesting... that means the math in my above post is pretty much all wrong for +4 AVs.

[ QUOTE ]
There are also some additional special cases, such as unresistable resistance debuffs still being resisted by resistance (hey, say that three times fast?).

[/ QUOTE ]

You lost me here, how can an unresistible resistiance debuff still get resisted by resistance? Wouldn't that make it a plain old resistible resistance debuff? Can you give an example of this?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Was this the 54 version?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh hale no. Level 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sissy!

[ QUOTE ]
Cold and Therm might as well. Cannot remeber, not really a fan of the sets so I stay away from them.

Anyway those are about the extent of the -regen mechanics I believe. I could easily be mistaken. Even if I am you are correct that it is one of the less used debuffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't say that regen debuffs are really that rare. Here's the ones I found with a quick look through CoD (I remembered about 2/3 from memory):

<ul type="square">[*]Cold/Benumb (120s rech, 30s dur): -500%[*]Dark/Twilight's Grasp (8s rech, 20s dur): -50%
Dark/Howling Twilight (180s rech, 30s dur): -500%[*]Kinetics/Transfusion (8s rech, 20s dur): -50%[*]Poison/Envenom (12s rech, 30s dur): -50%[*]Rad/Lingering Radiation (90s rech, 30s dur): -500%
Rad/EM Pulse (300s rech, 15s dur): -1000%[*]Thermal/Heat Exhaustion (120s rech, 40s dur): -500%[*]Traps/Poison Trap (90s rech, 10-40s dur): -1000%[*]Trick Arrow/EMP Arrow (300s rech, 15s dur): -1000%[/list]
Keep in mind those are all resistible, so the values scale down against higher levels and AVs (15% effectiveness vs lvl50s). I've actually considered the -regen component for Tanker attacks previously. The "problem" with high order regen debuffs (like those &gt;=500%) is they're strong enough to completely shut off regen to anything short of an AV, I'd say that's too strong for a Tanker to have. If you make the regen debuff weaker, however, then it would be completely inconsequential against AVs.

What I'd do is make it a small order, unresistible regen debuff, something like 10% to 15%. It would barely help at all against weaker enemies (minions / lieutenants), but start to be helpful against bosses, and very helpful against EVs/AVs. If possible, I'd make it unstackable from a single Tank, but stackable from multiple Tanks. (Not sure if that's possible, if not, it could grant a short duration temp power with a limit per entity of 8. It would be short enough that a single Tanker would have to continuously attack to keep it up but never stack it. A second Tanker who kept attacking would be able to keep the second stack up.)

The catch? Unresistible debuffs are very dangerous because they ignore everything that causes them to scale down (resistance, purple patch, etc). This is another reason I suggested such a small value. Against an even con AV, a 10% unresistible regen debuff is equal to a 66.67% resistible regen debuff, at 15% it would equal a 100% resistible regen debuff. Rarely do we fight +0 AVs, so let's take a look an an extreme example, +4 AVs (think STF). An unresistible 10% regen debuff would equal a 160.25%, at 15% it would equal a resistible 240.38% regen debuff. So a worst case scenario, it would still be weaker than a normal debuffer.

(If Castle wanted to make an enemy that was completely immune to regen debuffs, he'd be unable to, though. That is not an insignificant point - still, some unresistible debuffs exist such as Flash Arrow and the Assassination's tohit debuff.)