I just saw the nerf bat getting warmed up...again.
Proud member of the LEGION, and Sisterhood
[ QUOTE ]
If the debuff is balanced in the grand scheme, and I can't see how that could be the case, it still makes Unyielding a faustian bargain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Altough in part I can see how it can be the case, I cant see how come the scrapper/brute gets the SAME penalty as the tanker for an inferior benefit.
That 5% should be 3.75 instead.
Now things apart, why not just lower the numbers on one or other powers and elminate the debuff? Invince for instance has a 5% def + 1.5 def per enemy (tanker version). Once buffed that is 7.8 + 2.34. How about lower it so that once buffed its 2.8 and 2.34 for each other enemy? It would do almost the same without giving a penalty to psi and toxic.
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm missing something here... but isn't 5% pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know I don't think so. Why? Because if I have 3/4 the effectiveness of this power I should only have 3/4 of the penalty. I can't think of another power that is this punitive.
5% defensive debuff roughly translates into a 10% resistance debuff. Non-Tanks are actually in worse shape in many cases by using UY, yet it must be used to protect you from status effects.
Not only that, the whole debuff was on the premise that you had to pay for mobile status protection AND the great RES protection UY gave. When UY was gutted, the penalty should've been reduced or removed...PERIOD.
There is no justification for the harsh penalty for ANYONE now.
Nope, I felt that disturbance as well.
I analyzed his sentence in a raw text editor and this is what I found
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine <dev speak> gonna get their 4ss beat with the nerf bat come I7</devspeak> as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am i the only one that just had shivers up his spine?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. With all the whining over EM I expect to be nerfed. Who the heck knows what else they have up their sleeves though.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
*watches as DOOOOOM!!! rears its ugly head again*
Virtue Server: Jet Flash L50+3 EN/EN/Force Blaster | Doctor Mechanus L50+3 R/T/Mu MM | Titanium Girl L50+3 Inv/SS/EN Tanker | Kaishin L50+3 DB/SR/Primal Scrapper | Opilia L50+3 Crab Spider | Clockstriker L50+1 Kin/Elec/Primal Scrapper | Foxy Starr L27 Beam/Time Corrupter
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm missing something here... but isn't 5% pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things?
[/ QUOTE ]
Since defenses were scaled back, weave is less than 5%. SR passives are 5% (IIRC). We're talking a negative whole power here, which isn't trivial under any definition of the word.
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's Son of Statesman! 
[ QUOTE ]
A Tankers job is do soak up damage so they get a bonus to their resistances. Scrappers and Brutes make up for this by dealing more damage.
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
Powers are balanced by the grand scheme of the archetype, not via individual powers so it's not fair to compare power for power versus the various archetypes. Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
Problem is Jonyu, both you & Statesman have missed the whole point. The penalty to Unyielding was put in place to counter the really good resistances it USED TO GIVE. Unyielding no longer gives those great bonuses, just really mediocre/low ones.
As such, if the -5% Def was balanced against GREAT bonuses, why is it still "balanced" against GREAT bonuses when the GREAT bonuses are missing?
It's a sad state of affairs that using a power results in MORE damage than it mitigates. But given the response States gave to someone in a PM and your response here, I have doubts whether either of you will fully grasp our points.
Virtue: multiple characters.
CoH/V: Woot! Maybe Fun is to be had once again.
Ack! RUN! Regen is glowing mean & green!
If it reduces you, it's a nerf.
If it buffs the mobs, it's challenge.
They are not the same.
I'm gonna play the kiss$%& and side with Jonyu here, as I play both Tankers and Brutes.
Simply put, Brutes and Scrappers are not Tankers. They go by the same basic rule of thumb as the blasters, "Kill before they kill you," with the ability to last a little longer. They deal *far* more damage than an equal level tanker, and while the tank can last a lot longer in combat, they need to manage their endurance to keep toggles going while dishing out, until the highest of levels, less damage than a containment-happy controller.
The -def of Unyielding slightly compensates for the +def of Invincibility. Yes, you get it later... that has been the point of secondary sets since the launch of CoH. My invun/energy tank didn't get his first decent attack until level 35... everything before that is best used for punchvoke while your teammates do all the hard work. But it DOES become available to you, and it is an incredible power, especially for Brutes, as the auto-hit AoE taunt will help you rack up Fury.
My advice:
1) slot up unyielding for resists. It grants a decent resist to all damage types but psionic. You'll still be getting hit for more (until invincibility) but you'll be taking less. Unyielding is much more than a simple mez resist.
2)Use it on an "as needed" basis. My one Brute uses his secondary toggles like pouches in a utility belt. There are times when he can run around fine without ANY toggles going, so I spare myself the end drain and only run one or two as the immediate situation demands.
3)be patient, keep grinding. Once you get invincibility, you'll probably forget all about this problem
[/ QUOTE ]
A Tanker gets Unyielding at level 8 and is granted:
- 5% S/L RES
- 10% F/C/En/Neg/Tox RES
- mez protection
- 5% DEF debuff
A Brute/Scrapper gets Unyielding at level 16, and is granted:
- 3.75% S/L RES
- 7.5% F/C/En/Neg/Tox RES
- mez protection
- 5% DEF debuff
How is this balanced or fair? If, in fact, the DEF debuff is "balanced" (which I find ridiculous already) shouldn't it also scale with the benefits of the power?
As it stands now, Brutes/Scrappers wait 8 more levels to get a power that's less effective, and actually causes more damage than it protects from (according to the 1%DEF=2%RES balance metric), in exchange for decent mez protection.
[/ QUOTE ]
Using the 1%DEF=2RES% wouldn't dropping the DEF debuff even down to 4% give the Brute/Scrapper:
5.75% S/L
9.5% all but Psi.
That would make it even better than Tankers against S/L and only a .5% worse against the rest.
[ QUOTE ]
A Tankers job is do soak up damage so they get a bonus to their resistances. Scrappers and Brutes make up for this by dealing more damage.
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
Powers are balanced by the grand scheme of the archetype, not via individual powers so it's not fair to compare power for power versus the various archetypes. Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is that a flat -5% debuff compared to the reducection everywhere else is flatly *UNFAIR*.
[*]It should not have a -5% to psi thematically.
[*]It should be a balanced percentage based on the reduction of defense due to i6.
[*]It should be balanced to a weaker penalty (percentage-wise) for *weaker* power sets.
If a scrapper/brute version of Invulnerbility is 75% as effective as a tank, the debuff should be 75%.
With the massive reduction in i6 for resistances *and* defenses, the debuff penalty should be about 1/2 as much as it is. So a -2.5% for tanks and a -1.75% for brutes/scrappers would be *FAIR*.
And it's just so wrong that when you set yourself to be physically unyielding, you make yourself become *VULNERBLE* to psionic attacks. It isn't just a hole in our defenses, it is a actual weakness.
But for some reason, balancing INV this way seems to be an anametha to the developer to correct.
It's probably some phonbia of INV scappers and tanks herding whole maps solo.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
3)be patient, keep grinding. Once you get invincibility, you'll probably forget all about this problem
[/ QUOTE ]
You act as if this is new. If this joke called Unyielding's DEF debuff is a temporary thorn in our sides that we haven't had the wonder of Invincibility to cure.
I think we know full well how to counteract the DEF debuff. In fact, on the tank side of life and livin', a lot of folks dedicate their level 26 power for the sole purpose of counteracting a debuff. A level 26 power in the set... Counteracting a debuff. That in and of itself is boned as far as my reasoning is concerned, but that's not the meat n' taters of the post.
Fact is, it's a boned concept from jump, for ALL the reasons listed. "But you can get Knockout Blow at 8!" Tell that to my Scrapper. "But you have criticals!" Tell that to the now -5% DEF to Psi, a debuff according to the supposed gospel rule of 2 RES = 1 DEF that puts the S/L resists in a negative state, and the near breakeven point of the non S/L resists.
And that's with Tank numbers, gang. On the Scrapper/Brute side of livin', under that supposed gospel, golden rule, you're in the hole across the board. Wait... No, my bad.
3 slotted for resists, according to the 1 RES = 2 DEF rule, you got a whopping 2% RES to non S/L when it's up. And a sizeable hole in the smashing lethal aspect, which as we all know, is the most prevalent damage type in the game.
Yeah, it's balanced. Sure. Getting Knockout Blow at 8 solves it all. Getting Knockout Blow at 8 results in film at 11 of the mighty Maltese Knight and friends taking it in the poopchute thanks to their "balanced" status resist power.
There are two issues here. One is if Brutes/Scrappers should have the same def debuff in UY that Tankers get. The other is the def debuff itself.
For the first one, I have to side with Jonyu. B/S UY is not supposed to be as good as the Tanker version. It's a secondary power. Like some people have said, you should be glad the debuff isn't higher.
The second issue is more important. And here I'd like to state that NO DEFENSIVE POWER SHOULD HAVE ANY KIND OF DEFENCE DEBUFF IN IT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM! Not 5%, not 3.75%, not 2.5%, not even 0.0000001%. These applies even more to Tankers than it does to Brutes and Scrappers.
As has been pointed out by several people in this thread, UY currently results in characters taking more damage, not less. Instead of being divided, all ATs should band together against this outrage.
"And texting? 'How R U?' Wow! English is just getting its [censored] kicked. In two generations, that's going to be on chalkboards. And do you know what you get from that? You don't get Ernest Hemingway."
- Henry Rollins
The obvious solution to the entire matter is just to get rid of the defense debuff altogether. It's just silly to give the character that little bit of resistance and then hit them with that large a defense debuff. And I really don't buy the idea that we shouldn't compare unyielding to other similar powers any more than I buy that idea that we shouldn't compare similar power sets overall. Unyielding as it stands now is inferior to practiced brawler, far inferior to integration, and is at best equal to entropy field (which is gained at an earlier level, to boot). There should be no need to get into a discussion of whether the scrapper/brute version should have a lower debuff, because the debuff itself is silly to begin with. It might have been a reasonable balance measure back before I5 when unyielding's resists were higher, but not now.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's Son of Statesman!
[/ QUOTE ]
Look up in the sky, its a plane!!! Its a bird!!! NO!!! Its STAAAAAAATESBOY! (in the tone of BIIIIIRDMAAAAAAN)
Sorry was not able to hold myself there 
[ QUOTE ]
Powers are balanced by the grand scheme of the archetype, not via individual powers so it's not fair to compare power for power versus the various archetypes. Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
I keep wondering what grand genius schemes those things, really.
It can actually lower survivability. No other status protection power does this. The res buff of Unyielding is miniscule, you need to 'enhance' it just to get even with the lost DEF.
A defense power that 'attracts' attacks. Right. I guess the grand scheme justifies this. What do we know, really?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.
And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok basic math so you can understand
brute is 75% as effective as a Tanker.
if a number is a negative like -5% 75% as effective is 6.5% not 3.5%
3.5% would infact be 125% as effective... BECAUSE THIS IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER... THE CLOSER TO ZERO THE BETTER IT GETTS, MEANING THE MORE EFFECTIVE.
EXAMPLE:
30% defence - 25% = 22.5% which is 75% as effective.
-5% defense - - (minus a negative is a +) 25% = 6.25 which is 75% as effective (you minus a negative because the original number is a negative)
when you take away from a negative you go more negative.
For a postive you can go 30 x .75 to get 75% as effective
For a negative you must go - 5 - - (+) 25 % to get 75% as effective as -5.
Actaully I hope the devs fix this "gift" to us and make INV. -6.25% as effective, just so you whiners get a taste of what you are whining about.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.
And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok basic math so you can understand
brute is 75% as effective as a Tanker.
if a number is a negative like -5% 75% as effective is 6.5% no 3.5%
3.5% would infact be 125% as effective... BECAUSE THIS IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER... THE CLOSER TO ZERO THE BETTER IT GETTS, MEANING THE MORE EFFECTIVE.
EXAMPLE:
30% defence - 25% = 22.5% which is 75% as effective.
-5% defense - - (+) 25% = 6.25 which is 75% as effective
when you take away from a negative you go more negative.
For a postive you can go 30 x .75 to get 75% as effective
For a negative you must go - 5 - 25 % to get 75% as effective as -5.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, you need to go retake basic math.
The buff is 75% as effective (i.e. less effective - brute base strength is 75% of tank base strength), therefore the DEbuff should be 75% as effective (again, LESS effective - having LESS of an effect). This means reducing the base TOWARDS zero, not "subtracting" it further away.
Kam
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.
And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok basic math so you can understand
brute is 75% as effective as a Tanker.
if a number is a negative like -5% 75% as effective is 6.5% no 3.5%
3.5% would infact be 125% as effective... BECAUSE THIS IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER... THE CLOSER TO ZERO THE BETTER IT GETTS, MEANING THE MORE EFFECTIVE.
EXAMPLE:
30% defence - 25% = 22.5% which is 75% as effective.
-5% defense - - (+) 25% = 6.25 which is 75% as effective
when you take away from a negative you go more negative.
For a postive you can go 30 x .75 to get 75% as effective
For a negative you must go - 5 - 25 % to get 75% as effective as -5.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, you need to go retake basic math.
The buff is 75% as effective (i.e. less effective - brute base strength is 75% of tank base strength), therefore the DEbuff should be 75% as effective (again, LESS effective - having LESS of an effect). This means reducing the base TOWARDS zero, not "subtracting" it further away.
Kam
[/ QUOTE ]
The joy of kids.
Here you go tommy.
Which comapany is more effecitve at making money?
one that is -5% in dept or -3.5% in dept?
Neither is effective , but -3.5% is clearly more effective then -5%
I know this requires a little critical thought... but the same goes for defense
the closer to 0 the more effective a defence is when the number is negative.
The farther from 0 the more effective a defense is when the number is positive.
Now re-read my post. A tanker is more effective then a brute defensivly. a brute is 75% as good as a tanker
-6.25 is 75% as effective as -5% when the goal is a higher postive number.
Your right though maybe not basic math.... think it more closer to statistics which is college lvl so I am sorry for my reply, I forget that 15year olds play too at times.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because it's a double penalty. No one is complaining about Scrapper/Brute Unyielding having lower resists. What people are complaining about is the fact that the debuff isn't in proportion to the reduced resists. I can't speak for everyone, but I would ask why the debuff isn't 3.75% since the resists are 75% of the Tanker numbers.
And if this is balanced, how is it balanced? Is it balanced because we can still do missions on Heroic? Or is there some formula that tells you this is balanced? If so, please tell us. The forum population here will understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok basic math so you can understand
brute is 75% as effective as a Tanker.
if a number is a negative like -5% 75% as effective is 6.5% no 3.5%
3.5% would infact be 125% as effective... BECAUSE THIS IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER... THE CLOSER TO ZERO THE BETTER IT GETTS, MEANING THE MORE EFFECTIVE.
EXAMPLE:
30% defence - 25% = 22.5% which is 75% as effective.
-5% defense - - (+) 25% = 6.25 which is 75% as effective
when you take away from a negative you go more negative.
For a postive you can go 30 x .75 to get 75% as effective
For a negative you must go - 5 - 25 % to get 75% as effective as -5.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, you need to go retake basic math.
The buff is 75% as effective (i.e. less effective - brute base strength is 75% of tank base strength), therefore the DEbuff should be 75% as effective (again, LESS effective - having LESS of an effect). This means reducing the base TOWARDS zero, not "subtracting" it further away.
Kam
[/ QUOTE ]
The joy of kids.
Here you go tommy.
Which comapany is more effecitve at making money?
one that is -5% in dept or -3.5% in dept?
Neither is effective , but -3.5% is clearly more effective then -5%
I know this requires a little critical thought... but the same goes for defense
the closer to 0 the more effective a defence is when the number is negative.
The farther from 0 the more effective a defense is when the number is positive.
Now re-read my post. A tanker is more effective then a brute defensivly. a brute is 75% as good as a tanker
-6.25 is 75% as effective as -5% when the goal is a higher postive number.
Your right though maybe not basic math.... think it more closer to statistics which is college lvl so I am sorry for my reply, I forget that 15year olds play too at times.
[/ QUOTE ]
How about this, then:
Which number has MORE of an effect on your character?
A resistance of five percent, or a resistance of 3.75 percent?
Now, which number has MORE of an effect on your character?
A def debuff of five percent, or a def debuff of 3.75%?
(And, as an aside: Before you start making assumptions about people's real lives, you should probably have SOME idea what you're talking about.)
Kam
CAAAAAAAAAN you FEEEEEEEEEL the LOOOOOOOOOVE toNIIIIIIIIIGHT...
Math arguments are always so hawt.
[ QUOTE ]
A Tankers job is do soak up damage so they get a bonus to their resistances. Scrappers and Brutes make up for this by dealing more damage.
How can you complain that Brutes have to wait 8 more levels to get an inferior version of Unyielding when they're getting powers like Knockout Blow at level 8 compared to a Tanker at level 20?
Powers are balanced by the grand scheme of the archetype, not via individual powers so it's not fair to compare power for power versus the various archetypes. Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
So basically the numbers not only for the power within it's set, but compared against other similar powers is meaningless. I get tired of the round about way the devs handle balance in this game. They say if you want to present an argument to use numbers...so we use the numbers to present an argument and they tell us the numbers don't matter.....so we will go and present an argument based on theme and playability and they'll ask for numbers.
Basically what you are saying here is that balance is determined on an arbitrary basis that only the devs can know what the balance points are and how they are determined. That there really isn't any numerical basis for balance of the sets and individual powers.
LOL, do you guys ever stop to wonder why balance continues to elude you? 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am i the only one that just had shivers up his spine?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. With all the whining over EM I expect to be nerfed. Who the heck knows what else they have up their sleeves though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh I am fully expecting Brute, Mastermind, Stalker, and Regen nerfs. Possibly either Global Offense and/or Global Buff and Debuff changes as well.
[ QUOTE ]
Brutes are more than fine as they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
Am i the only one that just had shivers up his spine?