Jetpack, I don't think he is. He's right for the most part because Brutes just suck at surviving without buffs. Tanks are beasts with or without 'em.
[ QUOTE ]
Because the man already thinks tanks are too strong.
[/ QUOTE ]
'The man' in question doesn't know his Unus from his Uatu.
.
Brutes suck at surviving without buffs?
Um, OK.
As I said in the OP, I like both. And think both have a role.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and now I don't have to play a tank in order to be a hero and have decent shields.
[/ QUOTE ]
If all you want are decent shields, you never had to play Tankers at all. Scrapper defences have always been decent. Tanker defences are simply superior.
[/ QUOTE ]
*shrugs* And I disagree. I'm not willing to trade defensive capability for damage. If I play a Brute, I can have both.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you know this already, but Brute base values are the same as Scrappers. It's only Brute caps that are at Tanker levels. So what I say about Tanker defences being simply superior is absolutely true. Absolutely.
Brutes are what I call a "conditional," much like Dominators: their performance is ideal under certain circumstances, and under others, they can be some of the worst in the game. If you are damage capped and you're getting enough buffs to cap everything defensively (which is, of course, easier on a Tanker), then you've got a wrecking machine, no doubt about it.
However, when looking at Scrappers, when factoring criticals and assuming enough buffs to max out their caps, there's generally as little to worry about as either capped Brutes or Tankers.
Of course, this is all assuming quite a number of buffs. Buffs that could go to you, sure, but could just as easily benefit the rest of your team even more. Less buffs need to go to a Tanker, more can go to a team, the team as a whole wrecks everything in the mission as fast or faster than the super-buffed Brute/Scrapper.
Now, the fact that you said you wanted decent shields is what I was replying to initially. And again, without looking at caps, Brutes and Scrappers are at the same identical level.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and now I don't have to play a tank in order to be a hero and have decent shields.
[/ QUOTE ]
If all you want are decent shields, you never had to play Tankers at all. Scrapper defences have always been decent. Tanker defences are simply superior.
[/ QUOTE ]
*shrugs* And I disagree. I'm not willing to trade defensive capability for damage. If I play a Brute, I can have both.
[/ QUOTE ]
Brutes though have the same shields strength as scrappers, they are not stronger except for health. They also have to build up their damage which can be hampered on teams.
Now brutes can reach tanker caps with team support, but if you are going to rely on teams you might as well play a defender, controller, or blaster. Two will support the team better, and blasters will still have more damage.
Dirges
[ QUOTE ]
He's right for the most part because Brutes just suck at surviving without buffs. Tanks are beasts with or without 'em.
[/ QUOTE ]
And I stand behind the point that the quickest way to getting a shield reduction in Brutes is to keep yammering in the Tank section about how brutes are just as sturdy while doubling the damage.
I don't agree with that, you take an unbuffed Tank & Brute on an ITF, and the brute will faceplant every single mission unless it's stone, and even then it can only last so long.
But what's the end game of the complainers?
You think the powers guy is going to revisit issue four Tank stats in any remote way? No, then what is he going do, he's going to "take a look at" Brutes, or haven't you paid attention to how he's dealt with balancing powers & ATs?
At least the lot of you that keep coming over to this section to backhand Tanks will have something entirely new to piss and moan about in the Brute area.
[ QUOTE ]
And I stand behind the point that the quickest way to getting a shield reduction in Brutes is to keep yammering in the Tank section about how brutes are just as sturdy while doubling the damage.
*snip*
No, then what is he going do, he's going to "take a look at" Brutes, or haven't you paid attention to how he's dealt with balancing powers & ATs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nerfing Brutes will not improve Tankers, make them more fun to play or fix their issues(mechanical, role, conceptual or otherwise).
It wouldn't make Brutes happier. I don't think it would make anyone else here any happier. I know it wouldn't make me any happier.
.
Nothing ever done to this game will ever make you happier, J_B. Tankers still have a very substantial role for the majority of this game--especially on non-optimised teams, where a decent (not even great) Tanker can allow a team to take on challenges that they would otherwise not be able to do. Optimised teams are where Tankers begin to become superfluous, which is why I tend to make my Tankers as offensively based as I can (within reason).
As for concept, there are so many ways to approach concept that it's simply foolish to say that Tanker concept doesn't work; it doesn't work for you, and that's fine. It's where you start to say that concept is a factual issue that I (and so many others here) really take issue with what you say. It's a preferential issue, not factual, and a lot of us are fine with the concepts for our characters, just as we're fine with our roles.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with that, you take an unbuffed Tank & Brute on an ITF, and the brute will faceplant every single mission unless it's stone, and even then it can only last so long.
[/ QUOTE ] Unless they have an IO build. Then they can survive the entire TF. The only problems my Scrapper has is Rom the final time, and that is only because of the auto hit nictus. A similar built brute will do even better because of the extra hit points.
[ QUOTE ]
Nothing ever done to this game will ever make you happier, J_B.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Invul tweaks made me much happier. It made me happier when I saw the devs start giving narrative reasons why the signature characters bloat into AVs for TFs, which is something I pushed for, even if they didn't get it quite right. Hurl getting a larger projectile made me happier. Fly getting a slight speed boost did as well, even though I think it pales to truly fast flight with a sonic boom that someone else is offering.
The devs have done lots of little things that made me happier, but the important items seem beyond them. The greatest thing that would make me happier at this point is for them to announce CoH 2.
[ QUOTE ]
Tankers still have a very substantial role for the majority of this game--especially on non-optimised teams, where a decent (not even great) Tanker can allow a team to take on challenges that they would otherwise not be able to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
I shouldn't have to tell you why one AT being a crutch for 7 poor players to lean on is a bad thing. It's that mentality that leads to PLing and rampant MA farming. Tankers being tractors that everyone can get free rides on isn't something to be proud of.
Protecting your teammates is a fine role to have, provided it doesn't slip into the area I mentioned above. But Tankers should also have the offensive ability to fulfill their concept. Which brings me to my next point:
[ QUOTE ]
It's where you start to say that concept is a factual issue that I (and so many others here) really take issue with what you say. It's a preferential issue, not factual, and a lot of us are fine with the concepts for our characters, just as we're fine with our roles.
[/ QUOTE ]
You look at the vast majority of interpretations of super heroes with powers like invulnerability and super strength in any medium, be it games, movies or comics, and tell me which ones aren't heavy hitters. And having mediocre damage over all and the lowest damage off all the melee ATs isn't being a heavy hitter. Few players would call Tankers as they are now heavy hitters. If at times, as I've suggested before, they could hit as hard as the big boys, that would be different.
I'm not the only one with this "preference". Many people would expect the guys with super powers like Tankers to be the big guns on the team. The lead designer admitted to this. The number one complaint about Tankers in the recent/ongoing Brute vs Tanker thread was their offense.
It's less a question of preference and more a question of not meeting reasonable expectations people have based on the genre and the genre as interpreted in the same and other media, including video games and PnP games.
And I call them "reasonable" expectations because I've posted several proposals to allow Tankers to be heavy hitters within the boundries of the game and balance that most people have SAID are quite reasonable. The only ones not being reasonable IMO are the devs for being unwilling to address or discuss the issue.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And I stand behind the point that the quickest way to getting a shield reduction in Brutes is to keep yammering in the Tank section about how brutes are just as sturdy while doubling the damage.
*snip*
No, then what is he going do, he's going to "take a look at" Brutes, or haven't you paid attention to how he's dealt with balancing powers & ATs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Nerfing Brutes will not improve Tankers, make them more fun to play or fix their issues(mechanical, role, conceptual or otherwise).
It wouldn't make Brutes happier. I don't think it would make anyone else here any happier. I know it wouldn't make me any happier.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
Probably not but a reduction to brute defenses would be the most likely outcome if blue side brutes are truly a threat to tankers. It may not be popular but the developers have a 5 year track record of balancing downward.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
Probably not but a reduction to brute defenses would be the most likely outcome if blue side brutes are truly a threat to tankers. It may not be popular but the developers have a 5 year track record of balancing downward.
[/ QUOTE ]
And as I said before, that does nothing to help the issues Tankers have.
Two of the goals of the Dominator tweaks:
[ QUOTE ]
Improve "feel" of low level play.
Increase Dominator vs. Controller viability
[/ QUOTE ]
They didn't accomplish this by nerfing Controllers. Nor did they improve Stalkers with the recent changes by nerfing down the rest of the melee ATs.
In the case of Brutes vs Tankers or Scrappers vs Tankers for that matter, balancing Brutes/Scrappers down doesn't make ANYONE feel better about playing Tankers or Brutes/Scrappers.
.
I like the idea you had of adding a -regen or -res component to their attacks. It would have the benefit of tanks gradually doing more damage to hard targets and add a ton of value to teams.
[ QUOTE ]
On Blueside, Brutes will be no more suited to really sub for a tank than a Scrapper, and a Scrapper will still generally be better than a Brute for pure damage. Brutes on blueside will become, musically speaking, the baritones, the [censored] child of the male vocal register, not quite able to hit the notes the tenors (Scrappers) can or provide the deep resonance and authority that the basses (Tanks) can.
On Redside, however, Tankers will be... kind of like little aggro holding gods. Frostweaver is totally right. I haven't played the thing, but I've read the wiki page, and I gotta think I'd rather have a fully IO'd Inv tank or Ice tank on an LRSF than a fully IO'd granite brute.
[/ QUOTE ]
surprised you mentioned that brutes do less dmg than scrappers. While their base index is lower, they have an 800% dmg cap, and fury. In pve that is insane damage. Imagine the fire/kin's combined with brutes...
Some brute sets can hold their own, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Probably not but a reduction to brute defenses would be the most likely outcome if blue side brutes are truly a threat to tankers. It may not be popular but the developers have a 5 year track record of balancing downward.
[/ QUOTE ]
And as I said before, that does nothing to help the issues Tankers have.
Two of the goals of the Dominator tweaks:
[ QUOTE ]
Improve "feel" of low level play.
Increase Dominator vs. Controller viability
[/ QUOTE ]
They didn't accomplish this by nerfing Controllers. Nor did they improve Stalkers with the recent changes by nerfing down the rest of the melee ATs.
In the case of Brutes vs Tankers or Scrappers vs Tankers for that matter, balancing Brutes/Scrappers down doesn't make ANYONE feel better about playing Tankers or Brutes/Scrappers.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm merely pointing out that the track record speaks for itself.
I personally see no reason to worry about blue side brutes. The only real effect I see it having is all the scranker types will dump their scrankers for brutes. In my opinion that is a good thing for tanker popularity because you will have fewer bad team tanker experiences.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
Probably not but a reduction to brute defenses would be the most likely outcome if blue side brutes are truly a threat to tankers. It may not be popular but the developers have a 5 year track record of balancing downward.
[/ QUOTE ]
McBoo - I disagree; they tend to balance towards the middle (up/down depending on relative position of the majority). Since the creation of NCNC / Paragon Studios, more things have been buffed then nerfed.
Blasters (Defiance 2), Stalkers (Hide cost 0 end, Hide in 8s vs 10s, AS debuff, new crit system), drawn weapons (removing redraw, Axe/Mace/BS/Katana/Claws), Scorch (current animation instead of the Incinerate animation), Mace (Clobber/Shatter/Crowd Control), Ice Melee (Frost, Frozen Aura), AR (sped up Buckshot/Beanbag/Full Auto), Dark Melee (SL 15->10s rech, double SL dmg, first target bonus on SD, more upfront MG, 7ft SM), Invuln (no Unyielding debuff, stronger res passives, special debuff res in passives), EA (added heal component), SS (removal of Only Effect Self from Rage)...
I better stop there. That's just off the top of my head too, I didn't look anything up. I'm not saying there haven't been nerfs, there have (and some with nasty backlash), but to say the dev's track record is to down tweak? I'd disagree with that. (It's funny because I had a discussion with someone who said they buff too much.)
[ QUOTE ]
surprised you mentioned that brutes do less dmg than scrappers. While their base index is lower, they have an 800% dmg cap, and fury. In pve that is insane damage. Imagine the fire/kin's combined with brutes...
[/ QUOTE ]
_Inc_ - Their damage cap is actually 850% (100% of that being base, or +750%), but I don't see that making a big difference to be honest, even in the presence of Fire/Kins. A saturated Controller Fulcrum has a damage buff of +290%, that's just about enough to damage cap a Scrapper (485% vs 500%).
In order for a Brute to deal damage equal to a Scrapper @485% +dmg with a 7.5% crit rate, they'd need to be operating at ~782% +dmg (100% base, 95% slotting, say 170% from Fury, that leaves ~417% from buffs). That leaves them 127% +dmg short of damage dealing equivalence. (This assumes equivalent sets.)
I'm not saying that Brutes suck, mind you, but simply having a high damage cap makes it very hard to attain.
I can't help it, it's just what I do.
Also, I really do think that Brutes are a good balance between damage and defense, that no class hero-side can answer for.