[ QUOTE ]
War Mace ranks low because it has redraw and thus can't utilize Gloom. Remove Gloom from the chains and it'll be a top contender, with great AE damage to boot.
They really need to fix the Epic powers for Villains. Check out Dark Blast for Stalkers. It's got better DPA than Energy Transfer! Either that power is horrendously broken or RedTomax has that powers info wrong. The optimal DM chain I found used DB as every other attack.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think somebody reported that those info includes critical and that's why Dark Blast is showing that much damage. In reality, its damage is a bit lower than Smite.
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
[ QUOTE ]
I think somebody reported that those info includes critical and that's why Dark Blast is showing that much damage. In reality, its damage is a bit lower than Smite.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's why I use the unspecified damage listed in CoD for everything I do.
The ONLY discrepancy I noted was when Sarrate pointed out that brute/tank have a different scaler for the lethal part of greater fire sword than scrappers.
Actually... it's confusing even then:
* 1 Negative damage PvE only
* ToHit 0.75000 Melee_DeBuff_ToHit% for 6s
* 1.09 Negative damage If target is a player
* 1.09 Negative damage PvP only, If Hidden
* 1.09 Negative damage (20% chance) PvP only, If not Hidden but target is Held or Slept
* 1 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 1 Negative damage PvE only, If Hidden
Does scale 1 damage. Then it does another scale one damage if not hidden or if hidden? huh?
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After looking through this whole thread, I would have to agree with Sarrate that the analysis is probably overrated. This would really only work for totally tricked out builds that could be impractical for most of the gameplay and players here. Yes, for some of the tougher challenges like AV hunting and Pylon soloing these comparisons could be nice in an academic discussion, but the conditions of these numbers seem to be pretty exclusive from most of the game.
The +250% recharge, though definitely possible for some builds, is still pretty high for anything without using IO set bonuses or external buffs. Assuming 90% recharge enhanced for each power, Hasten tacked on, and maybe another buff like Quickness from /SR, you are still looking at 70-90% more global recharge. That seems to be out of reach except for the most dedicated builds.
Also assuming Fury at 90% is pretty high standard, which is definitely not the practice for Brutes at all times. Yes, I know it's probably not that difficult to generate Fury, but general gameplay seems to see Fury peak at 70-80% as the highest attained for most of the time, with the average being lower than that. Getting even higher Fury then involves getting specific conditions which could also put the Brute's survival at risk, and that does take some time to do.
I seriously don't think the developers will take these numbers as an indication of any need of balance between sets or ATs (though I'm not saying there is or there isn't a need for it in any case). That +250% recharge is figured into these calculations puts them way beyond the SO enhancement values that most of the games seems to be revolved around.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the results basically confirm my belief that when under most optimal situation, Brute has the GREATEST potential, which is pretty much what the AT is designed for.
I've been playing this game a lot but I don't have any lvl 50 Brute. My highest is only lvl 42 Dark/Elec Brute. Why? Because I don't like keeping Fury. I like to chat, make jokes and team a lot. I find that when I play Brute, I need to focus on too much like "go, go, go!!". And I hate losing Fury when it happens so naturally I find Brute AT not as fun.
I've been playing Stalker a lot and I find Stalker's damage is a lot higher when I want it. I assume Stalker and Scrapper are pretty similar when it comes to initial burst damage.
I am not surprised Brute is a bit higher than Scrapper but I highly doubt you can keep fury high all the time. There's bound to be "down-time" during mish.
I am surprised that War Mace still ranks that low even after all the buffs. Imagine how bad it was before?? LOL 
[/ QUOTE ]
Warmace is low? LOL, it's ahead of every single scrapper set except dark melee with SD saturated with 10 targets...
And why should a brute have greater damage 'potential' than a scrapper when the brute always has better damage mitigation?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because you actually need to reach that potential first? The numbers were calculated in the MOST optimal situation like fighting an AV/Pylon. In most situations, I think Scrapper's damage is high enough.
And who says Brute has "better" defense than Scrapper (and Stalker)?? Last time I check, all 3 of them have the same values. Brute has better "cap" but a lot of times the highest cap doesn't even matter 'cause you've already over the soft-cap.
Why am I the only one who thinks Brute is quite "over-rated"??? When I form team, I sometimes try to stay away from Brute because Brute and Tanker players tend to be very "anal" about knockbacks, confuse, pulls..blah blah, blah.
Give me a SoA with leaderhips any day!!
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> * 55.61 Negative damage PvE only
* ToHit -5.625% for 6s
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If Hidden</pre><hr />
This is what it looks like in City of Data (with PvP info removed). To me this indicates that it always does 111.2 damage and doesn't deal extra damage when hidden. All patron pool attacks look like this, so is this an issue for all Stalker patron pools?
Or is it just an error in CoD?
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> * 55.61 Negative damage PvE only
* ToHit -5.625% for 6s
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If Hidden</pre><hr />
This is what it looks like in City of Data (with PvP info removed). To me this indicates that it always does 111.2 damage and doesn't deal extra damage when hidden. All patron pool attacks look like this, so is this an issue for all Stalker patron pools?
[/ QUOTE ]
Patron powers do critical from hidden. ST attack has 100% and cone and aoe have 50%. Ball of Lightning has 50% critical.
Spine Burst only has 30% chance to critical.
So yes, you can build an aoe Stalker. I don't know why people keep talking about Scrapper VS Brute when I think a more accurate comparison is Stalker VS Scrapper. Oh well..
(When the new Stalker buff came out, patron powers still had the old critical mechanism which means they could only score critical from Hidden or Held/Slept targets. Now all patron attacks have normal 10% critical + 3% per party member within the radius and even though I haven't done a test about this, I feel I critical more with pets around me too.)
PS: Did I mention Shadow Meld is super good?!!!
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
If that's the case then CoD is probably wrong and the "* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden" should probably be ignored, making it a balanced attack.
[ QUOTE ]
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> * 55.61 Negative damage PvE only
* ToHit -5.625% for 6s
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 55.61 Negative damage PvE only, If Hidden</pre><hr />
This is what it looks like in City of Data (with PvP info removed). To me this indicates that it always does 111.2 damage and doesn't deal extra damage when hidden. All patron pool attacks look like this, so is this an issue for all Stalker patron pools?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have a 40+ Stalker (mine is ~37, iirc), but I think what you're seeing in CoD is Stalker's new crit chance. So, those four bullets would look like this:
* Dark Blast will always deal 55.61 ne damage. (PvE)
* Dark Blast will always debuff tohit. (PvE and PvP)
* Dark Blast has a chance to crit out of Hide. (PvE)
* Dark Blast will always crit in Hide. (PvE)
Since my Stalker isn't high enough, I decided to check a power that I have used, Havok Punch (removed PvP specific effects):
[ QUOTE ]
* 0.8 Smashing damage PvE only
* 0.52 Energy damage PvE only
* 8.00000 Melee_Sleeps Sleep (mag 2) (after 0.25 second delay) (30% chance) PvE only
* Endurance -0.10000 Melee_Ones PvE only
* Recovery -1.00000 Melee_Ones for 4s (30% chance)
* 1.32 Energy damage PvE only, If not Hidden
* 1.32 Energy damage PvE only, If Hidden
[/ QUOTE ]
* Havok Punch always deals smashing damage. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always deals energy damage. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always has a chance to sleep. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always has an endurance drain. (PvE and PvP)
* Havok Punch always has a chance to debuff recovery. (PvE)
* Havok Punch has a chance to crit out of Hide. (PvE)
* Havok Punch always crits in Hide. (PvE)
It most certainly doesn't always have two energy damage ticks, so the out of Hide must be the critical chance (just not specified). I think the reason they had to specify "Hidden" and "Not Hidden" is to avoid double crits like this or this. (Check the combat log.)
Does anyone know if Eagle's Claw still have a chance to triple-crit after Placate?
Jeebus. All the big number runners are out and about on this thread! ^_^
Excellent work, Billz. And I can't believe Fiery Melee is so different in DPS between the two classes.
F'in epic mathematics, my friend.
Sarrate: Sounds reasonable, that means the numbers for Dark Blast is just wrong in Mids'.
BZB: Now that Culex has updated her Damage Resistance spreadsheet, I don't suppose you can update this to take average resistances into account. You could do one for general play and one for just AVs.
Thanks, Rad.
Next step is to go with 42.4% recharge on every power. Pretend we're slotting with nothing but level 50 basic IOs.
Use only pool powers accessible to both sides. Use identical chains for both sides.
But I can guess how that's going to turn out:
Scrap Dual Blades 169.7
Brute Dual Blades 168.3
Just like that. I honestly think folks need to pay more attention to that data chunk right there. The scrapper and brute used identical chains and the scrapper won by a measly 1.4DPS.
Something to think about.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because the chances of Brutes being able to "keep" their Patron Power Pool attack Gloom is very very slim imho. They'll most likely have to respec into Ancillary Power Pools upon faction switch and pick up Dark Blast, which will drop their damage averages substantially enough to say: Blueside: Scrappers > Brutes in damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
How the heck do you think that would work? Epic power pools are AT based. While Brutes could easily get Scrapper APPs, other ATs will not find it as easy. They might make something entirely new, but I highly doubt it.
[/ QUOTE ]
scrappers should ahve access to tank epics, they already have identicle sets in body mastery and energy mastery
Biillz...
You think you could do Claws for Brutes?
Probably would be the same results as DB but I'm just a little curious...
[ QUOTE ]
But I can guess how that's going to turn out:
Scrap Dual Blades 169.7
Brute Dual Blades 168.3
Just like that. I honestly think folks need to pay more attention to that data chunk right there. The scrapper and brute used identical chains and the scrapper won by a measly 1.4DPS.
[/ QUOTE ]
As long as 90% fury is a resonable average for Brutes in normal PvE play--which is to say that fury fluctuates equally above and below 90%.
90% may be a resasonable watermark for AV/pylon soloing, but in normal mission play, I think it's too high. I've played three Brutes to 50, one to 32, and one to 46, and even though I chase the hell out of fury, I can't keep it pegged at 90% for an entire mission, especially when there are glowies to click, hostages to escort, or sparse parts of the map (long hall to elevator, long hall from elevator to next spawn).
When you first started these comparisons, you were asking for top-end, high-recharge ST attack chains, and so I didn't have a problem with the 90% figure, since you were pretty obviously talking about optimizing for pylon/AV soloing situations.
But now it looks like you're trying to draw comparisons between Brutes and Scrappers for "normal" content in "normal" situations, and for that, 90% is simply too high an average.
[ QUOTE ]
Biillz...
You think you could do Claws for Brutes?
Probably would be the same results as DB but I'm just a little curious...
[/ QUOTE ]
Already done a while back, Iggy. Or at least a comparison was done here.
But I might as well go for broke and proliferate all brute sets to scrapper and vice versa.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
But now it looks like you're trying to draw comparisons between Brutes and Scrappers for "normal" content in "normal" situations, and for that, 90% is simply too high an average.
[/ QUOTE ]
How about we split the difference and go with 75%? I do so only at gunpoint though. While I accept that fury drops between spawns, I just don't understand how my fellow brute players aren't slamming against 90% with every spawn they encounter.
Unless my perception of events is heavily affected by my soloist bias. Which is entirely possible.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I can guess how that's going to turn out:
Scrap Dual Blades 169.7
Brute Dual Blades 168.3
Just like that. I honestly think folks need to pay more attention to that data chunk right there. The scrapper and brute used identical chains and the scrapper won by a measly 1.4DPS.
[/ QUOTE ]
As long as 90% fury is a resonable average for Brutes in normal PvE play--which is to say that fury fluctuates equally above and below 90%.
90% may be a resasonable watermark for AV/pylon soloing, but in normal mission play, I think it's too high. I've played three Brutes to 50, one to 32, and one to 46, and even though I chase the hell out of fury, I can't keep it pegged at 90% for an entire mission, especially when there are glowies to click, hostages to escort, or sparse parts of the map (long hall to elevator, long hall from elevator to next spawn).
When you first started these comparisons, you were asking for top-end, high-recharge ST attack chains, and so I didn't have a problem with the 90% figure, since you were pretty obviously talking about optimizing for pylon/AV soloing situations.
But now it looks like you're trying to draw comparisons between Brutes and Scrappers for "normal" content in "normal" situations, and for that, 90% is simply too high an average.
[/ QUOTE ]
nah.
for the instances where having that dps is important - mostly fighting eb's, av's, pylons, etc - 90% fury isnt hard to get to or maintain
that EPS on stone melee is disturbing. but i guess it's the price one pays to be able to one-shot hold a boss for 10s unenhanced and keep groups of annoying longbow staggering around indefinetely.
i dont see much of a reason to to test sets that the two at's dont actually have
lets face it - broadsword with gloom would be insane on a brute. not to mention when one puts that on a brute with shields and realizes you wont need to io out for the melee/lethal defense caps thanks to parry (and it's inreased dmg with full fury...)
and stone melee on a scrapper?
[ QUOTE ]
How about we split the difference and go with 75%? I do so only at gunpoint though. While I accept that fury drops between spawns, I just don't understand how my fellow brute players aren't slamming against 90% with every spawn they encounter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, I reach 90% all the time during missions, and exceed it during some types of encounters. But using that figure as an average for PvE implies that 90% is the balance point around which the AT is adjusted, and that for typical players in tpyical missions on typical maps, fury will fluctuate around that mark.
And that's just not the case.
But for experienced players who have endurance management and survivability under control, 75% may be too low. For such players 80% is probably a nice, conservative estimate.
Single quick reply to more than one person to save time.
[ QUOTE ]
Werner, even at 314% recharge and doing FU/Slash/Focus repeat, I'm only getting 157DPS.
[/ QUOTE ]
I dug up an old perma Hasten soft-capped Claws/SR DPS build, and it looks like I calculated 225 DPS running the Follow Up -> Slash -> Focus -> Slash chain. Purple procs in Slash and Focus. Achilles' Heel in Slash. Regular damage procs in Follow Up and Focus. Gaussian set in Tactics with the chance of build up. 10% chance of criticals since DPS is all but meaningless against minions. 95% chance to hit. Arcanatime. 31% damage bonus. Assault.
Now, I realize I'm going beyond what you were including in the numbers we're comparing to. But I am saying that Claws isn't stuck in the mid 100s.
Anyway, my plan is to compare sets using actual DPS builds like this, with as standard a build template as possible. On the other hand, few of my plans ever come to fruition.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a math question: are the formulas for proc's used in attack chains a lot like interest (compounded in Werner's and simple in Umbral's)?
[/ QUOTE ]
Afaik, unless Werner is using the -res proc formula that we worked out a long time ago, we're using the same formula. Every other proc is simply a flat increase to average damage for a power.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm using the full formula that takes into account that the proc doesn't stack with itself. And when I calculate DPS, I do it the hard way, getting a separate -resist probability for each attack.
[ QUOTE ]
One thing that this thread overall points out that I don't like is that +Recharge plays *way* too much role in DPS. This makes Hasten a must have power.
[/ QUOTE ]
Must have? Hardly. I don't even have Hasten on my Regen. While I love the topic of DPS, I also think that DPS tends to be overrated. You don't need these kinds of numbers to take out AVs and other hard targets, and AoE and burst damage are more useful in teaming situations. Most people shouldn't play the kind of specialized builds that pull off these numbers.
(edit: Both of my main scrappers do in the neighborhood of 175 DPS, and I'm perfectly happy with that.)
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
for the instances where having that dps is important - mostly fighting eb's, av's, pylons, etc - 90% fury isnt hard to get to or maintain
[/ QUOTE ]
Like I said before, when we were obviously talking about soloing AVs/pylons, I didn't have the faintest qualm with the 90% number; in fact I think it's kind of conservative.
But the discussion appears to have veered into the realm of AT comparisons, and discussion of "normal" recharge slotting, which, to me, implies "normal" builds in "normal" situations, not AV/pylon battles.
[ QUOTE ]
(edit: Both of my main scrappers do in the neighborhood of 175 DPS, and I'm perfectly happy with that.)
[/ QUOTE ]
heretic.
[ QUOTE ]
i dont see much of a reason to to test sets that the two at's dont actually have
[/ QUOTE ]
Because we were told "all sets that make sense go to all ATs" was the goal. What that means, I don't know.
But that's not why I'm doing it.
I have a new goal, and that goal is to put to rest the brute damage>scrapper damage/scrapper damage>brute damage argument.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
One thing that this thread overall points out that I don't like is that +Recharge plays *way* too much role in DPS. This makes Hasten a must have power.
[/ QUOTE ]
Must have? Hardly. I don't even have Hasten on my Regen. While I love the topic of DPS, I also think that DPS tends to be overrated. You don't need these kinds of numbers to take out AVs and other hard targets, and AoE and burst damage are more useful in teaming situations. Most people shouldn't play the kind of specialized builds that pull off these numbers.
(edit: Both of my main scrappers do in the neighborhood of 175 DPS, and I'm perfectly happy with that.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Regarding hasten as a must have...
My Claws runs at 190+ dps without it...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there needs to be any manner of buff, I don't see a disparity between brute and scrapper power from this.
keep in mind that in a buff heavy environment, those scrapper chains are going to get a hell of a lot more from every point of +damage than their counterparts.
Do Brutes have a higher + damage cap? sure, but they need all of it just to equal what one fulcrum shift can do for a scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
AT's should not be balanced by how well they are buffed by other outside at's, especially when looking at only a few specific powers like fulcrum shift. If we do that, granite armor is way too powerful because kins let them move quickly, or buffed blasters are too powerful because they have too much damage mitigation for the ranged damage they put out.
From the info I've seen, brutes eclipse scrapper dmg far too often considering the fact they always have better dmg mitigation. And top-end, scrappers should have the dmg advantage in most cases because brutes clearly have dmg mitigation advantage at the top end, and this info clearly demonstrates that brutes have dmg dealing and dmg mitigation superiority on the top end. That's clearly imbalanced, and it's even less defensible when you consider the two at's share many of the same powersets.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now now... one of the resounding concerns (which has cropped up in this thread) is that brutes have such a high cap for resistance. Asside from tier 9s (something only up rarely on most builds) this is something you depend on external buffs to exploit.
To bemoan the relative efficacy of resistance buffs on brutes, while ignoring the significantly higher damage bonus from everything from AM to Forge to Fortitude upon a scrapper, is not the path to a balanced argument.
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!