Werner, my first question would be "Why should I trust Mids' average damage calculation?"
Do you get the same values if you figure out the actual damage longhand?
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
Werner, my first question would be "Why should I trust Mids' average damage calculation?"
Do you get the same values if you figure out the actual damage longhand?
[/ QUOTE ]
I should rename that column. I'm just listing Mids' average damage and doing some of those calculations as a sort of baseline. If you look down in the section with the actual build, you'll see that I'm doing it all longhand. Sorry for any confusion.
"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
Is 90% fury really a fair assumption? What happens when you turn that down to 75% and 50%... I see this as being the reason Brutes show up higher on the list moreso then a a game imbalance. As a scrapper you're always at full damage... where a brute is only situationally at this level of damage.
edited: Heh.. didn't finish reading the thread... i see this has already come up.
I gotta make pain. I gotta make things right. I gotta stop what's comin'. 'Least I gotta try.
Between your sheet and mine (once I found your +22% from SetIO buff and 10.5% from assault) we have a difference of 7.6 DPS.
And my sheet can't take into account the Achilles' Heel -DR proc yet, so that covers that.
I think I'll be very interested in seeing what it and the gladiator will do for FU, Slash, Eviscerate.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think one or the other should happen. My personal preference would be for Scrappers to simply get a damage increase.
[/ QUOTE ]
Edit: Late reply to an early post in the thread, but I just found this thread. Reading on I see this has been discussed already.
You lost me right here. Quite simply, this tells me that you're basing this heavily on "balance a mathematical symmetry."
Scrappers do not need more damage. I sit and stare at the screen sometimes when I see what I can achieve with Scrappers. I ponder what the devs were smoking when they moved us from 1.0 to 1.125 melee damage scale back during ED. (I cannot help but wonder if it was almost pure salve for our egos to lessen the psychological impact).
Fundamentally, at the levels of power we're talking about here, with 70-odd percent global recharge from IOs and all the other kit such a build is likely to be sporting, nearly every character in CoH is, frankly, more powerful than it needs to be. Any character able to solo an AV is also likely able to steamroll an inordinate amount of standard content without any help, probably spawned for anywhere from 2-6 players, if not more.
Mind you, I am not complaining about any of that. I'm an extensive powergamer, and I thrive on being able to pull stunts like that whenever possible. However, I still understand that what I'm doing isn't remotely reasonable as a consideration for how to balance anything. Well, except maybe to how to get things nerfed... (*talks more softly*).
Getting back to the point I was responding to, as soon as we're asking for more damage on an AT that already has more damage than it needs in order to bring it in balance with another AT that also has more damage than it needs, on the basis that they have more defense than us (but we have enough damage to do what's needed) I have to wonder if I haven't fallen down a rabbit hole.
I realize that the symmetric alternative to asking for more for Scrappers is to ask for nerfs to Brutes, but I also oppose that on the grounds that it smacks of some kind of "tit-for-tat" approach to balance. "I can't have it, so they can't either!"
I'm not saying nothing should happen, or that nothing will. I'm saying that I don't approve of it being either nerfs to Brutes or buffs to Scrapper damage. I expect that the devs will do what they seem to most frequently. They'll datamine for months, filter for certain views, and take action if they see skew that likes outside boundaries they think are good.
My bet is that we won't see problems worth fixing in this particular area. And for what it's worth, I say all this as someone for whom Scrappers is their favorite AT.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
<QR>
Things may also change with the expansion coming out. What if when you switch you lose access to that sides epics/patrons? Meaning if a Brute goes hero and has to take a tank/scrapper epic will the be as good? What if a Scrapper has to pick a Patron?
The entire point of my "some kind of parity needs to exist" is that, between Brutes and Scrappers, there isn't really any at the top end.
I take Brutes doing just as much damage while being 12.5% harder to kill at the very least, thanks to their higher hit points, with a grain of salt. This is something that many of you who currently see parity are missing. Brutes and Scrappers do the same damage. They shouldn't be. Brutes should be doing less because they're harder to kill even excluding power sets. That's what parity is.
As for the top end game, I'm talking about when you're dancing with the caps. When you're on a good team and/or IO'd to the gills, Brutes will outperform Scrappers. Their scalars are simply higher at 750% +dam (6.375) than a Scrapper's (6.075 assuming 8% overall crit chance; 6.1875 assuming 10% crit) as well as their resistance (250% better mitigation) and hp caps (33% better mitigation) and team contribution (cuz they have punchvoke).
Even assuming that only one of these is possible at any one time (either maximized mitigation or maximized damage) you still have to keep in mind that the Brute is still going to be better simply because s/he is harder to kill thanks to naturally high hit points. If their damages are equal but everything else remains as it is now, that's not parity. That's a discernible advantage for the Brute.
Because of this obvious advantage, it screams to me the need for a change. I don't care however much you scream that Brutes have to put more work into keeping their damage up or whatever, the fact of the matter remains that Brutes are capable of super-Scrapper level damage and super-Scrapper level survivability and even have a native advantage in one of those 2 fields when solo!
The only reason we're not going to see the changes to the AT to see some actual parity is because Castle doesn't want to rock the boat. You've already seen what's happened from his buffing of Dominators. People got angry at him for it. For giving Dominators a global buff in a way that didn't make them overpowered. Limiting the top end of Brutes because it's overperforming both of the similar ATs on blueside (Tankers and Scrappers) would be received just as poorly and quite possibly worse because, even though they've got the same damn sets and the same damn punch voke and they both have access to Taunt, 90% of Brute players insist that they should have parity with Scrappers with the exception that they should ignore their higher caps because for some reason they're pointless to bring into a balance consideration.
Which is all [censored] stupid.
Brutes are too strong as they are now. They've got too much damage for having so much survivability and too much damage potential for having so much survival potential. That's pretty much where it is. You can't change it, the numbers are right [censored] there, but people can (and will) obfuscate it.
I've been willing to stand aside and say "eh, it's redside, I don't really care", but GoRo has me agitated. This is why I never wanted side switching, but, now that we're getting it, we've opened up the "AT power disparity can o' worms" and Castle is unwilling to put forth the effort to address it.
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'll be very interested in seeing what it and the gladiator will do for FU, Slash, Eviscerate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not much. Here's what I have so far.
Claws:
227 DPS Follow Up -> Focus -> Slash
217 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Focus -> Slash
201 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Eviscerate
Dual Blades:
241 DPS Blinding Feint -> Ablating Strike -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
226 DPS Blinding Feint -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
Spreadsheet
"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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'll be very interested in seeing what it and the gladiator will do for FU, Slash, Eviscerate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not much. Here's what I have so far.
Claws:
227 DPS Follow Up -> Focus -> Slash
217 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Focus -> Slash
201 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Eviscerate
Dual Blades:
241 DPS Blinding Feint -> Ablating Strike -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
226 DPS Blinding Feint -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
Spreadsheet
[/ QUOTE ]
Bought all the necessary IOs on live. Copied to test.
Time to bring down pylon with FU, Slash, Evisc? 12:26
That's right: 12:26
Your Calculated DPS: 201
Actual DPS on first run: 179.212
Going for another run after a smoke and a beer.
Thing is, I'll probably keep this build because FU/Spin/Eviscerate is glorious farming damage.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'll be very interested in seeing what it and the gladiator will do for FU, Slash, Eviscerate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not much. Here's what I have so far.
Claws:
227 DPS Follow Up -> Focus -> Slash
217 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Focus -> Slash
201 DPS Follow Up -> Slash -> Eviscerate
Dual Blades:
241 DPS Blinding Feint -> Ablating Strike -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
226 DPS Blinding Feint -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike
Spreadsheet
[/ QUOTE ]
Bought all the necessary IOs on live. Copied to test.
Time to bring down pylon with FU, Slash, Evisc? 12:26
That's right: 12:26
Your Calculated DPS: 201
Actual DPS on first run: 179.212
Going for another run after a smoke and a beer.
Thing is, I'll probably keep this build because FU/Spin/Eviscerate is glorious farming damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing you didn't have the exact powers and slotting as the build in the spreadsheet with the 201 DPS. Not that you'd WANT that build, but a discrepancy of 22 DPS for a different build running the same chain isn't surprising. As I set it up, the build would only make it a little over two minutes before it burned out of endurance. I suppose a tray of blues would make it doable.
(edit: And mine would probably get slaughtered by the Pylon. It has soft-capped defenses, but no heal and nothing like your regeneration rate.)
"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
Ahhhh so you're the one who down the closest pylon...
Edit:
I'm trying out my own dps build...
Well -3 global damage on test ... I don't have the Obliteration on him, shouldn't makemush a difference
Second run I gave up at 6:22 when the pylon was barely at 50% health.
This chain sucks and isn't getting anywhere near what our calculations are showing.
I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
Second run I gave up at 6:22 when the pylon was barely at 50% health.
This chain sucks and isn't getting anywhere near what our calculations are showing.
I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Get either a Bane Spider or a Blaster to observe the status of the Pylon for you with Surveillance. If they're not shown to stack for a least 5 minutes, I'm pretty sure that's decent evidence that they don't.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Possible. I'd still calculate 195 DPS without the stacking, though.
But I think it's also likely that you aren't running a perma-Hasten, +22% global damage, Assault, chance for build up, double damage proc'd Follow Up and anything else silly I could do for DPS build. 
"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
k...
7:19 my first run
This should really be much lower... screwed up on the chain a few times. Not used to it yet...
Giving it another go..
6:22
How's that for Claws DPS?
Softcap to all - Endless endurance...
Yep It's All Good!!!
Gots me a vid for the doubters...
uploading now...
Fark a video. Post the damn build. That's 228.2 DPS.
Now the $100 question. Get those same buffs you're using for that build and dump them into a dm/sd build with portals popping SD/AAO fuel.
What's that DPS going to hit?
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second run I gave up at 6:22 when the pylon was barely at 50% health.
This chain sucks and isn't getting anywhere near what our calculations are showing.
I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Get either a Bane Spider or a Blaster to observe the status of the Pylon for you with Surveillance. If they're not shown to stack for a least 5 minutes, I'm pretty sure that's decent evidence that they don't.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another way to snoop on enemy stats that anyone can use: Power Analyzer MkIII
228 DPS, then, which is one better than I calculated for my DPS build, and mine didn't have sustainable endurance. Nice.
"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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second run I gave up at 6:22 when the pylon was barely at 50% health.
This chain sucks and isn't getting anywhere near what our calculations are showing.
I'm beginning to seriously doubt the belief that the two different types of DR debuff procs stack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Get either a Bane Spider or a Blaster to observe the status of the Pylon for you with Surveillance. If they're not shown to stack for a least 5 minutes, I'm pretty sure that's decent evidence that they don't.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another way to snoop on enemy stats that anyone can use: Power Analyzer MkIII
[/ QUOTE ]
Wasn't sure if that one would let you do it forever or if it would drop off, so I played it safe and went with a method I knew wouldn't screw you.
[ QUOTE ]
Is 90% fury really a fair assumption? What happens when you turn that down to 75% and 50%... I see this as being the reason Brutes show up higher on the list moreso then a a game imbalance. As a scrapper you're always at full damage... where a brute is only situationally at this level of damage.
edited: Heh.. didn't finish reading the thread... i see this has already come up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly.
I really do think that [u]we need some damage figures for the 50% and 75% Fury marks[u], because honestly, even solo, unless you're DM, being able to maintain a "constant" 90% fury is going to be VERY tough, I don't care what you're smokin, it's not easy at all. Granted, DM and DB both do pretty well at maintaining a high fury level, but even they "can" and "DO" fall well below 90% during missions, and ALL other primaries, definately do.
People really blow things outta proportions sometimes when they hate something, and no, Brutes cannot just sit at 90% Fury throughout an entire mission, ESPECIALLY if teamed. They can spike to that during a spawn fight, but it doesn't start out there.
I've been an extremely avid Brute player since CoV was launched, and if I had to give Brute's an "average" fury bar for a general mission, I'd place it at 65-75% solo (if you can keep moving), and 30-50% teamed. As an "average." Sure, they can see "dips" and "spikes" to that, but that'd be my experienced "guess" on it while taking all primaries into consideration.
ChaosString:
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I reach 90% all the time during missions, and exceed it during some types of encounters
[/ QUOTE ]
You don't "exceed" 90% Fury, I think at best Fury caps out at 95% (I actually believe it's 90%) due to either a "bug" or design. So you're not going to "exceed" 90% Fury hardly ever, IF ever for that matter.
[ QUOTE ]
ChaosString:
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I reach 90% all the time during missions, and exceed it during some types of encounters
[/ QUOTE ]
You don't "exceed" 90% Fury, I think at best Fury caps out at 95% (I actually believe it's 90%) due to either a "bug" or design. So you're not going to "exceed" 90% Fury hardly ever, IF ever for that matter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, you do. You just don't get Fury from attacking if you're over 90%. You have to get it from being attacked which, if you're on a team, isn't a difficult thing to do unless you're */Energy.
[ QUOTE ]
The entire point of my "some kind of parity needs to exist" is that, between Brutes and Scrappers, there isn't really any at the top end.
I take Brutes doing just as much damage while being 12.5% harder to kill at the very least, thanks to their higher hit points, with a grain of salt. This is something that many of you who currently see parity are missing. Brutes and Scrappers do the same damage. They shouldn't be. Brutes should be doing less because they're harder to kill even excluding power sets. That's what parity is.
As for the top end game, I'm talking about when you're dancing with the caps. When you're on a good team and/or IO'd to the gills, Brutes will outperform Scrappers. Their scalars are simply higher at 750% +dam (6.375) than a Scrapper's (6.075 assuming 8% overall crit chance; 6.1875 assuming 10% crit) as well as their resistance (250% better mitigation) and hp caps (33% better mitigation) and team contribution (cuz they have punchvoke).
Even assuming that only one of these is possible at any one time (either maximized mitigation or maximized damage) you still have to keep in mind that the Brute is still going to be better simply because s/he is harder to kill thanks to naturally high hit points. If their damages are equal but everything else remains as it is now, that's not parity. That's a discernible advantage for the Brute.
Because of this obvious advantage, it screams to me the need for a change. I don't care however much you scream that Brutes have to put more work into keeping their damage up or whatever, the fact of the matter remains that Brutes are capable of super-Scrapper level damage and super-Scrapper level survivability and even have a native advantage in one of those 2 fields when solo!
The only reason we're not going to see the changes to the AT to see some actual parity is because Castle doesn't want to rock the boat. You've already seen what's happened from his buffing of Dominators. People got angry at him for it. For giving Dominators a global buff in a way that didn't make them overpowered. Limiting the top end of Brutes because it's overperforming both of the similar ATs on blueside (Tankers and Scrappers) would be received just as poorly and quite possibly worse because, even though they've got the same damn sets and the same damn punch voke and they both have access to Taunt, 90% of Brute players insist that they should have parity with Scrappers with the exception that they should ignore their higher caps because for some reason they're pointless to bring into a balance consideration.
Which is all [censored] stupid.
Brutes are too strong as they are now. They've got too much damage for having so much survivability and too much damage potential for having so much survival potential. That's pretty much where it is. You can't change it, the numbers are right [censored] there, but people can (and will) obfuscate it.
I've been willing to stand aside and say "eh, it's redside, I don't really care", but GoRo has me agitated. This is why I never wanted side switching, but, now that we're getting it, we've opened up the "AT power disparity can o' worms" and Castle is unwilling to put forth the effort to address it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Honestly man, you're really showing your "bias" here, and it's coming off as alot of crying.
The reasons as to "why" Brutes may be able to reach higher damage levels than Scrappers do not, in any way, un-balance them to Scrappers, simply due to the truth that SO MANY factors are required for that to happen...AND they CANNOT be done solo and DO require a TEAM to achieve, as well as constant monitoring (Fury drops below a certain level and there goes that damage). Per the Dev's, needing "multiple" team-mates to be able to achieve certain performance levels is in not any way "un-balanced."
Grant a Scrapper the same type of "buffs/debuffs" and thier performance level damage wise will be just about as good and they'll be "un-killable" as well...so I don't see what the problem is...other than you are upset (or jealous?) that another melee AT can reach your Scrapper's potential with effort.
I just don't see a problem with a Brute (who uses many IO's and teams) being able to perform at levels comparable to a Scrapper with the same types of buffs. That's fine game balance imho. Teaming should never be nerfed.
I suppose next we should nerf the abilities that a "full" Corruptor team can achieve right? A full, well built, IO'd Corruptor team can achieve things that most AT's can only dream about. Defender teams can too.
Pssst Better EM attack chain ET, EP, Gloom, EP, BS, EP, Gloom
Also less drain on the fury bar without hitting TF, going to the bathroom, posting on the formus, grabbing a drink and then finishing the rest of the chain.
Looks like I've been inspired to at least start a DPS project of my own. Here's an example of what I'm planning, with the build template and spreadsheet template that I plan to use. The build template has +202.5% global recharge for those hard-to-reach chains, but isn't likely to give anyone sustainable endurance as I'll be slotting. If I can last one minute before burning out, I'm happy.
Here's the spreadsheet I'll be using with the first build inside. It's a Claws build with 227 DPS.
If anyone happens to notice any calculation errors, please let me know.
If I ever actually finish this, as opposed to just starting it, I'll be sure to post the results.
"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