Why is Rage made so much better than Build Up Etc
By
Ahmon,
Posted on: 2009-07-20 20:23 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
I'd agree Rage is stronger then build up, it's kind of a no brainer, but is SuperStrength the strongest of all tanker secondarys? (or brute primaries) I don't think so. I haven't played them all, but i've seen some very impressive EM and Stone's put out some nice damage. My Axer does some decent dmg, and on my brutes, my fire melee guys damage is off the hook.
So, IMO, the powerset seems balanced too me, and that's all that matters to me.
@KingSnake - Triumph Server
@PrinceSnake
My common sense is tingling... ~ Deadpool
If you can't learn to do something well... learn to enjoy doing it poorly...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
RAGE
* ToHit +20% for 120s
* DMG(All Types) +80% for 120s [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
* DMG(All Types) -9990% for 10s (after 120 second delay) [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
* Defense -0.2 for 10s (after 120 second delay) [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
Effect does not stack from same caster
* Endurance -0.25 (after 120 second delay) [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, I find the sheer annoyance of the -9990% damage(all) unbearable. I honestly don't know why it's so popular with such an annoying debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is annoying, but far better than the previous 10 seconds of ONLY AFFECT SELF. Now at least you can keep Taunting.
Also, I make use of Procs which are unaffected by the massive damage debuff.
The plastic tips at the end of shoelaces are called aglets. Their true purpose is sinister.
--The Question, JLU
I've always thought it would be thematic and balanced if rage's crash was a tohit crash. That way, you'd still have a 5% chance of chrushing someone's skull, but you almost certaintly wouldn't actually hit them.
TW/Elec Optimization
[ QUOTE ]
I've always thought it would be thematic and balanced if rage's crash was a tohit crash. That way, you'd still have a 5% chance of chrushing someone's skull, but you almost certaintly wouldn't actually hit them.
[/ QUOTE ]
I thought of that one before, but I'm trying to remember if Tanker taunt auras have a separate damage and taunt check, or whether the aura requires a ToHit check equally for both damage and taunt (for those that have both). Some Tanker taunt auras are auto hit (Inv, WP, SD), so that could be potentially unfair.
If this doesn't affect Tankers' ability to keep aggro, I'd be all for the ToHit crash.
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
Deamus the Fallen - 50 DM/EA Brute - Lib
Dragos Bahtiam - 50 Fire/Ice Blaster - Lib
/facepalm - Apply Directly to the Forehead!
Formally Dragos_Bahtiam - Abbreviate to DSL - Warning, may contain sarcasm
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shubbie
Im very good at taking a problem and making it worse.
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would it be disastrous for the power to work as designed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Make the -20% defense debuff resistable by the toon's defense debuff resistance
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not a bad idea.
[/ QUOTE ]
The most balanced debuff would be a resistable resistance debuff. All resistance resists resistance debuffs directly proportional to the value of the resistance being debuffed... Ok that could have been more clear... but it'd have been less fun to write.
The bottom line is that such a debuff would have a mathematically identical proportional increase in the damage transmitted to all sets, regen, def based or resistance based.
Now: one could argue that it might have a slightly disproportional impact on low HP def builds (EA or SR) as it would make them more vulnerable than they already are to damage spikes... but I think on the scale of injustice, you'd be into a second order effect.
A resistable def debuff would be just a little too good for SR, don't you think?
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
Compared to a resistable -resist for the other sets?
how about -20 resist and -10 defense
all sets would feel that.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which comic character can I see most easily swiping at a Rikti drone and missing as it zips around him? The Thing! An SS/Inv Tanker.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cmon... if we are porting famous characters into the game then the Thing has to be a stone tank! Invuln is Supes or the Hulk maybe.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Thing doesn't really have stone skin, or skin that can turn to crystal or hardened magma. He can't turn the ground into hot mud. He has toughened, plate-like skin that makes him invulnerable. He's Inv/SS all right - his "costume" just uses the stone texture pattern. 
Storm Summoning is great because it makes you better than everyone else in the game. - Camma
Knockback is mitigation. It won't be removed just because meleers ***** and moan. - Chaos Creator
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Two minutes of build-up for ten seconds of debuff? Yes please.
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally I would rather have a -1000% recovery and -160% damage debuff for 10 seconds. Feels like a cop out to do such an extreme damage debuff value.
[/ QUOTE ]
-1000% Recovery will leave you completely unable to attack and probably take you out of the fight for FAR longer than 10 seconds. Characters in this game are absurdly reliant on the ability to recover END while animations are playing. It makes -Recovery likely the most lethally crippling debuff in the game.
The first fix to rage had a -recovery component when it was on test.
It was terribad and the change wa reverted to back except the -99999% damage was added and the "affecting self only" was removed.
[ QUOTE ]
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a good question........Castle?
[ QUOTE ]
The first fix to rage had a -recovery component when it was on test.
It was terribad and the change wa reverted to back except the -99999% damage was added and the "affecting self only" was removed.
[/ QUOTE ]
I still LOL over this. The forums whined so hard that they just ended up buffing Rage.
Rage has needed a nerfbat for ages, but it's just too popular.
I'd rather see they just turn it into a +10 tohit / +40 dambuff / 0.16 eps toggle. (/ducks the whines)
[ QUOTE ]
Rage has needed a nerfbat for ages, but it's just too popular.
I'd rather see they just turn it into a +10 tohit / +40 dambuff / 0.16 eps toggle. (/ducks the whines)
[/ QUOTE ]
I was hoping for similar treatment, but let's look at those numbers.
Claws followup currently costs my main about:
1.55 EPS for a 20% tohit buff and 75% dam buff and causes some damage (EDIT: This is with end-red and rec-red slotted and double stacked.)
SD AAO costs .208 EPS for a 12.5 to 74.375% dam buff
Your stats sound fair, but I'd vote for the end cost to also be .208 EPS.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
Rage has needed a nerfbat for ages, but it's just too popular.
[/ QUOTE ]
That never stopped them from nerfing Regen...
[ QUOTE ]
I'd always thought that the SS attacks did less damage than equivalent recharge attacks in sets like Axe and War Mace, and that this balanced against Rage. Looking at red Tomax I see that I was wrong.
SS does have smaller faster attacks than these two weapon sets, and so less burst damage (until we get to KO Blow *cough*) so maybe that was the original idea?
Axe (for example) is burst damage, SS is DPS?
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually you are somewhat correct. Way back in the day, like Issue 0 to maybe Issue 1 Knockout Blow only dealt minor damage. The attack itself was suppose to be a crowd control power that knocked the foe out. It was later changed from brawl index of like 1 to like 9.8889 which it is now.
Why is Rage better than Build Up?
The short answer is because the rest of SS sucks.
The damage per activation times of KO Blow and Hurl and the sheer pointlessness of Hand Clap should make that self-evident.
Should Rage stack?
Nope. As one of SS's loudest proponents I'll admit it really shouldn't. But if they did something about that before fixing the other problems with that set, I'd say something. Also, I don't think a tripple application of rage is possible.
What other factors balance against Rage?
Despite having Rage and suffering penalties, other sets outdamage SS for both short term and long term, as well as AoE and ST damage, and said sets do not have extra penalties like Rage's crash.
In addition to this, as others have pointed out, SS is Smashing damage based. Smashing damage is moderately to heavily resisted by most enemies in the game. Unless you plan to only ever fight DE Crystal enemies, every chump in a bulletproof vest will be crapping all over your damage output, and you're penalized just the same no matter who you fight and how (in)effective you are with Rage.
In conslusion:
The sword of Damocles hangs over the SS set and Rage. When the devs begin to port it to Scrappers, they're going to have to look at Rage again. There's a good chance "fixing" the set for use on Scrappers will give Castle "ideas". I don't often like Castle's "ideas" about SS and melee sets in general. Despite having problems and even room for improvement in the set, nothing good lays in the future for SS IMO.
.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a good question........Castle?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because its an offensive set not a defensive one. Invul was a defense set and therefore defense mods apply, Super Strength is an offensive one.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a good question........Castle?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because its an offensive set not a defensive one. Invul was a defense set and therefore defense mods apply, Super Strength is an offensive one.
[/ QUOTE ]
Darkest Night on a brute: 10.5% tohit debuff
DN on a Defender: 18.75% tohit debuff
If offensive debuffs are affected by AT modifiers, why a personal debuff be affected?
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a good question........Castle?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because its an offensive set not a defensive one. Invul was a defense set and therefore defense mods apply, Super Strength is an offensive one.
[/ QUOTE ]
Darkest Night on a brute: 10.5% tohit debuff
DN on a Defender: 18.75% tohit debuff
If offensive debuffs are affected by AT modifiers, why a personal debuff be affected?
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think the reason is that until recently, Unyielding's debuff WAS the same for Tankers and Scrappers. In fact, I'm not even sure the amount of time they had a debuff hasn't already been surpassed by the amount of time they haven't had a debuff at all.
A buff to your Resistance or a debuff to your foe's is subject to AT modifier. But a self imposed penalty isn't the same thing as a debuff from a foe. Foe debuffs aren't even adjusted according to your AT, a Blaster will be debuffed the same amount as a Tanker by the same foe.
Maybe the devs felt self implied penalties weren't subject to AT modifier. (Although the Unstoppable crash is proportional to the AT's hit points. And Endurance crashes are the same for all ATs since they have the same Endurance maximum)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey - question.
Why is the Defense Crash the same for Brutes and Tankers? Brutes have .75 Defense modifiers compared to the Tankers 1.0.
When Unyielding from Invulnerability debuffed defense, it had -5% Defense to Tankers, and -3.75% for Brutes and Scrappers. There's precedent. Is there an actual reason or is it just an oversight?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a good question........Castle?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure it causes the same amount of -Defense between the two ATs because it provides the same amount of +ToHit and +Damage. Unyielding did not provide the same amount of benefits, so it shouldn't have provided the same amount of penalty.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure it causes the same amount of -Defense between the two ATs because it provides the same amount of +ToHit and +Damage.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tank Rage: ToHit +20% for 120s DMG(All Types) +80% for 120s [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
Brute Rage: ToHit +20% for 120s DMG(All Types) +80% for 120s [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]
You win.
But they shouldn't be the same, should they? Don't tanks and brutes have different base damage modifiers? Scrapper BU is +20TH and +100DAM where brute/tank is +20TH and +80DAM.
Why ARE brute/tank buffs the same?
Or is there a completely separate damage buff table?
Ahhh, now it makes sense:
http://coh.nofuture.org.uk/data/modi...Melee_Buff_Dmg
Be well, people of CoH.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think a tripple application of rage is possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is but it will take Rage fully slotted for recharge AND over 210% global recharge which is possible to get on your own but with great sacrifces in your build. Of course outside recharge buffs like Speed boost and AM will help get you there too. But those 3 crashes in 2 mins will tank your dps and your endurance.
[ QUOTE ]
Compared to a resistable -resist for the other sets?
how about -20 resist and -10 defense
all sets would feel that.
[/ QUOTE ]
The first question: would these be resistable or unresistable?
If the former, then sets with defence resistance not balanced against their defence would suffer or benefit unfairly. It's probably difficult to say what the right proportion is, but they're all different, so most will be wrong.
If the latter then sets that rely proportionately heavily on regen, or on a balance of powers, will do unfairly well (WP, I'm looking at you)
Resistance has a constant ratio of debuff resistance to damage resistance. Defence does not. A resistable resistance debuff would, at least without the benefit of actual testing or experience with it, seem like the obvious candidate. Simple and relatively fair.
The cake is a lie! The cake is a lie!
[ QUOTE ]
Which comic character can I see most easily swiping at a Rikti drone and missing as it zips around him? The Thing! An SS/Inv Tanker.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cmon... if we are porting famous characters into the game then the Thing has to be a stone tank! Invuln is Supes or the Hulk maybe.