Brutes & Scrappers after Going Rogue?
Is this after your Tanker says "brb this will take three times as long as a Brute" ?
|
Your Brutes suck, mine don't. Perhaps you should try slotting yours for RES/DEF, like I do. |
I may not have the same survival as Tankers, but I'm sure as hell a lot more offensively capable than they will ever be. |
Oh and you're wrong on one thing. A Brute can match a Tanker in survival with buffs. But a Tanker can NEVER, EVER, under any circumstances, match the damage output of a Brute. |
I don't know what kind of tanks you've been playing with or the kind of tanks you own.
|
I do and sadly, still not as survivable as my tanks. |
I'm glad you got that acknowledged. |
That's the thing, my tanks don't need buffs; brutes do. A tank with seven blasters is just as good as a brute with seven buffers keeping him alive. |
And there's no Brute anywhere that would need seven buffers to keep them alive. One or two, maybe.
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
Maybe your tanks are, but mine aren't. I may not do the same damage as brutes, but I'm sure as hell a lot more survivable than they ever will be.
|
My Willpower Brute never took the self-rezz cause she just about never died and when she did, it was well after the Tankers bit the dust.
3 Damage SOs in every attack is not slotting for damage? Missions still took forever to solo compared to all other characters.
I'd just like to throw in a mention that the role of the Tanker is to protect the team. This is typically done with aggro control, and survivability is generally done with Damage Resistance. That's not necessarily the case, though: roll a Dark Armor/Ice Melee Tanker like I inadvertantly did and you'll see all the wonders of what a Tanker is supposed to do.
For me personally Brutes > Tankers.
I find its not a question of how tough they are, but whether they are tough enough. A brute with support is tough enough for just about anything the game can throw at them, while doing boatloads of damage.
A tanker purely on their own merits is (imo) unnecessarily tough, and they pay for it in damage. If you want to team with 7 blasters, then great, tanker is what you need. On a team with any semblance of balance a brute will outshine a tanker.
A hp-capped, softcapped WP tanker can tank like 10 AVs at once. Neat. So? Its nice and all to be utterly indestructible, but its totally unnecessary.
By being somewhat squishier the brute benefits more from the team and brings more to the team. They get my vote. Plus the prevalence of tanker primadonna attitudes, but that's not a balance question
The Melee Teaming Guide for Melee Mans
A Tanker and Brute have their own places. You cannot say which one is "better". They're both good at what they do.
The phrase "tanking" is not limited to being able to survive. It mostly refers to the ability of capturing, and maintaining enemy aggro to distract them from the less armored members of the team. And that, is what a Tanker does best, given their inherent power, and all their taunt capabilities.
The Brute is much better in dealing damage. As far as numbers and calculations are concerned, a Tanker has a higher survivability than a Brute.
Tankers and Brutes can both gain up to 90% Damage Resistance to any damage type.
The Soft Defense Cap is independent of archetype, and is around 45%.
The Hit Point cap for both Tankers and Brutes is 3212.7.
The only thing that makes a Tanker's survivability superior to that of a Brute is that Tanker get "more bang for their buck". Their defensive powers have relatively higher values, and they get access to all their defensive powers by level 32. For instance, the power Deflection from Shield Defense offers 15% Defense to Melee for Tankers, and only 11.3% to Brutes.
However, in practicality, none of this matters. If a Brute reaches Soft Defense Cap, it's not much different from a Tanker with the same powers as far as survivability is concerned. If there is any difference, it would be either very marginal, or under special circumstances.
That's it for survivability.
Now, we move on to damage. These are the theoretical numbers:
Tanker Melee Damage Scale: 0.8
Tanker Range Damage Scale: 0.5
Brute Melee Damage Scale: 0.75
Brute Range Damage Scale: 0.5
As far as base damage is concerned, Brute falls short by 0.05 units on the damage scale.
However...there is this sweet, sweet thing in our universe called FURY.
A Tanker's damage modifier stops at 0.8. However, a Brute's base damage can be boosted up to 200% on top of its original value. That means that at full fury (which is not something hard to achieve), a Brute is at 2.25 on the damage scale (0.75 x 300% (this is because Fury goes on top of base damage)).
Furthermore, a Brute's damage cap is at 850%. A Tanker's damage cap is at 400%.
So, even if we go by Atheism's hilarious methods of comparison, a Tanker can ONLY beat a Brute's damage potential IF AND ONLY IF the Brute has very minimal Fury. Period. If there is any sort of damage buff involved, the Brute out-damages a Tanker. And if the damage buff is greater than 400%, the Tanker is just humiliated.
In the end, it all depends on the player, and the build. And that's the bottom line. All the numbers are mere theory. But all this theory suggests that under the right hands, a Brute has an advantage in terms of Damage, and a Tanker has an advantage in terms of aggro management. Their difference in survivability is incredibly marginal.
So please, Atheism, next time you try to argue an absolute point, use actual data and facts rather than pure opinions.
![](http://i34.tinypic.com/2lwrwc6.jpg)
Bright Shadow: I agree with most of your post, but it is... well, not mistaken, because I believe you actually do know this, but misleading in one respect.
You can't say that a Brute with fury has a damage scale of 2.25 and then move on to discuss damage buffs and caps the way you do. Fury doesn't modify the damage scale, it's just a buff.
So contrary to what you seem to be implying, the MORE external buffs are happening, the more fury a Brute needs to hit as hard as a tanker. At least until the Tank hits his damage cap, which really doesn't take long.
Example time:
A Tanker has an attack that hits for 80. He puts 100% damage worth of IOs in there and now hits for 160.
A brute has an attack that hits for 75. With a full fury bar, he does 225. Then he puts a 100% worth of IOs in there are hits for 300.
Now a Kin comes along and uses Fulcrum Shift to give them both +200% damage.
The Tanker now hits for 320, while the Brute now hits for 450. The Brute does, as you say, do hit substantially harder than the tanker ever could, BUT contrary to what you seem to be implying, the external buffs favored the Tank, both in absolute terms (+160 DMG instead of +150 DMG) and relative terms (pre-buffed Tank does ~1/2 Brute damage, buffed tank does ~3/4)
Of course, this all goes to hell if you add a second kin, at which point the tank goes home and cries. But teams with large but not insane amounts of damage buff actually let the tank put in a surprisingly good showing.
One good kin can damage-cap a brute, as long as there are reasonably large spawns.
As I said for me it boils down to one fact: a brute can be buffed to the same defensive levels as a tanker, a tanker cannot be buffed to the same offensive output as a brute.
The Melee Teaming Guide for Melee Mans
One good kin can damage-cap a brute, as long as there are reasonably large spawns.
As I said for me it boils down to one fact: a brute can be buffed to the same defensive levels as a tanker, a tanker cannot be buffed to the same offensive output as a brute. |
And if any other ATs with ally damage buffs like Forge, or better yet a 2nd Kin, are on the team then the Brutes don't even need to worry about Fury as they'll be hitting that 850% cap even with Fury at 0.
The Tanker capping out at 400%? That's the damage cap of the Dominator AT, who can dish out more damage than a Tank as well as using their control powers to keep the team safe.
Yes, a single Kin can easily damage cap a Brute. At that point even the tier-1 attacks in a Brute's primary can exceed 1000 points of damage.
|
If a Brute is at their damage cap, then they're operating at 850% base damage. In order for an attack to exceed 1,000 damage, it would need to deal ~117.6 base damage (1000 / 8.5). That is far above a t1 attack. The hardest hitting t1 attack is Barrage, which deals 55.04 base damage (467.84 at the cap). The hardest hitting attack Axe has access to, Cleave, only deals 115.11 base damage (~2.5 dmg short). In fact, the only powers in the Brute arsenal that can break the 1,000 damage barrier on the damage cap alone are Clobber (holy crap, I didn't realize the buff made it that strong), Greater Fire Sword (2 or more dot ticks), KO Blow, Seismic Smash, Total Focus, and Energy Transfer. A grand total of 6 powers; that's it.
Keep in mind, the above is for even level mobs with no extraneous resistance. A +2 mob with 26% resistance would drop everything but Energy Transfer off the list. A +3 mob with 9% resistance would do the same.
[edit: In order for Barrage to deal over 1,000 damage to an even level, unresisting mob, it would need to be under the influence of ~113.7% worth of res debuffs, about 5 Enervating Fields worth.]
Yes, but it would be nice, wouldn't it?
The Melee Teaming Guide for Melee Mans
You can't say that a Brute with fury has a damage scale of 2.25 and then move on to discuss damage buffs and caps the way you do. Fury doesn't modify the damage scale, it's just a buff.
So contrary to what you seem to be implying, the MORE external buffs are happening, the more fury a Brute needs to hit as hard as a tanker. At least until the Tank hits his damage cap, which really doesn't take long.
Example time:
A Tanker has an attack that hits for 80. He puts 100% damage worth of IOs in there and now hits for 160.
A brute has an attack that hits for 75. With a full fury bar, he does 225. Then he puts a 100% worth of IOs in there are hits for 300.
Now a Kin comes along and uses Fulcrum Shift to give them both +200% damage.
The Tanker now hits for 320, while the Brute now hits for 450. The Brute does, as you say, do hit substantially harder than the tanker ever could, BUT contrary to what you seem to be implying, the external buffs favored the Tank, both in absolute terms (+160 DMG instead of +150 DMG) and relative terms (pre-buffed Tank does ~1/2 Brute damage, buffed tank does ~3/4)
Of course, this all goes to hell if you add a second kin, at which point the tank goes home and cries. But teams with large but not insane amounts of damage buff actually let the tank put in a surprisingly good showing.
![](http://i34.tinypic.com/2lwrwc6.jpg)
If a Brute is at their damage cap, then they're operating at 850% base damage. In order for an attack to exceed 1,000 damage, it would need to deal ~117.6 base damage (1000 / 8.5). That is far above a t1 attack. The hardest hitting t1 attack is Barrage, which deals 55.04 base damage (467.84 at the cap).
|
I certainly prefer Brutes over Tanks. Tanks are unnecessary for 99.9% of the content in this game IMO, you can swap out a Tank for a Brute in most situations and not worry. I mean my SS/Fire Brute...supposedly really squishy as most people think can take on a lot of +2/x8 mobs without buffs. You can pretty much take a Brute over a Tank on a team and never look back.
[U][URL="http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=251594"][/URL][/U]
Gauntlet makes a big difference here, and clearly puts Tanks in the lead for drawing agro and generating threat. And I definitely agree that Tanks have a huge advantage in the 5 taget -range of their Taunt skill; it is insanely effective at clumping.
|
I don't know exactly how threat works, but my experience is that having the exact same mag 4 taunt with 13.5 seconds of duration WHILE doing Scrapper levels of damage produces one of the stickiest ATs in the game, one that can sometimes (rarely) peel agro off a Tank when running at full Fury with outside +damage.
|
This means taunt duration is everything. If a Brute played like a Tank, and took/used it to hold aggro, a Tanker would have no way of compensating. The Brute would have the same threat mod (4), the same taunt duration, and more damage. I have yet to ever meet a Brute that plays like that, though.
Having said that, I still think that is an utter failure of design that it's even possible - Tankers should be the absolute best at aggro generation. (To be fair, noone knew how taunt mechanics worked until well after Brutes were designed. (I found Castle's post, dated Nov 26, 2007. Issue 11 was released on Nov 28, 2007.)
Many Brutes not heavily IOd or without solid support from other teammates, and in some cases both, are easily overwhelmed by the amount of threat they generate.
|
Tankers are pretty much screwed. All a Brute has to do is take Taunt and they're the same thing as they have the same def/res caps but much higher damage capabilities. The Brute can actually kill all the aggro piling on him rather than standing around looking pretty.
|
I don't really fathom how a Tanker's 'low damage' is so crippling to a team.
Those numbers were at the damage cap - it is the absolute maximum +dmg a Brute can be effected by, regardless of source. It could be a mix of damage enhancers, fury, set bonuses, inspirations, buffs, etc. Once you hit +750% max damage (100% base damage + 750% damage buffs), more +dmg won't increase how hard you hit.
Honestly, Gauntlet (specifically the AoE portion, since Brutes already get single target Gauntlet) is a pretty weak inherent. The bonus AoE threat it generates is dwarfed by the effects aggro auras, aoes, and Taunt. Gauntlet may add a little threat here or there, but it's largely negligable, imo.
|
I still think it's funny that people talk about defensive saturation and never discuss offensive saturation. I constantly see complaints of how people corpse blast with powers because they die in seconds. I've been on teams where mobs simply disintigrate, even without the entire team in one place. How many times have you been on a team where someone had to go AFK and isn't even missed? I don't really fathom how a Tanker's 'low damage' is so crippling to a team. |
I've been in plenty of teams where minions and even sometimes lieutenants evaporate on impact. But there's a few seconds still where the bosses need to be downed, at the very least. And if that person that goes AFK happens to be the kin, you'll notice a quick decline in the kill speed. And not every team has a kin or even that high amount of damage output.
Not just that, but there are plenty of situations where it's impossible to attain a level of damage where more damage would be wasted. Fights against EBs, AVs, and GMs for instance. Along with fights against things like Pylons, the computer in the ITF, any enemy that buffs its RES up really high or is just generally hard to kill for whatever reason.
Take ITF, LGTF, and LRSF for example. Those have large quantities of EBs, AVs, and other challenging encounters. In all those situations, it's almost trivial to boost a Brute to the point where he/she can sustain the incoming damage. But it's also impossible for a team to have "too much" damage when fighting the hordes of RES capped Cyclopses, super-durable computers, Hamidons, and Miss Liberties. In any TF situation, I'd rather have a Brute.
And even in regular PUG situations like newspapers and things, I'd much rather have a Brute. While it's possible that our damage is so high that all the regular spawns are melting, it's also equally possible that the bonus damage will help. And most of all, it's almost a guarantee that the Brute will be able to handle the encounter, if we're talking about a team that's full of the buffs/debuffs/damage that would be needed to quickmelt spawns like we're talking about.
Or in short, in any situation where a Brute can tank, his damage MAY be wasted. But exchange him for a Tanker and his damage IS wasted. And so is his increased mitigation.
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
Never actually played a damage capped Mace Brute, have you? Last time she was capped out she was smacking Rikti minions around for 1000 damage with just the first couple attacks. Now I wish I had saved that damage log but I can't be bothered to keep arguing with fools who think that Tankers can outdamage Brutes.
|
[U][URL="http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=251594"][/URL][/U]
I don't know what kinds of Tanks you own, but it's impossible for you to do anywhere near the damage of a Brute.
|
Unless you're setting some amazing records with Ice Melee or something. |
I have two Brutes who can solo +2/x8 without buffs. I can't imagine why I would need to be more durable, especially if it's at the expense of about 50%+ of my damage. |
That's the thing, my Brutes don't need buffs. |
so throw me on a team with 7 Blasters. It'll be faster than your Tanker. |
And there's no Brute anywhere that would need seven buffers to keep them alive. One or two, maybe. |
At the same time though, the Tanker's bonus defense probably isn't contributing to the team either.
I've been in plenty of teams where minions and even sometimes lieutenants evaporate on impact. But there's a few seconds still where the bosses need to be downed, at the very least. And if that person that goes AFK happens to be the kin, you'll notice a quick decline in the kill speed. And not every team has a kin or even that high amount of damage output. Not just that, but there are plenty of situations where it's impossible to attain a level of damage where more damage would be wasted. Fights against EBs, AVs, and GMs for instance. Along with fights against things like Pylons, the computer in the ITF, any enemy that buffs its RES up really high or is just generally hard to kill for whatever reason. Take ITF, LGTF, and LRSF for example. Those have large quantities of EBs, AVs, and other challenging encounters. In all those situations, it's almost trivial to boost a Brute to the point where he/she can sustain the incoming damage. But it's also impossible for a team to have "too much" damage when fighting the hordes of RES capped Cyclopses, super-durable computers, Hamidons, and Miss Liberties. In any TF situation, I'd rather have a Brute. And even in regular PUG situations like newspapers and things, I'd much rather have a Brute. While it's possible that our damage is so high that all the regular spawns are melting, it's also equally possible that the bonus damage will help. And most of all, it's almost a guarantee that the Brute will be able to handle the encounter, if we're talking about a team that's full of the buffs/debuffs/damage that would be needed to quickmelt spawns like we're talking about. Or in short, in any situation where a Brute can tank, his damage MAY be wasted. But exchange him for a Tanker and his damage IS wasted. And so is his increased mitigation. |
Okay, you singled out a Kin as a character the team would notice if it didn't have. Do you think a Brute, who is playing solely to deal damage with no aggro management duties, would be noticeable, esp if the team has a Kin? I'm not so sure. I'm almost positive I've been on teams where I don't notice a Scrapper going afk (who, for all intents and purposes, deal roughly equivalent damage). If the answer to the above is "no," then the team isn't losing anything by having a Tanker. The Brute's damage is already unnoticeable.
I do understand your point, trust me, I do. I fully understand that a competent Brute with either a well balanced/played group of a billion inf build can play the role of a Tank. I've seen it done. I guess what I question is how often all everything comes together for that to happen. For forum goes like yourself, I have no doubt you can accomplish the entire game with a Brute leading. The non-forumites or those still leveling in non-optimized groups / builds? Not so much. Heck, I know I've been on teams where Tankers have problems in the same situations.
For a moment, suppose I agree with you that Brutes are always better to have than Tankers. In my mind, that means Brutes are too strong, not that Tankers are too weak.
At any rate, I think Tankers are reasonably balanced. I think Brutes were given access to two things they should have never had in the first place: the 90% res cap, and taunt capabilities that are, for all intents and purposes, equal to that of a Tanker.
Never actually played a damage capped Mace Brute, have you? Last time she was capped out she was smacking Rikti minions around for 1000 damage with just the first couple attacks. Now I wish I had saved that damage log but I can't be bothered to keep arguing with fools who think that Tankers can outdamage Brutes.
|
In order for a T1 Brute attack to deal that much damage, you'd need to be at the damage cap with over 100% worth of res debuffs on the target, as an even con with no resists. Anything higher than that, and the requirements increase. It is possible, but it is so far out of the normal realm of gameplay that it's just a "this happened once" type story - not something you can say is difinitively.
With that kind of buff/debuff saturation, Tanker Barrage would be dealing 508 damage. Yes, that's half what a Brute would be dealing. However, if I was boasting Tanker Barrage was doing 500 damage, you'd be right in calling me a loon if I tried to say "Tankers at the damage cap deal 500 damage with t1 attacks." It's a "look what happened this one time" story, nothing more.
I challenge you to damage cap yourself on inspirations, and hit an even con Rikti with Bash (t1 attack) harder than, say, 531 damage. (That's high because Drones have a 50% res debuff to smashing.) With Pulverize (t2 attack, 64% more base damage than the t1s you boasted) you won't hit harder than ~872 dmg. (Again, high because Drones have a 50% res debuff to smashing.) Against normal Rikti, you won't hit harder than ~355 / ~580 respectively.
It would take 5-10 minutes to do. Prove me wrong.
For a moment, suppose I agree with you that Brutes are always better to have than Tankers. In my mind, that means Brutes are too strong, not that Tankers are too weak.
At any rate, I think Tankers are reasonably balanced. I think Brutes were given access to two things they should have never had in the first place: the 90% res cap, and taunt capabilities that are, for all intents and purposes, equal to that of a Tanker. |
Additionally, he will more or less make Tankers useless as they have the same buff caps, the same aggro cap, and more or less the same taunt capability. I have Brutes who don't even use Taunt who still have no problems keeping 17 enemies focused on them. So the right playstyle will result in Brutes that do more damage and are more survivable than Scrappers while simultaneously being survivable enough and do more damage than a Tanker.
Thus, I'd never intentionally take a Tanker over a Brute if I had both. And I would only grab Scrappers after I already have a Brute (because Scrappers can stack in ways that Brutes can't, due to fury).
And I do think this is an issue with Brutes being too good. They can do everything that all other melee ATs can do. And when buffs enter the equation, they do more damage than Scrappers and are just as durable as Tankers. But none of the other melees can be buffed to match. In my head, the more damage a melee does, the less durable it should be. The scale doesn't work this way though. Brutes rank higher on the scale than they should, with Stalkers ranking lower than they should.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I wanted to propose a standardization of some stats at one point, but the whole proposal came across as me saying "nerf Brutes."
I wanted to make every AT's HP cap be exactly +100% its base AT (except EATs, which have many exceptions on stats due to their nature). This is enough room for powers like Dull Pain or True Grit+OWtS to take their effect, plus accolades, plus a further 20% for buffs and other advancement (IOs). It would nearly be impossible for any AT to self-cap its HP, and what I felt a much-needed change for certain classes like Stalkers who suffer from low HP cap. However, besides EATs (who I exceptioned above), Brutes are the only AT that would warrant a decrease in their max HP stat. Every other AT would actually need to be increased, save MMs who are already at +100% their base HP.
Yes, while some ATs are less than 34% from their HP cap, Brutes are the only non-epic AT currently that has a cap that's more than twice their base amount. I still feel it would be fair though, because a Brute would have to have either Dull Pain or True Grit+OWtS with Accolades and a bit over +20% HP from IOs to self-cap and have it be a nerf over the old value. My Invuln Brute has +15% HP from accolades, and even that was a chore to obtain.
Additionally, Brutes are the only AT that I would reduce the RES cap on. If it were up to me, Brutes would be at 85%, with Scrappers at 80%, and everything else stays the same. I would also settle for 85% Scraps and 80% Stalkers, or just 80% Scraps. Even though on some level I feel that each AT should be able to get the same RES values, since they can all soft-cap DEF and get the same amount of mitigation.
And of course Brutes also have a crazy-high max damage potential, though damage caps are more complicated and not something I'd want to dive into and start suggesting changes for.
So yes, I do think it's partially the fact that Brutes are just too good that they're able to fill the roles of both Scrappers and Tankers. Right now, Tankers are already an unpopular AT. And the only thing keeping Scrappers from filling the roles of Tankers on most teams is the fact that they can't grab aggro the same way. Brutes can both scrap and tank. They can deal high damage, they can hold aggro, and they can survive lots of damage. With the ATs as they are now, my first choice is always Brute.
Dispari has more than enough credability, and certainly doesn't need to borrow any from you.
|
Tankers are... unpopular? For who? Other than people trying to max the numbers and restrict spots on their teams to only those who "dial it to 11," there isn't any AT that's unuseful or won't add something to a team.
Arguably, Tankers and Defenders have the least useful inherents (and that mostly while soloing), and Brutes are perhaps a tad overpowered for some of their cap levels, but that doesn't change the fact that players enjoy playing all of the ATs, and they can all add something to a team.
People are also going to like more what they are at base, without buffs. I don't like being dependent on other players for being strong enough for certain things, as then I get nervous if the buffs start blinking. AT disparities are over argued and overdone among forumites, in my opinion.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Words to the wise aren't necessary- it's the stupid ones that need them.
"You're right...I forgot...being constantly at or the near the damage cap is a big turn off. Definitely not worth it."
- Vitality