Quote:
Yep, I expect either partial crits like the stalker precedent on TF, or for the powers to actually receive lowered damage like GFS did. In the case of TF, SS, KO, ET it will likely come with a recharge/end cost recalculation as mentioned.
|
Originally Posted by Starsman
A few notes: I still have to see an algoritmical study that properly accounts for recharge buffs/debuffs and misses. I guess that also turns every single one of them irrelevant.
That aside, SS's ability to get punch or kick is irrelevant. The only p ower in that set that entirely sucks is Punch, and taking the best ST pool power in the game does not make the sustained ST capabilities of SS that high. There is another issue, though, and that is AoE damage. At that point, Rage actually becomes an issue as it's boosting all AoEs you may get from the armor set or the epic pools. That skews things significantly and is one of the reasons why SS is so favored by farmers. Another issue that comes with Rage is it's burst damage, at least when it comes to bringing the set to scrappers. You may notice that no scrapper has been allowed to have a 20s recharge ST attack with 3.56 DS of damage. I doubt thats a coincidence. The most drastic damage scrappers have received up to this day is in Broad Sword and later a bit higher with Fiery Melee. When the game launched worries were about one-shooting certain foes. That may still be part of it but these days it also may be invasion of Stalker territory. That AT is heavily crippled in AoE so it can do huge bursts of ST damage and giving scrapers attacks that may surpass that, (and on top of that crit randomly) may be considered unbalanced. The way I see things, if SS and EM become scrapper sets they will indeed be tweaked. I can see KoB and Total Focus being lowered in recharge to not exceed Headsplitter's damage. This would mess up with both set's DPS though, so i can see the same port taking a bit of time to rebalance both set's Tier 1 attacks to be, at the very least, better than Air Superiority with a decent rotation. I guess also part of the issue lies with Proliferation process as it stands, so far it seems that most sets are just being ported with few AT modifications. Sets that are in the way of intended AT design just get pushed back and back. Would love to see a revised policy on making more modifications to a powerset's port. |
Quote:
Heres the full list from the study in question:|
Originally Posted by Dersk
Are we looking at the same "study"?
What scrapper numbers would be, from take 2 Name | DPS | EPS | Scrap Energy 151 3.3 Scrap Claws 149.6 2.9 Scrap Fiery 149.3 3.1 Scrap Strength 142.1 2.9 Scrap Dark 141.6 3.1 Scrap Martial Arts 141.5 3.6 Scrap Warmace 141 3.7 Scrap Dual Blades 136.3 3.5 Scrap Stone 131.8 3.5 Scrap Katana 128.6 3.2 Scrap Battleaxe 123.3 3.2 Scrap Broadsword 121.7 3.1 Scrap Electric 103.6 2.9 Scrap Spines 80.1 1.6 When limited to basic IOs, the only set that uses less endurance that what superstrength does is spines, which is only low because of the absolutely horrible activation times. The only currently existing sets that are better for dps are fiery melee and claws. Several, like martial arts and dual blades, use more endurance for less dps. As had been mentioned in Bill's threads, the brutes' ranking of superstrength is not as high as it would be for scrappers for various reasons. And, if you look at the differences between take 1 and take 2, brutes superstrength is much more competitive with more aggressive IO slotting, which would put superstrength even farther ahead for scrappers. |
Brute Fiery 172.6 3.1
Brute Energy 157.5 3.3
Scrap Energy 151 3.3
Scrap Claws 149.6 2.9
Brute Claws 149.5 2.9
Scrap Fiery 149.3 3.1
Brute Warmace 148 3.7
Brute Dark 143.7 3.1
Brute Martial Arts 143.7 3.6
Scrap Strength 142.1 2.9
Scrap Dark 141.6 3.1
Scrap Martial Arts 141.5 3.6
Scrap Warmace 141 3.7
Brute Stone 137.5 3.5
Scrap Dual Blades 136.3 3.5
Brute Dual Blades 134.8 3.5
Scrap Stone 131.8 3.5
Brute Katana 131.2 3.2
Brute Battleaxe 129.3 3.2
Scrap Katana 128.6 3.2
Brute Strength 127.3 2.9
Brute Broadsword 124.9 3.1
Scrap Battleaxe 123.3 3.2
Scrap Broadsword 121.7 3.1
Brute Electric 106.6 2.9
Scrap Electric 103.6 2.9
Brute Spines 93.4 1.6
Scrap Spines 80.1 1.6
First of all, this study looks at SS ported to scrappers completely unaltered, yet it comes in TENTH for scrappers. If the this info is correct, there can be no argument that SS directly ported to scrappers is overpowered in terms of single target damage, unless you also believe the nine powerset/at combos ahead of it are also 'overpowered'.
My mediocre to poor comments stems from the only existing powerset/at combo, the brute ss, which places 21/28. This is actually one of the few powersets that allows scrappers to retain their damage edge. But if you're talking about SS on the whole, if you average their performance in this study, you end up with mediocre, hence my description of mediocre (SS overall) to poor (brute SS).
In terms of endurance usage, SS isn't blowing anything away even when you look at nothing but the statistics. But imo, these statistics do not take into account how the rage crash causes serious endurance issues, which puts SS at a disadvantage endurance wise vs pretty much every competing set.
And when you mention the other study, SS does better not because of slotting, but because it's able to use gloom, which is a great single target attack. Pretty much all the brute primaries improve because of that in said study.
Quote:
|
Your definition of poor is curious. The brute sets that beat SS were fiery melee, stone melee, and fully soul-drain saturated dark melee, and they only beat SS at very small margins. The relatively poor performance of superstrength with basic IO slotting for brutes should clearly show you how easy it is to improve the performance of superstrength by taking outside powers and adding a lot of recharge. You're drawing the opposite conclusions you should from the very threads you reference. Edit: to be more clear, there is one (existing) brute set with less single-target DPS than superstrength in the basic IO slotting calculation. When gloom and heavy recharge are included, there are six sets with less single-target DPS than superstrength... for brutes, who gain less from rage than scrappers would. Mediocre to poor... |
In bills study, just for the SS set, brute ss finishes 21 of 28. Only brute BS, elec and spines would finish behind it. And at 127dps, it's not even close to the top contenders. That's poor.
In bills other study where SS can grab gloom and more recharge, it places 4th among brute primaries, which is nice, but only 5 brute primaries finished behind it, with two of them in the same neighborhood in terms of dps (112, 207, 203). Regardless, 4 of 9 is pretty middle of the road... or, mediocre.
You can disagree with my descriptions if you want, but I don't see the argument for 'overpowered' in any of those numbers. And yes, I understand in terms of this specific argument using these studies, we are talking strictly about sustained single target damage only.
Quote:
I'm certainly not taking bills charts as gospel, but they do give an idea how the sets compare to eachother, and I've noted that it is in regard to single target damage.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Well, you also seem to be a person willing only to look at a single data set and, even then, only assume that single target damage is the only valid comparison. I can assure you that I've looked at Billz' charts. In fact, I was one of the people that helped in creating a few of the attack strings for them. They are not, nor were they ever intended to be, a definitive listing of effectiveness of the various sets. The intent of them was more to outline any disparity between Brute and Scrapper performance than to try to outline any specific outlier sets within the ATs.
|
Quote:
| One of SS's greatest strengths is not, in fact, single target damage. It's the fact that it performs incredibly well in both ST and AoE damage. Footstomp, even by itself, is an incredible power. Augmented by rage, it provides obscene performance. ST damage cannot be taken as the only mechanism by which a set is measured. Honestly, AoE damage is arguably the more important measure of performance considering the way PvE ends up operating. |
I also agree that aoe damage is more valuable in the pve game than single target capabilities, by far. But I don't agree with the argument that SS is vastly outperforming competing sets in terms of aoe capabilities, especially when it only has on credible aoe power that comes late in the game. Some players see how powerful FS is and forget that other sets can do similar aoe dmg/mitigation, but it's spread out through several powers, and in almost all cases, available much, much earlier and throughout the sets leveling.
Quote:
| Except that it does prove that Rage is more powerful specifically because you can take outside powers. As Dersk has already pointed out, you seem to be rather incapable of actually interpreting the data from Billz' analysis (it's not a study, as a study would require the collection of data rather than the use of existing data). |
And study vs analysis, lol? Semantics anyone? C'mon professor, were talking about super strength powers on a gaming board...
Quote:
| I never said anything about skimping on damage enhancement. I said that the power provides what amounts to free damage enhancement. Unlike accuracy and tohit, more damage is always welcome so there is no reason to reduce your slotting because of additional capabilities provided by a buff power. Anyone that reduces their +dam slotting because they got some +dam that didn't bring them over the cap is not a particularly intelligent individual. |
I was responding to this:
"Let me get into this even further. Not only are you getting to save a slot on accuracy but you are also getting to "save" on damage slotting. Because Rage provides that massive amount of damage and it's pretty much perma with baseline slotting, you're getting 75% +dam (factoring in the downtime) in every power as well. That's 2.5 damage enhancements."
In terms of the '75% plus damage in every power", that's needed for SS to be competitive with other sets, so to imply that this is an advantage is deceptive at best. Because without that 75% damage buff, SS is getting wrecked by the competition damage-wise.
Quote:
| The problem with this is twofold: if Rage is designed to allow SS to bridge the disparity and allow it to compete with other sets, it shouldn't be allowed to augment outside powers to the same extent that it can because then it's providing an untoward benefit. As I have repeatedly stated, when you begin bringing in outside powers, the entire "balance" of the set goes out the window because you're providing the higher level of damage to every power in the set. I would be as if taking Fire Melee gave every single power you took, including pools and APPs, a bonus DoT. |
*Note: in terms of single target damage ONLY! Umbral ANALYSIS coming soon!
Quote:
| I'm not even going to touch on your inability to actually read and comprehend Billz's charts. I don't even think you understood what I was referring to when I discussed additional endurance efficiency because it wasn't a question of spending less to get greater efficiency but rather getting more for the same price (as dam/rech/end is standardized). Once again, as Dresk pointed out, Billz's charts rather obviously demonstrate that increased efficiency rather well. |
Quote:
| That depends on how you build for them. The Hasten crash isn't anything to write home about and, if you play intelligently, it's no harder to make sure you spend within your limits than it is for any other set. Of course, this isn't even getting into how IOs can quickly marginalize endurance costs, if you want to get into the argument as to whether SS is too good at the top end. |
Quote:
| That's because, and I'm not sure you understand this, that SS increases efficiency by increasing performance for the same cost rather than outright reducing cost. SS is going to give you better performance per point of endurance consumed than almost any build out there (and Billz' numbers support this). There is a difference between increasing efficiency by increasing damage and increasing efficiency by decreasing cost. |
Quote:
| Of course, I'm not even sure how SS could be all that problematic to design to be endurance sustainable. Rage double stacked provides lower endurance costs than FA and that's at the extreme top end of performance. Of course, I've never had a problem designing for endurance sustainability. I know how to deal with it. I could probably fix any of those builds you want to make them sustainable without much effort or loss of performance. With IOs, it's simply a foregone conclusion. |
Quote:
| Once again, not a study, but analyses. There is a very substantial difference. |
Quote:
| And I've never put much weight into Starsman's numbers. He calculates attack string averages algorithmically, which has never generated anything even approaching realistic performance assumptions except when attack competition is largely irrelevant (i.e. attacks would progress in a priority chain rather than in a cohesive attack string). Another is that he automatically assumes that attacks are fully saturated and require no additional work to be so. Because of this, he places Dark Melee as an above average AoE set (I'm incredibly good with DM and even I wouldn't venture that it's even close to a set with real AoEs). |
Quote:
| The only times these assumptions are actually valid are when you have areas with make target acquisition arbitrarily simple and a very simple attack choice progression, both of which Super Strength has. If those assumptions aren't met, the actual numbers drop as you lose a great deal of efficiency (attacks begin interfering with other attacks and you hit fewer than the max number of targets). Comically enough, Starsman's numbers (even discounting the fact that SS is the only set that would realistically perform under those assumptions) would actually support my claims rather than the other way around because he places SS as routinely above average damage in both AoE and ST and below average endurance consumption as well. |
Quote:
| I would urge you to honestly learn what you're looking at rather than simply blithely spouting it. I've actually critically analyzed both of their analyses and determined what conclusions can actually be drawn from them. I've looked into this a lot more than you. Bringing up two of the more famous examples of numerical analyses, both of which I am remarkably familiar with, isn't going to surprise me, especially when I've already factored those depictions into my conclusions. |
Quote:
| Just try actually looking at Billz's analysis rather than just talking about it. You're outright wrong. Brute SS came in 4th, behind saturated Dark Melee, Fire Melee, and Stone Melee. Saturated Dark Melee isn't even a reliable measure of performance for the set, Fire Melee is designed to be the damage king because it lacks secondary effect (and its contributions for Brutes are actually inflated compared to Scrap numbers because the DoT benefits from Fury while it doesn't benefit Critical), and Stone Melee is up top simply because it has obscene damage output thanks to high EPS use. This completely ignores the fact that Scrappers would be able to put SS to use even better because Scrappers get better relative gains out of +dam. |
Quote:
| Well, it's obvious that you don't know how to interpret Billz's study or Starsman's numbers, and, even though I automatically doubt anecdotal evidence when it isn't supported (and the sheer prolific nature of SS toons in optimized damage and farming situations would disagree with you here), I doubt yours even more since you've demonstrated a distinct lack of critical thinking capabilities, much less the ability to actually read what directly in front of you. |
But to respond, I've used the same evidence that you've used to support your arguments, everything else, from both of us, has been anecdotal. And I've read what you've posted and simply disagree with it, and explained why. It is ironic that you confuse an opposing argument as a lack of critical thinking though.
I certainly wouldn't take those charts as gospel either. However, as I stated then, if SS is too broken to be ported as is to scrappers, then it's too broken to exist for brutes and tanks.
Either port it or nerf it. Either way, it should be the same set for all three archetypes beyond the taunt/confront difference.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
The difference between using the same evidence as me and using the same evidence as me intelligently is rather large. You bring up Billz' numbers and then simply state wrong information that can readily be negated by the information your attempting to quote. In your previous post, you stated that "(Super Strength) comes in TENTH for scrapper" when, in the very list you posted, it comes in fourth (Energy, Claws, Fire, then Strenght). You're not doing yourself any favors by saying things that are simply blatantly wrong.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
But to respond, I've used the same evidence that you've used to support your arguments, everything else, from both of us, has been anecdotal. And I've read what you've posted and simply disagree with it, and explained why. It is ironic that you confuse an opposing argument as a lack of critical thinking though.
|
Even worse, you're not even capable of realizing that there is a difference from trusting a set of given numbers and providing criticism for a set of given numbers (and the specific ways in which they're flawed) and then using the fact that the only numbers that aren't artificially inflated are already better than average for performance.
What's probably the saddest thing, however, is that you're utterly incapable of understanding what balance could even possibly be. If something significantly outperforms the average in absolutely every single category (ST, AoE, end efficiency, secondary effects), you are not stumbling upon a question of whether the set is "good". You are stumbling upon the answer as to whether the set is "balanced". If it's outperforming the average in all categories (and, irregardless of what you think, it is known that it does), it is not balanced. You can have "good" and still be balanced, but, since it's too good (which, admittedly, is a qualitative rather than quantitative assessment because the devs have never set a definitive line as to what "too good" is) it's simply not.
I dare you to ask Castle (or anyone else that actually understands what the concept of balance entails) whether he thinks that SS is a well balanced set. I am willing to bet more than most that he would agree with me rather than you.
Now, if you really want to get into the realm of "omg Umbral thinks so much of himself! he's a stuck up jack-*** that thinks everyone else is an idiot", I can play ball in this area. I am smarter than you. It's readily apparent. The fact that my arguments are both more cogent and supported than yours and that I've mastered subtleties of the arguments that you're apparently incapable of even getting the basic gist of further gives evidence to my claims. Even more, the fact that I've gotten specific changes through based exclusively on my suggestions further lends credence to it.
I readily admit that I'm a jack-***, but that does nothing to curtail the fact that I'm intelligent. Humility has nothing to do with intelligence and, honestly, I don't see a point in wasting energy explaining to you, yet again, why you're wrong, what you don't understand, and why you should really just shut up and let the big boys talk. I'll explain it once, but, if you're not able to grasp it after the first time (much less the first ten times, as I know we've had this argument numerous times) there's not much point in having a conversation where I talk to you on an even level when it's apparent you're not.
Life is not fair. All are not equal. You are not special, no matter how many times your mother told you. Statistics indicates that there is a very substantial likelihood that I'm smarter than you. Empirical evidence has demonstrated it to be true. Get over it.
Quote:
Billz, you really should know better than that. Honestly, you're ignoring the mechanical differences between the various ATs out of blind hope. You may as well claim that Shield Defense is exactly as effective for Tankers, Brutes, and Scrappers when anyone worth their salt can tell that it obviously isn't.
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
However, as I stated then, if SS is too broken to be ported as is to scrappers, then it's too broken to exist for brutes and tanks.
|
Quote:
I don't know and I don't care if a direct port of Scrapper Super Strength would be overpowered. I'll worry when they actually port it. But this particular comment really jumped out at me.|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Brute Fiery 172.6 3.1
Brute Energy 157.5 3.3 Scrap Energy 151 3.3 Scrap Claws 149.6 2.9 Brute Claws 149.5 2.9 Scrap Fiery 149.3 3.1 Brute Warmace 148 3.7 Brute Dark 143.7 3.1 Brute Martial Arts 143.7 3.6 Scrap Strength 142.1 2.9 ... First of all, this study looks at SS ported to scrappers completely unaltered, yet it comes in TENTH for scrappers. If the this info is correct, there can be no argument that SS directly ported to scrappers is overpowered in terms of single target damage, unless you also believe the nine powerset/at combos ahead of it are also 'overpowered'. |
The list you posted shows it fourth for Scrappers, not tenth. The rest are Brutes. One of the Scrapper sets beating it hasn't been ported yet, and another is Fire, which has a secondary effect of more damage, so in a sense should be the "overpowered" damage set. Only Claws actually seems interesting to me. And not to take anything away from Bill Z Bubba's analysis, but you're basically looking at a single data point, a single attack chain, a single way of slotting every power. That's only barely more informative than "I played it to 50, and I didn't feel like it did very good damage" or "Werner did a top end tank DPS comparison and Super Strength got the highest DPS of the four sets he picked to look at." None of these data points are particularly relevant in isolation. None of them say much about overall balance. Look, you might be completely correct. You were right about Katana. I was wrong. But looking at a single data point, even if it is correct and supports your argument, does NOT equal "there can be no argument". There can absolutely be argument. You may have noticed people arguing. You may have noticed valid points on both sides. Or maybe you haven't.
"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:
Horse ****. If tanks are balanced against scrappers who are balanced against brutes, then powerset A will be balanced amongst them all.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Billz, you really should know better than that. Honestly, you're ignoring the mechanical differences between the various ATs out of blind hope. You may as well claim that Shield Defense is exactly as effective for Tankers, Brutes, and Scrappers when anyone worth their salt can tell that it obviously isn't.
|
Claws wasn't altered for brutes due to any balance concerns. It was altered for no other reason but that the devs wanted it to *feel* different.
I'm ignoring exactly nothing. Scrappers will benefit more from rage than brutes and tanks. So what? They also benefit more from followup and buildup. That fact is baked right into the balance between the ATs.
If double stacked rage plus foot stomp is too much for a scrapper to have now, then it's too much for a brute or tank to have. If that statement isn't true, then the ATs are NOT balanced against each other and we have bigger fish to fry.
From what I've seen, however, scrappers and brutes ARE completely balanced against each other. Tanks just suck.
Be well, people of CoH.
Okay...why is the fact that Rage works on all powers that big of a deal?
Last I knew, Soul Drain, Build Up, Follow Up, and Blinding Feint ALL worked on any power used while their buffs were up.
Now with Follow Up and Blinding Feint, I guess one would argue, you wouldn't want to add in the redraw, as that would lower your DPS (curious though, is Gloom a great attack for a Claws Brute to take?), but Build Up and Soul Drain are less likely to worry about redraw (as long as Build Up is being used by a non weapon based set/spines).
Second, while I love Billz chart, because it gives an idea of what the sets are capable of, his test was more about Brute/Scrapper disparity than anything else.
Scrap Energy 151 3.3
Scrap Claws 149.6 2.9
Scrap Fiery 149.3 3.1
Scrap Strength 142.1 2.9
Scrap Dark 141.6 3.1
Scrap Martial Arts 141.5 3.6
Scrap Warmace 141 3.7
Scrap Dual Blades 136.3 3.5
Scrap Stone 131.8 3.5
Scrap Katana 128.6 3.2
Scrap Battleaxe 123.3 3.2
Scrap Broadsword 121.7 3.1
Scrap Electric 103.6 2.9
Scrap Spines 80.1 1.6
*Brute Strength 127.3 2.9
I look at that list and my thought is...hmmm...Super Strength came in 4th place, but really it's SO CLOSE to Dark, Martial Arts, and Warmace...that the fact it's not NEARLY as overpowered as anyone thinks it will be. That's less than 1 DPS difference between Martial Arts and Super Strength. MARTIAL ARTS! The set everyone usually thinks needs a bit more tweak.
So you go into the other factors of...AOE. What does this make me see...BUFF DRAGON TAILS AOE! Give it the same numbers as Foot Stomp for END/RCH/DMG and increase it's Radius to at least 10ft if not 15ft like Foot Stomp. I'm thinking 10ft, and just say Footstomp gets the extra 5ft for it being a Tier 9 AOE.
If it's ported, will it become a popular Scrapper Primary? Well...OF COURSE! It's not going to be popular because it's OP. If it's ported over unchanged, with Scrapper Mods, it's going to be popular because SCRAPPERS WILL BE BETTER WITH SUPER STRENGTH THAN ANY OTHER AT.
That's no different than now with Elec/Shield being considered better on Scrappers than Brutes.
I also don't think that list took into consideration, Rage's NO DMG period. With no damage going on, wouldn't that lower the DPS a bit? Billz would have to answer if he did that or not, as I just don't know.
Biilz also didn't include a Scrapper Super Strength version on first list, so no idea how it ends up there with high recharge, but then, that first list also used Gloom in the chain, which Scrappers don't have access to.
And I still can't help but agree with Billz. If it's not OPed on the other ATs, it shouldn't be OPed for Scrappers.
It'll be a top performer for Scrappers, but it won't be THE TOP PERFORMER for Scrappers. It may turn into the TOP ALL AROUND SET for scrappers, but some set has to take that spot.
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
The reason I say it is irrelevant is because I already have my sysem setup to dip into power pools for extra attacks, and even with their use the set still is not going anywhere into the OP realm for tankers.|
Originally Posted by bAss_ackwards
It doesn't seem that irrelevant to me when you can use it to consistently boost Fire Blast and Fire Ball.
 Rage'd Fire Blast can be very helpful with single target DPS. |
One thing I never added, though, was Gloom. THAT may be a problem.
Quote:
I can see that Rage would help Scrappers much more than Brutes. But Against All Odds, Follow Up, and that sort of thing help Scrappers more than Brutes, so this hardly seems new, though it may (or may not) be a stronger effect than those. And wouldn't Rage affect Tankers the same way as Scrappers? Aren't the relevant differences between the two just the AT damage modifiers and criticals? If so, then I'm not seeing how the argument "if it would be OP for Scrappers then it's already OP for Tankers" is wrong? I might have missed something - I've long since resorted to at best skimming all the Scrapper Super Strength threads since it comes up so often.
|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Billz, you really should know better than that. Honestly, you're ignoring the mechanical differences between the various ATs out of blind hope. You may as well claim that Shield Defense is exactly as effective for Tankers, Brutes, and Scrappers when anyone worth their salt can tell that it obviously isn't.
|
"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:
Werner, not sure if you forgetting that scrappers have 25% stronger damage buffs. This means a direct port of Rage to scrappers would yield a constant 100% buff, not 80%.
|
Originally Posted by Werner
I can see that Rage would help Scrappers much more than Brutes. But Against All Odds, Follow Up, and that sort of thing help Scrappers more than Brutes, so this hardly seems new, though it may (or may not) be a stronger effect than those. And wouldn't Rage affect Tankers the same way as Scrappers? Aren't the relevant differences between the two just the AT damage modifiers and criticals? If so, then I'm not seeing how the argument "if it would be OP for Scrappers then it's already OP for Tankers" is wrong? I might have missed something - I've long since resorted to at best skimming all the Scrapper Super Strength threads since it comes up so often.
|
Quote:
I admit that I did not even know that. Interesting.
|
Originally Posted by Starsman
Werner, not sure if you forgetting that scrappers have 25% stronger damage buffs. This means a direct port of Rage to scrappers would yield a constant 100% buff, not 80%.
|
"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
It's only with self damage buffs, though. This means Assault is not affected, but Build Up and Against All Odds are.
Blasters have the same bonus, their Build Up is 100% damage buff.
Quote:
Working on my BS in CS, as we speak.
|
Originally Posted by Santorican
Are you in college now or on your way to getting one?
|
Quote:
But we've had that dance before. If a set makes a Tanker able to creep into Scrapper damage-dealing performance levels, that's potentially OK, because both ATs have performance bands, and those bands overlap. There's some level of creeping into the Scrapper band, definitely not formally stated by the devs and possibly not formally defined at all, that's not going to be acceptable to the devs. Your argument states that, if a Tanker exists in the top end of the Tanker band, and possibly in the low end of the Scrapper band (which is allowed), then the porting that powerset unchanged is acceptable even if it would raise the top end of the Scrapper band. I don't agree with that, and I would be shocked in the extreme if the devs did.|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
I'm ignoring exactly nothing. Scrappers will benefit more from rage than brutes and tanks. So what? They also benefit more from followup and buildup. That fact is baked right into the balance between the ATs.
If double stacked rage plus foot stomp is too much for a scrapper to have now, then it's too much for a brute or tank to have. If that statement isn't true, then the ATs are NOT balanced against each other and we have bigger fish to fry. |
Does SS have that characteristic? Not in ST DPS. AoE might be a completely different bag of chips.
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
Quote:
I do not find it ok for a any set to be blocked from scrappers because it's currently so horrifically broken that it lets a tank dish out scrapper level damage.|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
But we've had that dance before. If a set makes a Tanker able to creep into Scrapper damage-dealing performance levels, that's potentially OK, because both ATs have performance bands, and those bands overlap. There's some level of creeping into the Scrapper band, definitely not formally stated by the devs and possibly not formally defined at all, that's not going to be acceptable to the devs. Your argument states that, if a Tanker exists in the top end of the Tanker band, and possibly in the low end of the Scrapper band (which is allowed), then the porting that powerset unchanged is acceptable even if it would raise the top end of the Scrapper band. I don't agree with that, and I would be shocked in the extreme if the devs did.
Does SS have that characteristic? Not in ST DPS. AoE might be a completely different bag of chips. |
The AT damage mods are used for a specific reason: Set A does X amount of damage in AT-1's hands and does Y amount in AT-2's hands.
It's that simple. It *should* be that simple. Tanks have higher base mitigation values and caps and thus a lower AT mod. Their inherent does not buff their damage output. This means that *ANY* set used by a tank should never be able to match a scrapper using that same set.
We can all agree on that, yes?
Can we also agree that the current balance between scrappers and tanks is acceptable?
If so, then a straight port of super strength should also be acceptable. If it is not, then *something* is broken. If tanker SS is so broken that it is pushing itself into scrapper level damage output, (something I haven't seen) then it's a fair bet that SS is currently broken.
Stating that X is fine on a tank but would be broken on a scrapper seems to me to be an admission of nothing more than that those against it fear the nerf bat. Perhaps with reason. While I've taken an SS/WP brute high enough to get and slot footstomp, I haven't IOed one to the gills. I found the constant rage crashing to be far more a nuisance than to be worth it.
I find the statements of its massive aoe output to be overstated.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
I believe there comes a point when burst damage comes into play. Sustained damage aside, burst isn't an issue for Tanks because the damage is lower, and less of an issue for Brutes because Rage + Fury + Build Up is additive.|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
If so, then a straight port of super strength should also be acceptable. If it is not, then *something* is broken. If tanker SS is so broken that it is pushing itself into scrapper level damage output, (something I haven't seen) then it's a fair bet that SS is currently broken.
|
With scrappers, however, having such high DPA attacks in one go means there comes a point where they can run up and one shot certain enemies. Crits exaggerate that even more. Even setting aside PvP, that's really a Stalker thing.
I noticed that the sets that haven't come over seem to generally suffer from this giant burst in the form of an over budgeted top tier attack. Sustained damage aside, I don't think the devs are comfortable with scrappers being able to one shot enemies to that degree.
Moonlighter
50s include MA/SD, MA/SR, DP/Elec, Claw/Inv, Kat/Dark, Kat/Fire, Spine/Regen, Dark/SD
First Arc: Tequila Sunrise, #168563
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Stating that X is fine on a tank but would be broken on a scrapper seems to me to be an admission of nothing more than that those against it fear the nerf bat.
|
I've said that before and not a lot of people seem to get it.
Virtue: @Santorican
Dark/Shield Build Thread
Quote:
Two things:| I noticed that the sets that haven't come over seem to generally suffer from this giant burst in the form of an over budgeted top tier attack. Sustained damage aside, I don't think the devs are comfortable with scrappers being able to one shot enemies to that degree. |
1: It doesn't matter. Either a set is broken or it isn't. If a set is fine on a tank, then it's fine on a brute or scrapper. Your statement implies that a brute with double stacked rage and 90% fury isn't doing heavy burst damage with KO Blow.
That's obviously not the case.
2: Scrappers already have huge burst damage attacks that crit. See BS-Headsplitter, DM-Midnight Grasp, FM-GFS, etc.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
This made me lol. It's so blatantly untrue that it only serves to exist as a joke.
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
If a set is fine on a tank, then it's fine on a brute or scrapper.
|
Quote:
How about prove it instead of blowing the hot air you so continually spew around here?|
Originally Posted by Umbral
This made me lol. It's so blatantly untrue that it only serves to exist as a joke.
|
I can actually show correlation between powersets. All I have to do is yank the AT damage mod. What have you got?
I'll go even farther. What set currently shared by all three ATs is broken on one but not the others?
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
I think he (Billz) means, if all things are "balanced" as they "should" be, then this statement will hold true. Powersets like SS only work for tanks and brutes because of the lower base offensive values, but other sets like FA only work for tanks (if you can call that "working") because they have higher base defensive values. |
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Either a set is broken or it isn't. If a set is fine on a tank, then it should be fine on a brute or scrapper
|
They really aren't "fine" as they currently stand, it's more likely that they are simply yielding acceptable performance values.
~Rather, that's how I interpreted it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
I hate to be the bringer of bad news... but Willpower sucks!!! you're better off rolling a regen
|
^Professional Katana/regen build thread
Quote:
False and narrow minded statement.|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
Two things:
1: It doesn't matter. Either a set is broken or it isn't. If a set is fine on a tank, then it's fine on a brute or scrapper. |
The devs can be confortable with a player doing 435 damage at level 50 (interestingly just 5 more damage than a minion), but not comfortable with giving any player a power that does 657 damage (what a non-crit KoB with rage would do for a scrapper.)
Just because some rules apply to one AT does not mean they should apply to all ATs. The only thing you can argue is about sustained DPS, in theory, if a tanker is allowed to do X dps then a scrapper should be expected to do
X * 1.4 dps (before criticals), since that is the currently defined correlation between tankers and scrappers .
Note this would not be the case with SS. SS is expected to have perma rage, that means a direct port would be X * 1.5 due to the self-damage modifier. That alone breaks the correlation between scrapper and tanker and is enough reason to review the port.
Modifiers are not the only tool that the devs use to do cross-AT balance, it just happens to be the most used one. They have many other criteria that dictate what is OK for one AT and wrong for another (like forbidding heavy sustained AoE for stalkers.)
Now, the devs can rewrite this tomorrow and suddenly say "you know what? to hell with it, I want a scrapper that will hit for 1000 HP at level 50!" But up to this date, they have obviously shied away from it.
Quote:
|
Your statement implies that a brute with double stacked rage and 90% fury isn't doing heavy burst damage with KO Blow. That's obviously not the case. |
Quote:
| 2: Scrappers already have huge burst damage attacks that crit. See BS-Headsplitter, DM-Midnight Grasp, FM-GFS, etc. |
Rage'd Fire Blast can be very helpful with single target DPS.
Playstation 3 - XBox 360 - Wii - PSP
Remember kids, crack is whack!
Samuel_Tow: Your avatar is... I think I like it