SS and EM for Scrappers!!

Heroes, Villains ♦ Reviews ♦ Retrospect

Heroes, Villains ♦ Reviews ♦ Retrospect

Yup, in my haste to mock you for your leaving it out entirely I gave it a 50% uptime.

The ATs are still balanced against each other and your inability to prove your case remains plain for all to see. In other words, still blowing hot air.

Says the guy who thinks that the devs would have proliferated a broken set in the first place. You're not only blowing hot air, you're having court in the sauna.

Where have I said that? So much lying on these boards lately. So sad that misrepresenting what other people have posted is the only way weak-minded people know how to debate.

If SS is broken, it needs to be fixed so that it can be ported. If it's not, it can be ported now. Disprove that statement or shut the fark up.

I'd really like to peer into the mind of the developers and try to figure out their thought process on a lot of these sets. Its almost as if they woke up one day and decided they were going to create some caddywhompus set that is Spines lol.

You pretty much said it right here.

Brutes != Scrappers != Tankers. They each use mechanics and attributes differently. If you ignore that, you're demonstrating a disturbing level of noobishness for something that is supposed to know how the game works.

I would, and I've been trying. Of course, you really don't care about anything I say and, if I do say anything, you simply go about and try to "correct" me by using completely incorrect numbers or dismissing it out of hand (which is a very mature way to debate when the only evidence that is allowed is that which supports your views, regardless that it's true). Of course, you're completely ignoring any evidence I bring up with Shield Defense which should be glaringly obvious evidence that each set uses the mechanisms in question in entirely different manner. You can try to dismiss the claims that Shield Defense is evidence of this because survivability sets are not offense sets, though, even a person as purposefully obtuse as you would have to be an idiot not to realize that I'm not touching upon the imbalance of their survivabilities and rather using the mechanics present within the sets to demonstrate the innate imbalance that would be achieved by proliferating blindly without consideration for how each AT handles the mechanics in question.

I'm still amused that you think I'm blowing air when you're doing anything I am only worse. Hypocrisy looks really good on you.

You are horrible at debate. Never did I say tanks equal scrappers. I said that they are BALANCED against each other. Can you post anything that isn't an obvious misinterpretation of the person's posts that you're arguing against?

You gave no evidence of anything. I have already stated, repeatedly, that I am fully aware that scrappers benefit more from damage buffs and that this fact is PART OF the balance put in place between these three archetypes.

This fact in no way discounts my statement that a balanced attack set can be proliferated between the ATs without issue.

Your repeated attempts to dodge this and repeated failures to argue against it are pathetic. Own up to the fact that you attacked my statement without rational cause or slink away with your tail between your legs.

That post was made well over a year ago, and he specificly said that he wasn't going to look at spines at that time.

I got the feeling that he finds spines to be one big mess and that he would go in quite heavy with the rebalancing and most people wouldn't appreciate that.

Spines was created by a completely different group of people than those that are working on the game now.

Castle and co seem to have a much better grasp of game balance than the old crew imo.

Balance is a question of equality. If you honestly think that all ATs use the same mechanics in the same way, you're deluding yourself.

And that point of balance between each of the different archetypes (a balance that is, itself, debatable when you consider the capabilities of Brutes in the presence of buffs rather than only ever considering solo performance) would actually apply to this discussion if the mechanics that each AT uses differently were actually equalized in the mechanisms that powersets actually use.

You readily admit that +dam is stronger in the hands of Scrappers yet assume that, if a set has large amounts of +dam present to offset low base numbers, it's going to perform adequately for Brutes and not be completely overblown for Tankers. Powerset balance is not simply a question of looking at a single set of AT modifiers and running a single calculation. The number of AT mods, and how they affect the balance of a set when it's transferred from one AT to another, is huge.

Except that it does. Your stern lack of the ability to see that doesn't change the fact. SS is a set that relies on large amounts of +dam to be viable. It's roughly balanced (though on the top end of performance) for Tankers and Brutes because they get less from +dam than Scrappers do. Scrappers get more from the very mechanic that is needed to give SS viable performance so Scrappers are going to get better performance from SS than Tankers or Brutes would.

You cannot prove that this isn't true.

If anything, I can prove it is true by simply pointing out Shield Defense and the vast disparity in performance between the various ATs. Scrappers completely obliterate any seeming of balance with Shield Defense, unless you really want to make the claim that Scrappers getting 40% more damage when Brutes are only getting 20% even though they have the exact same survivability capabilities is balanced.

Try it yourself. I've got more than a few data points to support my claim. You've got a smattering of completely off-topic numbers and simplistic calculations that ignore the actual capable disparities between the various ATs and focus entirely upon those single variable calculations where the fundamental equivalence between the ATs is largely present. You don't want to look at any numbers that prove you wrong. If anything, you should slink away since you honestly believe that you can Brutes and Scrappers are exactly the same, and assume that a simplistic analysis is all that you need to prove it.

(edit: Why would I leave anyway? I'm having loads of fun learning just how little you actually know about the game. This is fun!)

Did you get your debate skills in seminary? Balance doesn't mean that all is equal. Tank mitigation mods are higher than scrapper mods. Scrapper damage mods are higher than tanks mods. They are not equal. The archetypes, however, are balanced against each other.

What mechanics are used differently? They all use their respective damage caps in the same way. They all use damage buffs the same way, regardless of the fact that scrapper mods mean scrappers get more off a buff. They all use mitigation caps the same way.

And we're not debating whether the archetypes on the whole are actually balanced against each other. Once again, you're attempting to dodge the actual debate by introducing a new one. It's a tactic you lean on heavily in every debate you get into.

I have made no such assumption. The statement I have made is that regardless of scrappers getting higher level buffs from a damage buff, in the end a balanced melee attack set will be balanced across all three archetypes. This is the actual debate. This is what you repeatedly dodge because you have no case against it.

Lots of spew, so little substance. YOUR failure lay in the fact that you can't accept, nor show otherwise, that SS in a straight port to scrappers would not be overpowered in comparison to the other scrapper attack sets without also showing that SS is overpowered for brutes and tanks. Your best effort was to throw out "but... but... but... Shield AAO!!!!" Guess what will happen if Castle and Co decide that AAO is overpowered? It's going to be nerfed across the board. It's not going to just be nerfed for scrappers.

Are you starting to understand the concept of powerset equivalence yet? The same is going to hold true for SS and a port to scrappers. If rage is breaking the set too much, it's going to be nerfed for ALL archetypes. This is how it should be. This has been my point all along and you damn well know it.

Data points you can't or won't show. Imagine that. For having nothing to back up your idiotic assertions you sure do talk a good game. Shut up or put up, boy.

No, it doesn't mean that all things will be equal. It does, however, mean that all things factored together should generate an end result that is roughly equivalent. Don't confuse the use of the term "equal" with the concept of "equal damage". Balance is explicitly determined by factoring in all of the variables rather than a single set.

Did you get your view of seminary by listening to ******* atheists that have no clue what real seminary is like (keep in mind, I'm a rather die-hard atheist, though I'm not so convinced of my own views to think that every seminary is a ridiculous neo-con religious indoctrination institute)?

Let me point this out to you simply: they don't use every mechanic the same way. Scrappers get less out of bonus DoTs than Tanker or Brutes do because the comparative advantages of Critical are reduced (they don't provide a full 7% increase in overall damage because those additional points of damage aren't factored in). Brutes get less out of +dam than Tankers or Scrappers (because they have large amounts of native +dam that dilute the benefits therein). It's not

Actually, I'm not even bringing up that point in the context of the debate (which is why I put it in parentheses). Rather, it's simply an additional thought that is tangentially related. Don't assume that just because I wrote something down that I intend it to be used in whatever debate is on hand, especially when it's written in such a way as to indicate that it is only tangentially related.

Hell, if anything, you're the one that continually attempts to dodge the debate by trying to bring my ability to debate into question or suggesting that anything I say is without substance (even though you do it just as much, if not more than me). You're attempting to call into question the validity of my argument by specifically attacking me rather than the argument. The entirety of your counterargument has been "nu-uh!" and "prove it!", ignoring the fact that I've given you evidence.

Why should I demonstrate that it's overpowered on Scrappers but not overpowered on Tankers and/or Brutes? I believe that it's overpowered on all 3 of them, though, apparently, you can't separate that from the fact that I also believe that it would be more overpowered on Scrappers than it is on either of the previous ATs mentioned.

Actually, I doubt it would get a substantial nerf to Brutes or Tankers since, aside from the overperformance of Shield Charge due to improper implementation. Shield Defense is remarkably well balanced on Tankers and Brutes because AAO isn't providing a massively untoward damage benefit as compared to the average performance of the AT. When the powerset allows one AT to get 40% better damage over time while it only provides 20% and 30% improvements to the other ATs, I would expect the devs to simply change it for the 1 AT rather than all of the others. You know, what they did for Energy Melee (ET is weaker on Stalkers), or Dark Miasma (Twilight Grasp has a smaller area for MMs than for Corrs or Defs). There are loads of cases wherein the AT version of one power is different than the version of that power used by other ATs (and not just due to AT mods). If you want to ignore those, feel free, but it's not going to help your case, unless you only care what you think rather than what is actually true.

Except that you seem to be so blithely ignorant of the very fact that the various attributes that specific sets use to achieve a degree of performance on one set can have distinctly different effects when extrapolated to another set. Just because a set is balanced or imbalanced on one set doesn't mean that it will be balanced or imbalanced on another. Any set with a large amount of +dam is going to have massive benefits for Scrappers and severely limited effects for Brutes. Like I've been trying to show you, Shield Defense exemplifies this.

I definitely talk better game than you because, unlike you, I actually admit that the game is substantially more complex than you give it credit for. I would also venture that I also do better math than you because I can see a value that's horrendously unrealistic right off the bat whereas you can be blinded by the need to discredit someone else that it providing evidence that contradicts you to actually know what the hell you're talking about.

Of course, I already showed you Fire Melee. I also showed you Shield Defense. You didn't didn't like either of those, for whatever reason, even though the devs have actually shown that they have no problem changing powers for specific ATs rather than changing the entire powerset for all ATs if a power is too strong for only one of them (which pretty well disproves your claim that the only way the devs would handle such a situation would be to). I could show you new numbers that show how well Scrappers could break Super Strength even more. No matter what, though, you wouldn't care. You've already determined that you are correct, and, regardless of what anyone says, you're going to push write on through and call people idiots, dismiss absolutely everything that isn't supporting you, and demonstrate exactly why you have about as much place in a comprehensive balance analysis as Fire Minded.

I was saying 'SS for scrappers' comes in tenth place on the chart I was discussing, obviously. I'm surprised I have to explain that to someone as brilliant as you think yourself to be, lol.

The saddest thing is, you seem to claim that SS significantly outperforms the average in absolutely every single category, when we're looking at things that show this is simply not true. Brute SS is clearly below average in single target output looking at the evidence at hand.

And if we use your definition of overpowered, again I ask, what is your opinion of claws, since it is a set that has above average performance in every category you mentioned? I'm thinking there are several sets that are above average in each category for the at's said powersets are available for, that doesn't guarantee said powerset is overpowered or imbalanced. A math wizard like yourself should understand the fact two things can be balanced in 3 categories, even if one is above the baseline in all 3 categories and one is below in 2 and above in one.

Which is why I posted about EM and PvP changes. Whether castle agrees with you or not is irrelevant, he's not some infallible gaming god, lol. Hell, based on the pvp and em changes, he probably does agree with you.

This is just your opinion. But at least you're being consistent in that it's filled with falacies and an overblown sense of worth.

Oh no, the internet bully is calling me a dummy! Clearly, the sign of a truly intelligent debater, lol. But I guess when your argument falls apart, all you have left is namecalling and chest thumping.

Oh, the irony. You said: 'You are not special, no matter how many times your mother told you.' Perhaps you should take your own advice junior, because you clearly have a lot of growing up to do.

Agreed. The rage crash is a bigger pain in the *** in terms of game play then just looking at the numbers. And it's 'massive' aoe output is overstated, especially when you look at other sets that have similar capabilities (or better) that are simply spread out over several powers, the majority of which are available to the player much earlier than FS is available.

Is FS a great power? Absolutely, but again, it's the only real aoe SS has, it comes late in the game, and competing sets have competitive or better aoe abilities, and they get them earlier.

Agreed.


And I agree with bill's assertion that if the powers that be decide SS can't be ported to scrappers without massive revision, and that it's 'broken' with scrappers, then I don't see how one could claim it's not broken for other at's as well. Then again, the powers that be think its ok for one at to have the ability to do better damage and have superior surivability over another similar at.

Having said that, wasn't fire melee tweaked a bit when it was ported? I know claws got changed when it was ported to brutes. So if it gets a few tweaks to make it work better with a different at, that's not necessarily a big deal.

True, I didn't mean to imply that I was completely dismissing the entire opposing argument. What I meant was, in terms of that chart (assuming the info was correct), and in terms of just single target damage (something I noted several times, since there is no info on overall aoe ability, and overall aoe ability is something much harder to calculate and display using statistics), I find it hard to argue that a direct port of scrapper SS is overpowered when brute MARTIAL ARTS would outdamage it.

I'm the one dodging arguments?

Your "rebuttal" for the Shield Defense argument is, and I quote, "exactly fark all to the topic at hand"? If your argument of "all that matters is AT mods" argument held any water, you'd actually have something to say about that. How is that a rebuttal? Your "rebuttal" is, literally, a dismissal. Did you learn the meaning of the term "rebuttal" from a 5 year old?

Your counter-argument to FM is similarly ludicrous. You claim, explicitly, that the Brute and Scrapper versions are exactly the same, which they largely are. Of course, you make no counterargument for their relative levels of effectiveness beyond the whole, you know, "they're there so they're balanced" argument that you've rehashed over and over. Looking at your own numbers should tell you something about whether Brute FM is overpowered: of all of the top contenders of the Brute ST sets, it deals the most damage for the least endurance while simultaneously providing some of the best AoE dps around, which is similarly better and more efficient thanks to that whole "Brutes use DoTs better than anyone else" issue.

Wow... Sounds like you should start listening to yourself a bit. You're apparently so awesome that you can dismiss any counterargument with a single wave of your mighty hands and then call anyone else that attempts to convince you of your errors that they are the egotistical idiot.

Your line is, and I quote, " yet it comes in TENTH for scrappers". Am I supposed to read what you intended rather than what you wrote? You specifically said that "it" came in tenth. Not "SS for Scrappers". You may want to try avoiding the use of pronouns in indeterminate ways.

Because we're discussing whether Brute SS would be overpowered? SS is balanced within the context of the Brute AT because Fury dilutes the effects of Rage. That's one of the big reasons why I don't complain about SS for Brutes, specifically (though I have no complaints about complaining about Brutes in general).

Honestly, yes. Claws doesn't do everything in exactly the same way that SS does. Claws can do respectable ST damage (I wouldn't say "good" especially if you look at the top tier performance), respectable to good AoE performance (Shockwave is impressive, Eviscerate can perform well, and Spin is excellent, though they all have counterpoint that inhibit their use), and though it's a bit light on soft control when you look at it (Focus has knockdown and Shockwave has knockback... and that's it).

Compare this to Super Strength: moderate to excellent ST performance (especially when you give it to Scrappers rather than Brutes), excellent AoE performance (footstomp anyone?), and excellent hard and soft control (every power either stuns, holds, or knocks).

The comparison between the two isn't exactly strong.

Before you attempt to call me out on my information, make sure you get yours right.