Tankers and Brutes in GR

no, that was not what we were talking about.

Dechs' tank is IOed out to the hilt.

Comparing IOed to SOed is stupid. If you are going to compare what can be made tougher, if you don't do it on common ground it is meaningless.

That is the other reason the whole thread is speculation at best, no one knows what the game is going to be balanced around when GR drops.

...




I feel dizzy.

E voila. Exactly my opion, but nicely formulated without the mangled English.

My semi-concept build, semi-cheap IOed SS/invul brute regulary functions as a main tank on the LRSF (without pulling in the final 2 missions ). The only 'expense necessary' is a balanced teams that knows what they are doing imo.

Invuln is not one of the secondaries that I think would be often refused by players who for whatever reason don't want to allow some of the squishier secondaries to attempt a full frontal assault on the Freedom Phalanx.

In truth, the full frontal assault method is more about how many corrs you have on your team and how good your team is overall than it is about the actual secondary - still some secondaries are sturdier or more resilient than others.


It depends on how you play and what you're doing.

With regards to expense, I'm not talking about normal group play, at a normal pace with a balanced team - I'm talking about the extreme top end of the game.

That's assuming Dech started the conversation...but he was quoting someone.


The meaning is more like this:

1) Is an SO tanker enough for the game? Yes. The game is based on SO (so far) and a good team of SOed characters can do pretty much anything.

2) Is an IOed brute as sturdy as an SOed tanker? Yes.

Therefor, combining 1) and 2), an IOed brute is good enough to play the role of tanker, in the same way as an SOed tanker can for a normal team.

Of course an IOed tanker is sturdier then an IOed brute... but he's also sturdier then a SOed tanker. Does that mean we have to kick all SOed tanker because they aren't IOed? no.

If you stick with the same primary/secondary though, i don't think an IOed tanker can reach the SOed brute damage.

If you change the primary/secondary, then an IOed dark/stone brute is probably sturdier then even an IOed fire/EM tanker for exemple. =P

First, it's Dechs. Pronounced "dex." Notably not short for "Dexter."

EDIT: I'm not upset or anything. I know it's an odd name. Just clarifying.

I completely understand what you're saying though. An IO'd brute is better than an SO'd tanker with the same powersets, but an IO'd tanker doesn't have the damage of an SO'd brute with the same powersets. I totally agree.

The only thing I am saying is: you won't ever find a Dark Armor brute as tough as my Dark Armor tank. Tanks will always be better at holding aggro and staying alive than brutes with the same powersets/budget. That's not debatable.

Is the need for that kind of toughness up for debate? Certainly. I happen to be an aggroholic. I don't feel "super" because I can defeat stuff. I feel "super" when I herd monsters for a hami raid, or taunt as many AVs as I can find. Sure I won't kill them, but by $deity, nothing's going to hurt my team.

But the fact remains that tanks will not replace brutes and brutes will not replace tanks.

Sorry Dechs!

I aggree with you, a good tanker will always be better then a good brute for holding aggro/staying alive. Wether it's needed depends on the team make up and players preference.

And i don't see brutes or tankers being eliminated. It will just make the players that hate brute or tanker happier, while still having the two around. =)

Hmmm... I wonder just how much Rage a Brute can keep generated with a good Tanker holding most, if not all, of the aggro.

No, I'm serious, I'm really wondering this. I've never played in a group with a Tanker when playing any of my Brutes...

It all depends what Brute I suppose. Personally, I can generate full fury off of one target with both of my Brutes (Claws and SS).

Again, I doubt any SO SS/SD/Mu brute is going to reach IO SD/SS/Blaze tanker damage, to use the most AoE oriented epics for each archetype.

For that matter, while the difference wouldn't be as large, I doubt SO brutes can deal IO tanker damage for many builds as well, endurance management on SOs is a PITA without specific powers (/elec or /nrj), the lack of recharge slotting severely hurts damage over time, and SO mitigation isn't so hot (being dead, nobody deals more than 0 DPS).

Any brute can generate fury without taking hits with brawl/boxing on auto attack.
Fire melee was a pain to generate fury for me because I didnt take scorch but brawl/boxing offset this and put me to max fury pretty quickly without being hit.

Just to be a pain in the butt, id like to point out rise of the phoenix

Deals damage when dead

I don't have to math skills to prove it either way. ^^;;

As a whole, yeah i aggree that the IOed tanker will be better. I wasn't considering endurance management or mitigation.

You mean Fury.

I can generate the typical 85%~90% Fury bar on any team where there is a Tanker.

If you don't want to wait for your attacks to generate Fury, just be faster at taking the alpha.

Occasionally you'll get some Tanker who is erroneously convinced the most important thing in the world is to have all of the aggro all of the time and will go into Taunt-bot overdrive in an attempt to literally try to steal aggro from you.

At that point I usually just tell them that my Brute is built to survive any aggro he generates and that they should focus on protecting the squishier members of the team instead of wasting time trying to taunt stuff off of me.

I sincerely hope that target is an EB, AV or GM. No one single target (outside of the 3 I just mentioned) should live long enough to generate full fury on any brute. Even if you are at 0 fury starting out.

As I mentioned before, I am an aggroholic, which I believe to be one step better than what you've described here. I don't go out of my way to steal aggro from brutes/scraps/blasters that can handle themselves, but I am always looking for the next big group of nasty that can be hitting me.

I have played a few all melee ITFs.

Major fun. No problems with fury.

Better not be any fury shortfalls- with all of those sword wielding Romans on patrol, everyone should get more than enough action. I don't think it will be a huge issue post GR. Brutes are more than a little charming, after all.

Having a SD/SS Tanker and a SS/FA Brute and doing various short stints of farming with each, I'm trying to decide whether to doubt your sanity or credibility for stating that the Brute won't be able to reach the Tanker's damage. The difference is a few points on Shield Charge where the tanker has the advantage, and the Brute hits far harder on every other attack.

Now, had you started talking about Elec/Shield/Blaze Scrappers, then I'd agree with you. But a Tanker?! They're capped on damage before the Brute even gets started.

As for being "tough enough"... if you can herd the aggro cap's worth of +4 AVs long enough to kill them, does it matter if someone else might be able to herd them for a longer period of time because they kill them slower?

Originally Posted by PleaseRecycle it has gone from unconscionable to downright appalling that we have no way of measuring our characters' wetness.

Originally Posted by Brillig It's hard to beat the entertainment value of Whackjob Wednesdays.

Did you just implied that you can solo 17(that's the cap?) +4 AVs with an SOed brute? O_o
I'm pretty sure even an SOed granite tanker couldn't survive long against 17 +4 AVs...

I forget how many specifically, but it was over 10 (12ish?) AVs that Nihilii solo'd on his /inv scrapper.
Note: They were all hand-picked S/L dealing AVs (through MA), and I'm not sure if they were on absolute max diff, but he still did it. On a scrapper.
And aggro cap is 16, if I remember correctly, but for whatever reason, Taunt can only hit up to 5 people... not sure why that is.

Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze I hate to be the bringer of bad news... but Willpower sucks!!! you're better off rolling a regen