Why make a scrapper when you can make a brute?
Quote:
Yesterday it was 94 degrees. Today, it was only 86 degrees. So global warming is a myth. Numbers don't lie.
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
But the numbers do not lie, despite how ineptly you think I'm handling them.
|
"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:
/golf clap
|
Originally Posted by Werner
Yesterday it was 94 degrees. Today, it was only 86 degrees. So global warming is a myth. Numbers don't lie.
|
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Wow....and I thought my Threads made little sense....(or so im told)|
Originally Posted by Tongz
Aw, don't cry emo kid... I wasn't being a meany, I was merely defining a term and the perceived problem. (If you can't figure that one out, check the thread title.)
There seems to be a general consensus that the numbers do, in fact, come quite close when it comes to damage. Are they about even on defenses, too? That's the feeling I'm getting; I only ask because I feel like brutes have higher HP. If it is, then ofc if comes to personal preference, rendering my obsolete definition... obsolete.  (Still. People should know what stuff means.) |
In a team, a Scrapper is Better.In a Solo Scene a Brute "Can" be better, but not always.
Scrappers will never be replaced by Brutes because Brutes are like your mother...too high maintnance.A Scrapper is like the Girl Next door, easy to please.
Glad I could help.
Quote:
Yes it does disturb me when those obviously lacking understanding call those with understanding liars. However, such occurrences are common on forums so I'm not even remotely surprised.
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
People post numbers in that thread. Then they post better, or worse, numbers, and the only difference was....what? Their fingers were tired? Little more than hearsay. I'm sorry if that disturbs you. |
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Actually, I'm not convinced that would be that good except as a soloing set. On teams, I think it would be very challenging, especially if the Brute actually tried to tank.|
Originally Posted by GavinRuneblade
Imagine porting /regen to brutes unchanged with their hit points. Scrappers have good sets, not all of them are primaries.
|
With support it'd be hideous, though.
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:
Do you really understand how ignorant your logic looks?|
Originally Posted by mauk2
People post numbers in that thread. Then they post better, or worse, numbers, and the only difference was....what? Their fingers were tired?
Little more than hearsay. I'm sorry if that disturbs you. |
You cherry picked the numbers. Sure, there's an attack chain that tops the Scrapper equivalent. That's one combination. The declaration "Brute Damage > Scrapper Damage" based on that one data point is disingenuous at best. It does not hold across all powerset comparisons. It does not prove unambiguously that all Brutes deal more damage than all Scrappers.
If you want to declare affirmatively that the build you chose is higher DPS than the other builds listed, then that's fine. No one can argue with that. Unfortunately for you, that's not how you're using the data. And that's why pretty much everyone is telling you you're wrong.
It's also why it's very unlikely that much will change.
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
Not to mention that the numbers I used for brute claws were what the numbers WOULD have been had they not been tweaked to make the set "feel" different for brutes.
The only difference in feel is that it feels superior... because it is.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
As someone who played Regen waaay back when IH was a toggle and never really fell out of love with it, regardless of how good or bad the set is, as long as it's left mostly in-tact (not having QR taken out of it, ala Stalker version), I will take it and love it all of my CoH days. Something about the set remains iconic and amazing to me.|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Actually, I'm not convinced that would be that good except as a soloing set. On teams, I think it would be very challenging, especially if the Brute actually tried to tank.
With support it'd be hideous, though. |
But I think top-end Regen would be fine on its own (perhaps less so with standard SOing), since Perma-DP would be even better on a brute.
I'd also love to see Martial Arts someday ported to Brutes.. But that's a dream that may never happen. If you read this Arcanaville, make it happen! You are the Martial Arts maiden.
As for Brutes/Scrappers, Scrappers are never going to be obsolete because of minor statistical differences. that is like making an argument that because Scrappers do damage and Blasters do damage, Scrappers are clearly the better choice because Scrappers have much better defenses than Blasters. It's never been a problem, purely because they both do good damage. The same echoes with Brutes/Scrappers.
If Brutes will step on any toes, I think it's Tankers. But that's another topic for another time.
I think the biggest advantage is the relief of not having to keep the fury bar filled all the damn time. I also enjoy the criticals rather than building rage. Just because GR will be introduced does not mean Scrappers will fall off the map to Brutes.
Quote:
I'm gonna give it to you simple. On why that thread is very enlightening, but in the end means very little.|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Aw, now don't be casting aspersions.
 If your contention is correct, then I have to ask when is Castle gonna fix this? Because one of my absolute fave toons is a fire/wp scrap that needs the extra 20 DPS. NEEDS IT.  Aw, man, why you gotta hate? I'm just pointing out the facts, that do not support the conclusion of the thread.Fact: The best brute set does way more dps than the best scrapper set, for less end. Even if I lay off hitting that hot button, on average, brutes STILL do more damage. Fact: Brutes have higher hitpoints. This does not balance out their extra damage. Fact: Brutes have higher buff caps. This also does not balance out their extra damage. Yes, scrappers have more End tools at their disposal, (thank you devs for physical perfection, we luv it!) but I will counter by pointing solemnly at gloom. Are brutes End starved enough to make them balanced? I sure don't think so. Don't get me wrong, I love scrappers to death. But the numbers do not lie, despite how ineptly you think I'm handling them. (fumble fumble thumble drop....) (sigh) People post numbers in that thread. Then they post better, or worse, numbers, and the only difference was....what? Their fingers were tired? Little more than hearsay. I'm sorry if that disturbs you. |
All those brutes and scrappers your trying to decide on inviting for the best damage, in the end, are likely delivering the the same damage.
Why? because all those best damage strings being talking about in Billz thread are great for discussion. But in the end, 99% of people won't be using those attack strings.
Go and watch actual people play (you say you PuG)...Shadow Maul and Dragon's Tail used on single targets. Eagle's Claw being throw about.
Even on my IOed out DB/WP scrapper, my best DPS string is BF-AV-Repeat...not the best, because getting that required a hit in survival.
And that's what you're going to run into with PuGs, andnot teaming with the IOed Out OR Go Home, crowd.
Scrappers and Brutes will be played just as much now as before (okay maybe a few more brutes due to being able to take them blueside)...but Scrappers are in no danger.
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
Willpower.|
Originally Posted by GavinRuneblade
Imagine porting /regen to brutes unchanged with their hit points. Scrappers have good sets, not all of them are primaries.
|
It's better then Regen. The only reason you would want to go Regen over WP is because quick recovery comes earlier.
Quote:
This is really the biggest part. I play both Brutes and Scrappers, and love both, but there are a great deal of times when building Fury and maintaining it is actually quite difficult. A tanker on the team, stealing aggro, a cautious team that prefers using pulls, and of course, the first part of any fight. |
Originally Posted by Bookkeeper_Jay
I think the biggest advantage is the relief of not having to keep the fury bar filled all the damn time. I also enjoy the criticals rather than building rage. Just because GR will be introduced does not mean Scrappers will fall off the map to Brutes.
|
When going rogue hits, I plan on continuing to make Scrappers, especially with some of the new sets that won't work well with brutes at all(Kinetic melee).
Quote:
That was the funniest comment I have ever seen you post lol!
|
Originally Posted by Werner
Yesterday it was 94 degrees. Today, it was only 86 degrees. So global warming is a myth. Numbers don't lie.
|
Virtue: @Santorican
Dark/Shield Build Thread
It's pretty easy to just look at the mechanics of fury and criticals to see given the same attack, somewhere around 70% fury the brute and scrapper damage is equal. Prior to that the scrapper does more damage, higher then the brute does more damage. Adding +damage to both the brute and scrapper from global sources or buffs benifits the scrapper more then the brute. In fact if theres enough outside +damage (somewhere around +70) the scrapper's attack will do more damage then the brute even with full fury (+180% damage). +70 sounds like a lot, except of course of your double stacking blinding feignt or follow up, or during build-up, or during heavily saturated soul drain, or during heavily saturated AAO, or if you have a handy kinetics teamate.. or... well you see my point. (For those of you following along, this is also where Rage would be great for scrappers). Furthermore, as more and more +damage is piled on scrappers pull ahead steadily until scrappers hit their cap... Since brutes cap later, they start to catch up again with scrappers until brutes in their cap.
That's all basic math that, and therefore, if i've done it correct, its just fact. So as many people have pointed out in this discussion, sometimes Brutes outdamage scrappers...sometimes scrappers outdamage brutes.
So, let's see (assuming you're a min/maxer choosing between brute and scrapper) if you want to play... DB, Claws, Dark, Martial Arts, Katana, Broadsword, Spines, or anything with /Shields, then you pick scrapper...
Since I'm not one to be negative, let's leave it at this. Assuming the OP is refering to min/max builds only, I agree with the OP if you're a fire/ or electric/ not teamed with a kinetics user and if your secondary is not /shields or /regen.
I gotta make pain. I gotta make things right. I gotta stop what's comin'. 'Least I gotta try.
Take the 'numbers' out of it and just compare how the scrapper played vs the brute. Solo and on a team. How it felt while playing. Buffed and unbuffed.
Solo, i vote Brute 9 times out of 10. But my elec/regen scrapper can solo just fine too, whereas my BS/DA scrapper sucked at soloing(which i did very little of). I played my kat/SR to 50 primarily solo except in the higher levels when i did a bunch of TFs and team play getting the AVs. That toon was awesome. On a team, i felt that I take too many chances trying to keep fury up. Solo, that is simple. I have 2 lv50 brutes and one lv45. All 3 Soloed great. fire/ea, mace/stone and the 45 is elec/shield.
If you didnt care about the numbers, answer the OP's question... my answer is if i want to play primarily solo, make a brute. Primarily teamed, make a scrapper. But, with that said I say screw both scrappers and brutes and make a TANKER
SJ
I generally like Brutes better than Scrappers mainly because of the sets that have not ported over yet, and secondly because of better survivability.
But as for playstyle, my Brutes actually fight more like Tanks than Scrappers. So to me, there is a clear distinction between Brutes and Scrappers. On Tanks and Brutes, I gather a group around me and try to punch the crap out of everyone, either to hold aggro for my teammates or build my Fury, respectively. On Scrappers, I tend to focus on specific targets until they are defeated and go on to the next one.
So for me, fighting on a Tank/Brute goes like: toggle-smack-toggle-smack-toggle-smack
. whereas fighting on a Scrapper is like: toggle-smack-smack-kill-toggle-smack-smack-kill, toggle-smack-smack-kill
So even when AT's will be able switch sides, what toon I play will be dictated by how I feel like playing, as it would for choosing any AT.
Quote:
OMG.|
Originally Posted by Hostillian
I'll tell you why you should NOT make a scrapper . . .
They're not Strong and Pretty. |
I totally missed that.
Quote:
(sigh)|
Originally Posted by Werner
Yesterday it was 94 degrees. Today, it was only 86 degrees. So global warming is a myth. Numbers don't lie.
|
We'll leave aside fire brutes and the "Holy crap" damage levels for the nonce.
Care to address the fact that brutes do 3 percent more damage (average) and yet still have significantly more hitpoints and much higher defense caps?
Shouldn't they do significantly less damage than scrappers(but more than tankers) in order to fit properly?
Also, what's the word on gloom for scraps? Or that Castle is making scrapper criticals boost DOT's for fire melee?
Or are people gonna keep whistling past the graveyard?
Quote:
Well....no.|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Do you really understand how ignorant your logic looks?
|
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hearsay
"unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge"
What part of this fails to describe the information in the pylon thread?
Quote:
| You cherry picked the numbers. Sure, there's an attack chain that tops the Scrapper equivalent. That's one combination. The declaration "Brute Damage > Scrapper Damage" based on that one data point is disingenuous at best. |
If you put gloom in.... The picture is different.
Read for comprehension, please.
Quote:
| It does not hold across all powerset comparisons. It does not prove unambiguously that all Brutes deal more damage than all Scrappers. |
Quote:
| If you want to declare affirmatively that the build you chose is higher DPS than the other builds listed, then that's fine. |
Brutes do comparable (or even quite a lot better) damage than scrappers, while ALSO having a crap-ton more hitpoints AND much higher resistance caps than scrappers do.
If they have more life, and can get better defenses, why don't they do WORSE damage than scrappers do?
Seriously.
Quote:
|
No one can argue with that. Unfortunately for you, that's not how you're using the data. And that's why pretty much everyone is telling you you're wrong. It's also why it's very unlikely that much will change. |
Quote:
All Brute damage in that post is not better than all Scrapper damage in that post.|
Originally Posted by mauk2
In that thread, ALL brute damage is better than scrapper damage, by an average of three percent, IF you drop gloom out of the picture. Read the first post!
|
Averaged across all Brutes and all Scrappers represented in that thread, Brutes were 3% higher. That does not imply that all Brutes do more damage than all Scrappers.
Quote:
| Read for comprehension, please. |
Quote:
| Brutes do comparable (or even quite a lot better) damage than scrappers, while ALSO having a crap-ton more hitpoints AND much higher resistance caps than scrappers do. |
The fact is that Brutes and Scrappers achieve peak solo damage levels that differ by an amount that's negligable compared to the range of performance across powersets and builds within the two ATs.
Quote:
| If they have more life, and can get better defenses, why don't they do WORSE damage than scrappers do? |
Yeah, sure, if everyone stops playing Scrappers, I guess they'll have to step in and take action. I won't be holding my breath waiting for their hand to be forced.
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
By the way...
Quote:
Yeah, I'm, totally sure all the people in here disagreeing with you are the ones with the reading comprehension issue. Especially since one of them wrote the thread you're quoting.
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Read for comprehension, please.
|
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:
Well, we've been TRYING to address your "facts":|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Care to address the fact that brutes do 3 percent more damage (average) and yet still have significantly more hitpoints and much higher defense caps?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Werner
"numerically superior" is very dependent on the situations you commonly find yourself in.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Werner
Overly simplistic analysis is overly simplistic.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Werner
It's specific chains, specific level of recharge, specific slotting, specific assumptions about generated fury, and so on. Even if the assumptions are reasonable, we're only looking at a handful of data points, and only on a single statistic, DPS, which isn't even particularly representative of damage output except in weird edge cases.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deus_Otiosus
For all of the huffing and puffing about DPS comparisons, I'd say most players never even come close to building and maintaining a level of play to get to that elusive top end.
And even when you do, if you team, there will be situations that hinder Fury. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Werner
Yesterday it was 94 degrees. Today, it was only 86 degrees. So global warming is a myth. Numbers don't lie.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Sure, there's an attack chain that tops the Scrapper equivalent. That's one combination. The declaration "Brute Damage > Scrapper Damage" based on that one data point is disingenuous at best. It does not hold across all powerset comparisons.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BrandX
all those best damage strings being talking about in Billz thread are great for discussion. But in the end, 99% of people won't be using those attack strings.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shred_Monkey
It's pretty easy to just look at the mechanics of fury and criticals to see given the same attack, somewhere around 70% fury the brute and scrapper damage is equal. Prior to that the scrapper does more damage, higher then the brute does more damage... sometimes Brutes outdamage scrappers...sometimes scrappers outdamage brutes.
|
The numbers you are looking at are just a few specific data points. DPS for specific builds running specific chains with specific slotting at a specific level of recharge and a specific amount of fury.
All of those things that are specific in the analysis can be changed. What If I'd made the assumption that most Brutes averaged 60% Fury instead of 75%? Suddenly the Brutes look terrible. Nothing's changed. I've just looked at a few DIFFERENT data points. What if I think I can maintain 80% fury on average with my go-go-go play style? Brutes look even MORE attractive.
What if instead of picking a standard slotting for the builds, I choose very specific slotting of each power for that particular build? Perhaps what I'd consider an optimal slotting for a live build that has concerns other than DPS? Things change again. Some builds get better, some builds get worse, the comparison changes one way or the other.
What if instead of using DPS as our measurement of damage output, I take the trouble to try to come up with something more representative of normal play? For instance, burst damage is going to weigh in heavily on teams, because the team will quickly destroy the targets. So I could measure the damage output that each build can do in some shorter window of time, such as 10 seconds. Suddenly everyone with build up powers will be looking better than before. And what about AoE? Surely we'll be using AoEs while we mission, and it would be negligent to leave out that measurement of damage. So we include AoEs in some way. All the numbers change again.
This is a gigantic, multi-dimensional data set. You've looked at a handful of data points, and somehow concluded not only that the trend seen in those few points applies across the entire data set, but you almost seem to be asserting that the data set doesn't exist. That somehow, the ONLY points of interest are the few that someone conveniently calculated for you in a stickied thread.
Those really aren't the only points of interest. There's really almost zero reason to believe that those few data points are representative of the game as a whole. In a statistical sense, perhaps the difference in damage output was measured at 3%, but your margin of error is huge, perhaps 50%. And I don't mean margin of error in the sense that Bill's numbers are wrong. I mean it in the sense that there is no good reason to think that they represent the average or achievable performance of Scrappers and Brutes as they are actually played in the game. The data, however interesting, is almost statistically irrelevant.
Now, given all that, the reason I made my 94 vs. 86 degrees comment is that it's essentially the same situation. Global temperature trends are a gigantic, multi-dimensional data set. To simply look at a couple of points in that data set and believe you can conclude anything about the data set as a whole is simply incorrect. You cannot assert anything about the data set as a whole from two simple measurements. Similarly, you cannot assert much of anything about Brute vs. Scrapper damage output from looking at the data Bill put together, except in regard to THOSE specific builds in THOSE specific circumstances.
So we're not trying to explain the "fact" of a 3% difference in damage. We're trying to explain that it isn't a fact at all. The fact, if there is one, is that average of the Brutes Bill chose, with the slotting he chose, and the level of recharge he chose, and the level of fury he chose, do 3% more DPS than the Scrappers in the same circumstances. This doesn't address damage as a whole, only DPS. It doesn't address various levels of fury. It doesn't address the way people actually build as opposed to this specific hypothetical. It doesn't address how teams interact. It doesn't address people slotting in any way other than a given "standard". All of these factors, as I've said, will change that percentage, swinging it wildly to and fro. The 3% means so close to nothing that it might as well be nothing.
Was that helpful? Or am I still not explaining it well?
"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, your explanation only included a few data points to go by, but I'll take it as if it were the only data points. I agree with you.|
Originally Posted by Werner
Well, we've been TRYING to address your "facts":
Was that helpful? Or am I still not explaining it well? |
I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.
Mauk2, please read Werner's post for comprehension prior to replying.
lol brutes
I'll tell you why you should NOT make a scrapper . . .
They're not Strong and Pretty.
There are three types of people in this world: Those who can count and those who can't.