Quote:
It's true, though: +80% damage for an AT that runs around with 300% or more to start with is much less significant than +100% on an AT that runs around with 195% otherwise. And SS on tanks outperforms most tank sets for damage AFAIK, but nobody really cares because they're still below good scrappers/brutes.|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
That bolded part is the part I don't believe.
|
Ideally, to me, a SS port would make the set rely less on Rage, maybe turn it into a situational power instead of an all-the-time buff, and buff the rest of the set to compensate, so that the set stays about as good as it is now by itself, and doesn't boost non-SS attacks so much. If I'm really dreaming, maybe we can make the Rage crash less annoying, too. I can't really argue against anyone who looks at what I just wrote and says "no, keep your grubby paws off my SS, I like it the way it is", though.
Quote:
Still means that if it's broken for scrappers then it's broken for tanks and brutes.|
Originally Posted by Hopeling
It's true, though: +80% damage for an AT that runs around with 300% or more to start with is much less significant than +100% on an AT that runs around with 195% otherwise. And SS on tanks outperforms most tank sets for damage AFAIK, but nobody really cares because they're still below good scrappers/brutes.
|
There is no getting around that.
If that wasn't true then we'd get to run around saying, "aao and soul drain are too powerful for scrappers!!!"
Be well, people of CoH.
I agree. I said the same thing a few posts up. It would be even more broken on Scrappers, though, which would almost certainly demand dev attention when it got ported, and the outcome may not be something we end up liking.
I disagree that leaving something broken is a better option that finishing melee powerset proliferation.
And I say this as someone that really only recently started abusing the hell out of the game with an ss/fa brute.
Be well, people of CoH.
I agree with that, as well, as I also said a few posts up. I would like the set to be not broken (in either direction) after the port, is all, so "just port it as is" or "just replace Rage with Build Up" are both terrible options, to me.
Quote:
I would argue that bolded bit is not always the case, and has not always been the case. My experience in the past was that /SS tankers could generally keep up with my scrappers. Part of that is foot stomp and part was KO blow hitting hard targets really hard. It's less of a thing now with spring attack and judgement to add more AOE, as well as some sets (like claws) getting buffs. |
Originally Posted by Hopeling
It's true, though: +80% damage for an AT that runs around with 300% or more to start with is much less significant than +100% on an AT that runs around with 195% otherwise. And SS on tanks outperforms most tank sets for damage AFAIK, but nobody really cares because they're still below good scrappers/brutes.
|
The percentages aren't meaningful without sustained performance over time, and sustained performance over time is really good.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
It wouldn't be even more broken on scrappers. It might be more obvious, but the relative brokenness is virtually identical.|
Originally Posted by Hopeling
I agree. I said the same thing a few posts up. It would be even more broken on Scrappers, though, which would almost certainly demand dev attention when it got ported, and the outcome may not be something we end up liking.
|
This particular argument is one I've never trusted, never believed, and will likely never trust or believe.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
Sets like DB, KM, and /Shield are better on scrappers than brutes, at least partly because of their persistent damage buffs, yes? They're not broken on either AT, but general consensus seems to agree that such sets are better on scrappers than on brutes, by a larger amount than just the usual difference between scrappers and brutes.|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
It wouldn't be even more broken on scrappers. It might be more obvious, but the relative brokenness is virtually identical.
This particular argument is one I've never trusted, never believed, and will likely never trust or believe. |
SS would be better on scrappers than brutes, for much the same reason, except by an even larger amount, since Rage can provide an even larger buff. And if it's already broken on Brutes, and would be that much stronger on Scrappers, it would be more broken on Scrappers.
That's my line of reasoning. I'm not trying to be confrontational, just laying it all out explicitly so you can identify which part you disagree with, and then we can discuss it.
I disagree with the basic premise that it is less broken on other ATs. Obviously, rage on a scrapper would be better than rage on a brute, but that doesn't mean it's less broken on a brute. It simply reflects the brute's lower damage modifier and self-buff capabilities. The thing is that scrapper, brute, and tanker melee and defense powersets are basically designed around the same balance point, at least this is what previous devs claimed in the past. If this is true, then a set that is balanced for one is likely to balanced for the other two. On the other hand, if a set suddenly becomes broken or more broken if transferred to one AT, then it is likely broken for the other ATs that have it.
Just having bigger numbers doesn't make it more broken, though.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
I guess we're just disagreeing on what "broken" means, then. What if I phrase my meaning in a more specific and technical way: Super Strength on scrappers would overperform, in terms of damage, to an even larger degree than it does on brutes. The current brute level of overperformance is (apparently?) small enough that the devs don't consider fixing it to be a high enough priority, or worth the potential player backlash, but they'd be reevaluating the set anyway if they proliferated it, and the higher level of overperformance on scrappers might force their hand.|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
Just having bigger numbers doesn't make it more broken, though.
|
That still doesn't mean they shouldn't port it, though. It just means I doubt a straight port is a good idea, and so I doubt that's what will happen.
Quote:
If the only way they can port SS to scrappers is to reduce its overall performance, it's overpowered where it stands, especially compared to other powersets that are virtually identical on tanks, brutes, and scrappers. The overperformance would be the same relative to the AT's intended functionality.|
Originally Posted by Hopeling
I guess we're just disagreeing on what "broken" means, then. What if I phrase my meaning in a more specific and technical way: Super Strength on scrappers would overperform, in terms of damage, to an even larger degree than it does on brutes. The current brute level of overperformance is (apparently?) small enough that the devs don't consider fixing it to be a high enough priority, or worth the potential player backlash, but they'd be reevaluating the set anyway if they proliferated it, and the higher level of overperformance on scrappers might force their hand.
That still doesn't mean they shouldn't port it, though. It just means I doubt a straight port is a good idea, and so I doubt that's what will happen. |
The argument that smaller numbers means it's less broken for other ATs strikes me as more of a matter of perception and psychology than anything else. Sort of like people being more willing to spend $1.99 on something than $2.00.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
That's what I'm disputing: SS on scrappers, barring changes, would be even more overpowered relative to other scrapper sets than it is on brutes relative other brute sets. Foot Stomp with 95% enhancement, 80 fury, and double Rage does 305 damage. Whirling Smash, with the same enhancement and Fury, does 208. So for a brute, Foot Stomp is about half again as strong as Whirling Smash, which seems appropriate given their recharge times. On a scrapper, with 95% enhancement and double Rage (+200% with scrapper mods), it would do 89*(1+.95+2) = 351 damage. Whirling Smash, with the same enhancements and before counting crits, does about 170. So for a scrapper, Foot Stomp would be about TWICE as strong as Whirling Smash. Running the comparison again with single Rage instead of double Rage would make the disparity smaller, but not eliminate it.|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
The overperformance would be the same relative to the AT's intended functionality.
|
It's not just that the set would be more damaging than it is on brutes - that's almost a given for most brute/scrapper comparisons. It would be proportionally stronger than other scrapper sets by a greater degree than the same sets on brutes.
This is precisely the kind of perceptual/psychological issue I was talking about. The fact that you used double rage simply exaggerates the perception.
And of course, tankers don't have fury to fall back on, so it seems like they would be more likely to have issues similar to scrappers already.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I think I should add I've been over this argument before, and I've not changed my mind. I'm not likely to do so now.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
*sigh* Using single Rage instead makes the disparity smaller, just as it does on Brutes, but it does not disappear. Here:
Brute Foot Stomp, single Rage: 59*(1+.95+.8+1.6) = 257
Brute Whirling Smash: 208 again, of course
So with one stack of Rage, Brute Foot Stomp is about 24% more damaging than Brute Whirling Smash.
Scrapper Foot Stomp, single Rage: 89*(1+.95+1) = 263
Scrapper Whirling Smash: 170 again, of course
So with one stack of Rage, Scrapper Foot Stomp is 55% more damaging than Scrapper Whirling Smash.
So even with the much-more-conservative single-Rage scenario, Foot Stomp on a scrapper is much better relative to other scrapper powers than it is on brutes relative to other brute powers. This is what I meant when I said it would overperform to an even larger degree.
Edit for post #40: That's fine. I'm not likely to change my mind, either, especially if you tell me the math is just a perceptual issue ;P Discussions such as this are rarely about changing the participants' minds, at least not in the short term, but at least they help understand where the other side is coming from.
doh! warmace gets buildup. 1 second.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
I didn't say the disparity would disappear, just that you were going for the most extreme example in the comparison.|
Originally Posted by Hopeling
*sigh* Using single Rage instead makes the disparity smaller, just as it does on Brutes, but it does not disappear. Here:
Brute Foot Stomp, single Rage: 59*(1+.95+.8+1.6) = 257 Brute Whirling Smash: 208 again, of course So with one stack of Rage, Brute Foot Stomp is about 24% more damaging than Brute Whirling Smash. Scrapper Foot Stomp, single Rage: 89*(1+.95+1) = 263 Scrapper Whirling Smash: 170 again, of course So with one stack of Rage, Scrapper Foot Stomp is 55% more damaging than Scrapper Whirling Smash. |
The other thing about whirling smash is that it has a shorter animation, shorter recharge, and a lower endurance cost. It's also supplemented by three cones, whereas SS has no other AoE at all.
Quote:
| Edit for post #40: That's fine. I'm not likely to change my mind, either, especially if you tell me the math is just a perceptual issue ;P Discussions such as this are rarely about changing the participants' minds, at least not in the short term, but at least they help understand where the other side is coming from. |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
That's true. I wasn't trying to say "Foot Stomp is 23% more broken than Whirling Smash, which I arbitrarily designate as the perfect balance point", though, just using it as a benchmark. You could replace that with any other power you want to use as a benchmark, and the result should be similar; looks like that's what Bill's doing right now in his edit.|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
The other thing about whirling smash is that it has a shorter animation, shorter recharge, and a lower endurance cost. It's also supplemented by three cones, whereas SS has no other AoE at all.
|
Quote:
| I didn't tell you the math was a perceptual issue. It was your statement that the math demonstrates that SS would be more OP compared to scrapper titan weapons because of comparing one attack in each set, and doing so in the absence of performance comparisons between the two sets across the board. |
Brute damage mod: 41.708
Scrapper damage mod: 62.562
If we're going for double rage, you need 300% rec-red to get that 240 base down to 60. You also need to deal with the 10 second no damage crash every 60 seconds.
300% rec-red in buildup means it recharges in 22.5 seconds and lasts 10. So 80% uptime? 64% buff for brutes, 80% buff for scrappers? Or should we just do 80 and 100 since we're ignoring rage's crash? Sure. Let's do that.
yea, I'm also ignoring cast times, I know...
SS users get double rage. 160% for brutes, 200% for scrappers.
WM users get single application of buildup. 80% for brutes. 100% for scrappers.
Brutes get 160% from fury
Enhanced to 95%
SS Foot Stomp: 1.42
Mace Whirling Mace: 1.12
Brute FS: 7.313 (1.42*(1+1.6+1.6+.95))
Brute WM: 4.872 (1.12*(1+1.6+.8+.95))
Scrapper FS: 5.609 (1.42*(1+2+.95))
Scrapper WM: 3.304 (1.12*(1+1+.95))
Brute FS: 305.01
Brute WM: 203.2
FS is greater by 50.1%
Scrapper FS: 350.91
Scrapper: WM: 206.7
FS is greater by 69.77%
The difference between those two increases? 19.67%
Still a damn far cry from 200% better. Or twice better or whatever.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
But benchmarks won't tell the whole story. It's like comparing Midnight Grasp to Headsplitter on raw numbers alone (and ignoring that one is lethal with a 19 degree cone and the other negative energy and single target), or looking at how a scrapper performs with Soul Drain saturated 50% of the time compared to other scrapper sets vs. how a brute performs with Soul Drain saturated 50% of the time compared to other brute sets. There will always be a larger disparity in scrapper sets in terms of differing damage buffs due to the higher base damage.|
Originally Posted by Hopeling
That's true. I wasn't trying to say "Foot Stomp is 23% more broken than Whirling Smash, which I arbitrarily designate as the perfect balance point", though, just using it as a benchmark. You could replace that with any other power you want to use as a benchmark, and the result should be similar; looks like that's what Bill's doing right now in his edit.
|
Quote:
| Whatever the difference is between SS performance and TW performance on brutes, or any other set you want to compare, that difference will more strongly favor SS on scrappers, is what I'm saying. I used Whirling Smash as an example/benchmark, but really a similar ratio should hold for every power, and for the set as a whole. Given the math of it, I don't see how that could possibly not be true. Can you explain? |
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
And Super Strength gains much more benefit from Patron/Epic AoEs than Titan Weapons does because of no redraw and rage. So while you can't compare SS aoe to TW aoe without factoring in TW cones, you can't compare TW aoe with cones to SS aoe without factoring in patron/epic aoes.
|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
All things being equal, Titan Weapons has more AOE attacks and thus higher AOE potential than super strength. The cone attacks also have a 10 foot range and two of them hit fairly hard. So while the SS scrapper will hit harder with foot stomp, the TW character has titan sweep, arc of destruction, as well as defensive sweep whereas SS has single-target attacks. Comparing similar powers one for one will favor SS and SS may outperform other single target sets, but even with raged up foot stomp, will it outperform the AoE sets in the manner you're suggesting?
|
Quote:
Which is applicable to brutes as well as scrappers and does nothing to demonstrate that it's less OP for brutes than it is for scrappers.|
Originally Posted by DreadShinobi
And Super Strength gains much more benefit from Patron/Epic AoEs than Titan Weapons does because of no redraw and rage. So while you can't compare SS aoe to TW aoe without factoring in TW cones, you can't compare TW aoe with cones to SS aoe without factoring in patron/epic aoes.
|
If they proliferate SS to scrappers, it will likely be reduced across the board. Not because it's uniquely OP for scrappers, but because it's simply overpowered due to having a permanent +damage buff that applies to far more than super strength. Scrapper damage levels don't make it suddenly "impossible to ignore." It's always been impossible to ignore, but the devs have chosen to allow it to exist in that state.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Quote:
It's true. I truly thought that claws/fa would be better than ss/fa for farming. Redraw killed that on both paper and in game testing.|
Originally Posted by DreadShinobi
And Super Strength gains much more benefit from Patron/Epic AoEs than Titan Weapons does because of no redraw and rage. So while you can't compare SS aoe to TW aoe without factoring in TW cones, you can't compare TW aoe with cones to SS aoe without factoring in patron/epic aoes.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BellaStrega
Which is applicable to brutes as well as scrappers and does nothing to demonstrate that it's less OP for brutes than it is for scrappers.
|
We all know that rage buffing everything is the reason SS is OP. We all know that by overlapping rage instances you get to ignore the defense debuff. The damage crash can be functionally ignored by filling that hole with temp powers that ignore damage buffs/debuffs.
It's broken but how much more it would be on scrappers than brutes just isn't an issue.
Be well, people of CoH.
Quote:
Redraw has always been such a terrible idea.
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
It's true. I truly thought that claws/fa would be better than ss/fa for farming. Redraw killed that on both paper and in game testing.
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)