Raid Diversity is now Dead
I won’t speculate with you on why you think the changes were made. If Anet wants an inclusive, challenging raid experience, the changes make sense. If those changes are good for WvW as well, so be it. It’s really not relevant what the primary reason was; you don’t need to be a genius to see it works for both.
Dude my post was responding to you speculating about it. So I guess you will only speculate alone?
Primarily, because raids were too easy with excessive boon durations and sharing.
Secondly, because the compositions were biased too much against unfavoured classesSo basically, if Anet is advertising an inclusive and challenging raiding environment, everything that got nerfed moves them in that direction.
But that’s wrong. They are pleased how raids are going. I really doubt that they nerf things for making the wings harder if the first is out for a year, the second 6 months and 3rd 3 months. It makes no sense at all, they would have reacted faster.
I won’t speculate with you on why you think the changes were made. If Anet wants an inclusive, challenging raid experience, the changes make sense. If those changes are good for WvW as well, so be it. It’s really not relevant what the primary reason was; you don’t need to be a genius to see it works for both.
If you were to have visited the WvW forums you would have seen the front page in which there was a pretty massive thread calling the WvW boonshare meta horrible for lack of a better word. To which there was also a dev response saying they planned to fix it.
What they should have done, yet for some ungodly reason didn’t was make those changes WvW only, because the only problem with WvW was perma resistance and stab stacking.
Boons in raids/pve weren’t an issue as the original encounters already had a fixed difficulty scale and nerfing them (the way they did) wouldn’t open up any class diversity. Which i’ll remind you it still hasn’t.
They still have yet to come back to the start of these changes (save for ele) and revert the gross nerfs given to some classes and specs for the sake of PvP where they should rightfully so have different effects and strengths.
Primarily, because raids were too easy with excessive boon durations and sharing.
Secondly, because the compositions were biased too much against unfavoured classesSo basically, if Anet is advertising an inclusive and challenging raiding environment, everything that got nerfed moves them in that direction.
But that’s wrong. They are pleased how raids are going. I really doubt that they nerf things for making the wings harder if the first is out for a year, the second 6 months and 3rd 3 months. It makes no sense at all, they would have reacted faster.
It’s wrong that these changes lead to a more inclusive and challenging raiding environment? No, I don’t think that’s wrong.
Really? Do you care to explain why? Let me start: Here is why I think it’s true:
Primarily, because raids were too easy with excessive boon durations and sharing.
Secondly, because the compositions were biased too much against unfavoured classesSo basically, if Anet is advertising an inclusive and challenging raiding environment, everything that got nerfed moves them in that direction.
Nothing has changed about “excessive boon durations and sharing”. There’s only one thing that actually changed: they added revs to the list of unfavoured classes, while diversity overall took a dive.
There is no loyalty without betrayal. -Ann Smiley
It’s wrong that these changes lead to a more inclusive and challenging raiding environment? No, I don’t think that’s wrong.
That’s not what I meant. I’m saying that they had no intention to make raids more challenging on purpose now, at this time point. Without having new elite specs or other new introductions into the game there is no reason to make content harder if it wasn’t over one year. That would be like: “Ah yo guys, they killed our raid bosses way too often since raids are out, let’s make them harder even though 12 months have passed since their release.”
First of all the changes had to do with PvP and were not directly connected to raids. If it were like this and they would know what they are doing, we would have seen nerfs on different classes too where it is way more necessary.
(edited by Vinceman.4572)
Really? Do you care to explain why? Let me start: Here is why I think it’s true:
Primarily, because raids were too easy with excessive boon durations and sharing.
Secondly, because the compositions were biased too much against unfavoured classesSo basically, if Anet is advertising an inclusive and challenging raiding environment, everything that got nerfed moves them in that direction.
Nothing has changed about “excessive boon durations and sharing”.
Well, if that’s truly what you believe, there isn’t really anything to complain about is there …
It’s wrong that these changes lead to a more inclusive and challenging raiding environment? No, I don’t think that’s wrong.
That’s not what I meant. I’m saying that they had no intention to make raids more challenging on purpose now, at this time point. Without having new elite specs or other new introductions into the game there is no reason to make content harder if it wasn’t over one year.
There is if they didn’t think it was hard enough or for whatever other reason they had. They don’t actually need a reason to justify changes to players if we are being honest.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
There is if they didn’t think it was hard enough or for whatever other reason they had. They don’t actually need a reason to justify changes to players if we are being honest.
If it were so, they would have reacted sooner.
The assumption also contradicts the recent statements of raids being fine for them.
I still don’t see any profound connection to PvE “issues”, it definitely was a PvP & WvW thing.
I quit this game mainly because since HoT the balance is complete garbage. My main almost since release guard is realistically worthless (not needed/unoptimal, don’t tell me the joke utility of guard is worth for the dps loss towards an ele) in the only real endgame content, while eles are allowed to shine 24/7 with multiple builds all year like they are demi gods. I got sick of it for good. I’m a fan of pugging and understandably pugging is not possible unless you play ele as a dps, the only role that is fun.
I heared Halloween this year was another cash grab as well, seems like the future of this game is looking real dead.
At least a big competitor of this genre is looking to have a bright future again. They got problems with mages as well but it is not such joke severe like in this game with eles.
and common sense.
(edited by Adrenalin.5719)
There is if they didn’t think it was hard enough or for whatever other reason they had. They don’t actually need a reason to justify changes to players if we are being honest.
If it were so, they would have reacted sooner.
The assumption also contradicts the recent statements of raids being fine for them.
I still don’t see any profound connection to PvE “issues”, it definitely was a PvP & WvW thing.
That’s a nice sentiment but you don’t know that anymore than I do not. It’s not really relevant anyways. The fact is that regardless of the reason, I am correct; the changes do create a more inclusive and challenging environment in raids, even if it is just a coincidence.
That’s a nice sentiment but you don’t know that anymore than I do not. It’s not really relevant anyways. The fact is that regardless of the reason, I am correct; the changes do create a more inclusive and challenging environment in raids, even if it is just a coincidence.
It’s not a sentiment. They have reacted earlier when things were unintended or not in the line with their plans.
And to the other thing – I wasn’t participant in the discussion – I state you are wrong but because it is your feeling that you are right and it’s hard to rationalize someone’s feelings.
Unless you have some reasonable argument that shows the changes don’t bring a more inclusive and challenging raid environment, then I don’t see much else to discuss here. That’s the topic of the thread. Making statements that may or may not be correct about the motivation for those changes is just a diversion.
I just corrected you on one thing you were wrong and derailed nothing with that.
I quit this game mainly because since HoT the balance is complete garbage. My main almost since release guard is realistically worthless (not needed/unoptimal, don’t tell me the joke utility of guard is worth for the dps loss towards an ele) in the only real endgame content, while eles are allowed to shine 24/7 with multiple builds all year like they are demi gods. I got sick of it for good. I’m a fan of pugging and understandably pugging is not possible unless you play ele as a dps, the only role that is fun.
I heared Halloween this year was another cash grab as well, seems like the future of this game is looking real dead.
At least a big competitor of this genre is looking to have a bright future again. They got problems with mages as well but it is not such joke severe like in this game with eles.
Actually I can’t remeber the last time that I did a raid boss without a DH.
Also the best class to find a spot on pugs raids nowadays are condi ps, druid and Chrono. Since they are less common of ele.
And to be honest the balance is really better after hot then before.
I mean everyclass, maybe out of revenant now, have a spot in raid.
(edited by lucadiro.4519)
And to be honest the balance is really better after hot then before.
I mean everyclass,maybe out of revenant now, have a spot in raid.
Really? Are you even listen to what u have to say. I guess that somehow rev has suddenly escaped our notice and become the elephant in the room now. Suure, class balance is better (except rev but who cares, we were here 1st).
Somehow the only class that they coincidentally released with hot, has suddenly become the one that’s now completely broken and useless in pve – and maybe outside of it too. But balance after hot has really improved, sure sure.
I mean, it doesn’t matter that u have to strong-arm everyone who mains a Rev into abandoning their class in pursuit of another one, bc let’s face it doesn’t apply to you anyway. I once had a guildie that complained from getting kicked from every raid, and how he was a new player and he just got full asc set on his rev, now he feels like he has to toss it in the scrapyard and start over again.
It doesn’t matter if revenant has become an untouchable in raids now, or that it’s suddenly and unwittingly been consigned and relegated to opprobrium. Just shut the door behind it and leave it in the dark, it’s not even worth mentioning now. Long as all other classes have a role in raids, right? It doesn’t matter that most of these roles aren’t even equal in stature to each other, or that some classes are still favored over others.
I mean, It’s bslanced cos all classes have a spot in raids, despite most spots being exclusive and only open to a select few classes over others. Riiight
(edited by nagr.1593)
And to be honest the balance is really better after hot then before.
I mean everyclass,maybe out of revenant now, have a spot in raid.Really? Are you even listen to what u have to say. I guess that somehow rev has suddenly escaped our notice and become the elephant in the room now. Suure, class balance is better (except rev but who cares, we were here 1st).
Somehow the only class that they coincidentally released with hot, has suddenly become the one that’s now completely broken and useless in pve – and maybe outside of it too. But balance after hot has really improved, sure sure.
I mean, it doesn’t matter that u have to strong-arm everyone who mains a Rev into abandoning their class in pursuit of another one, bc let’s face it doesn’t apply to you anyway. I once had a guildie that complained from getting kicked from every raid, and how he was a new player and he just got full asc set on his rev, now he feels like he has to toss it in the scrapyard and start over again.
It doesn’t matter if revenant has become an untouchable in raids now, or that it’s suddenly and unwittingly been consigned and relegated to opprobrium. Just shut the door behind it and leave it in the dark, it’s not even worth mentioning now. Long as all other classes have a role in raids, right? It doesn’t matter that most of these roles aren’t even equal in stature to each other, or that some classes are still favored over others.
I mean, It’s bslanced cos all classes have a spot in raids, despite most spots being exclusive and only open to a select few classes over others. Riiight
A lot of words here.
1 balance is better now yes, we had more classes unviable in the past, now just rev is underperforming (but to be honest is still viable in fractals, just not optimal in raids) but is very far to be useless in pve. And very good in pvp and wvw.
2 your friend can still move his Gear to Warrior and guardian… And for your info I spent a lot of golds on my rev so I’m not happy that it is in that state.
3 i never said just forgot revenant and close the door. You are so salty and you are putting a lot of words in my mouth. I’m not happy that revenant is not anymore optimal, i hope for a buff/rework to it for be again optimal, but people can’t say that balance after hot is broken in pve because, again, only One class is not OPTIMAL while the other are all good.
(edited by lucadiro.4519)
It’s wrong that these changes lead to a more inclusive and challenging raiding environment?
Yeah. In the end, raids aren’t any more challenging (as i understand, 5/5 comp performs on average as well as pre-change ones). And as for inclusivity, there was nothing in those changes that increased it – quite the opposite, they restricted the meta even more (6 slots locked now to 3 classes, necro is out).
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”.
Except that wasn’t my response, and you know it.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I agree with every word you say here, but I would add another point. Optimal composition is less of an issue for me than diversity of playstyle. Fewer fun ways of building characters and beating bosses means content grows stale faster and fewer people care to even try it.
Again, I think most of us realize true profession balance is absolutely impossible without making everything play the exact same (which should never happen). Disparity between builds/professions isn’t something they can fix nor should they even try. The problem is when that disparity is so massive that it makes playing certain professions significantly reduce a groups chances – which is where the game mode is now.
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.
[Quote]
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.[/quote]
I don’t think the data supports your position. The gaps between dps classws are relatively small and the differences largely situational. The only issue is that the pug community always seeks a one size fits all solution so they just “learn” ele is best and don’t bother understanding when it isnt.
www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt
[Quote]
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.
I don’t think the data supports your position. The gaps between dps classws are relatively small and the differences largely situational. The only issue is that the pug community always seeks a one size fits all solution so they just “learn” ele is best and don’t bother understanding when it isnt.
[/quote]
Fair enough, but if it is a perception issue, then it is one that we need to fix – and that is something that leading raiding guilds can help with by posting realistic raiding guides and builds for professions like scrappers, reapers, dps mesmers, guardians, etc – and by providing tips, spreadsheets and videos that show that these professions/playstyles do not drop the dps of the raid squad significantly when they replace the current go to professions (ele, warrior, daredevil).
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.
I don’t think the data supports your position. The gaps between dps classws are relatively small and the differences largely situational. The only issue is that the pug community always seeks a one size fits all solution so they just “learn” ele is best and don’t bother understanding when it isnt.
Fair enough, but if it is a perception issue, then it is one that we need to fix – and that is something that leading raiding guilds can help with by posting realistic raiding guides and builds for professions like scrappers, reapers, dps mesmers, guardians, etc – and by providing tips, spreadsheets and videos that show that these professions/playstyles do not drop the dps of the raid squad significantly when they replace the current go to professions (ele, warrior, daredevil).
Why should they do anything if they are going to be attacked by posts like this? You could also make these spreadsheets and guides.
Edit: And they post fast kills or low-squads or 10-class kills …
(edited by Absurdo.8309)
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.
I don’t think the data supports your position. The gaps between dps classws are relatively small and the differences largely situational. The only issue is that the pug community always seeks a one size fits all solution so they just “learn” ele is best and don’t bother understanding when it isnt.
Fair enough, but if it is a perception issue, then it is one that we need to fix – and that is something that leading raiding guilds can help with by posting realistic raiding guides and builds for professions like scrappers, reapers, dps mesmers, guardians, etc – and by providing tips, spreadsheets and videos that show that these professions/playstyles do not drop the dps of the raid squad significantly when they replace the current go to professions (ele, warrior, daredevil).
Why should they do anything if they are going to be attacked by posts like this? You could also make these spreadsheets and guides.
Absolutely nothing in that response was meant to be an attack. Calm down – focus on the conversation – and once stop trying to make every post into a personal attack. It is unproductive and only derails conversations.
Back on topic -
I do still believe there is a problem with the performance gap between the top and bottom performers right now. When I see groups with certain professions in the game right now, they tend to fail at the fights much more than those with the top performing ones.
At the same time, I am willing to admit my perception may be flawed. If players out there can provide the evidence and support that these professions/playstyles are indeed worth bringing (for average starting out raiders – not talking about speed running or other things that raiders can do after they’ve downed it 1000 times)- that the gap between them and the popular metabuilds are indeed close enough that this is a non-issue – then I welcome those posts and feedback. They would – definitely – make this entire conversation a non-issue.
So please, if you (anyone) can provide that kind of data and community support, do so. Prove threads like this one wrong and help make raids a friendlier and more inclusive place. I would love to see that happen.
(edited by Blaeys.3102)
The gap in performance between professions – ESPECIALLY in terms of pure dps output and boon sharing – is far too wide to be healthy for the game.
I don’t think the data supports your position. The gaps between dps classws are relatively small and the differences largely situational. The only issue is that the pug community always seeks a one size fits all solution so they just “learn” ele is best and don’t bother understanding when it isnt.
“If you ignore chrono warrior druid necro all the classes have similar DPS”. Come on man, you know it isn’t fair to just look at the DPS classes. Chrono contributes likely well over 50k group DPS. You probably have a better idea of warrior than me but I’m sure it is something similarly absurd, as is druid if you consider the ability to maintain damage boosts due to healing.
Necro damage is like 2/3 of the other DPS classes unless you are running a comp built around stacking epi bounces, in which case your other classes’ DPS will suffer anyway.
Even besides that, staff ele on large hitboxes is 30-40% better than the other DPS classes (depending on which class and boss), which would be fine except “large hitboxes” is 3/7 fights. That’s beyond “largely situational” to me, especially considering the magnitude of the DPS discrepancy.
I definitely agree with the idea that newer players get it in their head way too often that bringing an ele will always increase DPS and ignore the particulars of their situation. I’ve seen plenty of hilarious 3-4 ele comps on matthias and VG that are constantly rezzing. But there are large gaps in class DPS in raids, and there, are definitely even larger gaps in terms of overall performance based on available utility skills and traits, and these gaps are wide enough to make certain classes essentially mandatory and others essentially unusable (at least to the extent that anything can be mandatory / unusable given how little DPS is actually required).
(edited by Dinosaurs.8674)
I wasn’t referring to the indirect dps contributed by support classes. I was speaking specifically to the “dps classes.”
I don’t think anyone would disagree with you that necro is in huge need of a buff.
www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
You can all continue to argue that these changes screw with optimal builds/compositions, but that really ignores the fundamental concept that the raids aren’t designed and balanced around those optimal builds/compositions in the first place and therefore, that argument is entirely irrelevant.
I mean, the whole statement that if you don’t choose the optimal composition, your performance degrades goes without saying. The only real problem that anyone should be concerned about is when the number of compositions that are solutions to raids becomes dangerously low. That actually doesn’t happen in raids … not yet anyways.
The real problem you see is that players artificially lower the number of solution compositions, not Anet. This is a player perception issue and people are using class changes as scapegoats for their own perception of what works and not work.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
All I’m saying is there’s no need to play ignorant and say nothing changed. Things changed, there were consequences. Some people care about these consequences which is why they made this topic. Whether you feel they’re ridiculous or not is another matter entirely which I’m not going to discuss with you.
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
You can all continue to argue that these changes screw with optimal builds/compositions, but that really ignores the fundamental concept that the raids aren’t designed and balanced around those optimal builds/compositions in the first place and therefore, that argument is entirely irrelevant.
I mean, the whole statement that if you don’t choose the optimal composition, your performance degrades goes without saying. The only real problem that anyone should be concerned about is when the number of compositions that are solutions to raids becomes dangerously low. That actually doesn’t happen in raids … not yet anyways.
The real problem you see is that players artificially lower the number of solution compositions, not Anet. This is a player perception issue and people are using class changes as scapegoats for their own perception of what works and not work.
Is there room to meet in the middle here?
Currently, all bosses are beatable with less than 10 players. Under your view, then, it would be acceptable for a class to have 50% effectiveness than another because the boss would still be beatable if you brought that sub-optimal class as the tenth player.
It seems wrong to just ignore inter-class balance just because the bosses are still beatable.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
Having an entire class’ worth dependent on a single skill is a horrible idea. It puts that class in a position where it’s either amazing or total crap depending on the usefulness of the skill, it ruins the class’ flexibility, and it creates a situation where if that skill gets nerfed the class suddenly becomes terrible (i.e. what happened to necro and kindof rev).
Necromancer just needs more damage on its skills in general. Substantial damage buffs to 5-10 skills is probably the way to go.
Engineer has better DPS than other classes that actually get used. It’s is total crap because it needs all its utility slots to deal that damage and – despite being a “jack of all trades” class – is completely inflexible and unable to change skills or traits without losing a substantial amount of damage. I’ve written this elsewhere but I think best way to address these problems in pve is:
1.) In the explosives line, Glass Cannon (and maybe Shaped Charge) removed and replaced with something more specific to explosives
2.) Pistol autoattack bleed damage increased, rifle auto damage increased, hammer damage substantially increased.
3.) Alchemy line gains a trait which increases damage on allies affected by elixers.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
Having an entire class’ worth dependent on a single skill is a horrible idea. It puts that class in a position where it’s either amazing or total crap depending on the usefulness of the skill, it ruins the class’ flexibility, and it creates a situation where if that skill gets nerfed the class suddenly becomes terrible (i.e. what happened to necro and kindof rev).
Necromancer just needs more damage on its skills in general. Substantial damage buffs to 5-10 skills is probably the way to go.
Engineer has better DPS than other classes that actually get used. It’s is total crap because it needs all its utility slots to deal that damage and – despite being a “jack of all trades” class – is completely inflexible and unable to change skills or traits without losing a substantial amount of damage. I’ve written this elsewhere but I think best way to address these problems in pve is:
1.) In the explosives line, Glass Cannon (and maybe Shaped Charge) removed and replaced with something more specific to explosives
2.) Pistol autoattack bleed damage increased, rifle auto damage increased, hammer damage substantially increased.
3.) Alchemy line gains a trait which increases damage on allies affected by elixers.
These are fair points, but I don’t think the developers have the desire or the means for complete structural changes.
I view these as quick fixes that immediately give these classes more of a spot on the team.
I agree that more expansive changes are ideal. The resources for them seem lacking though.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
All I’m saying is there’s no need to play ignorant and say nothing changed. Things changed, there were consequences. Some people care about these consequences which is why they made this topic. Whether you feel they’re ridiculous or not is another matter entirely which I’m not going to discuss with you.
Well, that wasn’t my claim … it was the other guy so /shrug
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
You can all continue to argue that these changes screw with optimal builds/compositions, but that really ignores the fundamental concept that the raids aren’t designed and balanced around those optimal builds/compositions in the first place and therefore, that argument is entirely irrelevant.
I mean, the whole statement that if you don’t choose the optimal composition, your performance degrades goes without saying. The only real problem that anyone should be concerned about is when the number of compositions that are solutions to raids becomes dangerously low. That actually doesn’t happen in raids … not yet anyways.
The real problem you see is that players artificially lower the number of solution compositions, not Anet. This is a player perception issue and people are using class changes as scapegoats for their own perception of what works and not work.
Is there room to meet in the middle here?
Currently, all bosses are beatable with less than 10 players. Under your view, then, it would be acceptable for a class to have 50% effectiveness than another because the boss would still be beatable if you brought that sub-optimal class as the tenth player.
It seems wrong to just ignore inter-class balance just because the bosses are still beatable.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
I’m not saying there aren’t opportunities for individual class improvements that could make them more raid-desirable. In fact, it might not be obvious, but I think that’s why these kinds of class changes are made; even though they are nerfs, they give Anet the ability to maneuver with changes to the class later.
I’m sure this isn’t the proper thread to discuss those things. Those kind of useful suggestions just lost in the “OMG Anet ruined the game” noise this thread started out as.
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
You can all continue to argue that these changes screw with optimal builds/compositions, but that really ignores the fundamental concept that the raids aren’t designed and balanced around those optimal builds/compositions in the first place and therefore, that argument is entirely irrelevant.
I mean, the whole statement that if you don’t choose the optimal composition, your performance degrades goes without saying. The only real problem that anyone should be concerned about is when the number of compositions that are solutions to raids becomes dangerously low. That actually doesn’t happen in raids … not yet anyways.
The real problem you see is that players artificially lower the number of solution compositions, not Anet. This is a player perception issue and people are using class changes as scapegoats for their own perception of what works and not work.
Is there room to meet in the middle here?
Currently, all bosses are beatable with less than 10 players. Under your view, then, it would be acceptable for a class to have 50% effectiveness than another because the boss would still be beatable if you brought that sub-optimal class as the tenth player.
It seems wrong to just ignore inter-class balance just because the bosses are still beatable.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
I’m not saying there aren’t opportunities for individual class improvements that could make them more raid-desirable. In fact, it might not be obvious, but I think that’s why these kinds of class changes are made; even though they are nerfs, they give Anet the ability to maneuver with changes to the class later.
I’m sure this isn’t the proper thread to discuss those things. Those kind of useful suggestions just lost in the “OMG Anet ruined the game” noise this thread started out as.
I’m not sure I follow this logic: make a class less desirable now, so it’s more desirable in the future? If that’s the goal, then they would couple those changes. As it stands, it just makes certain classes less desirable for an undefined period of time.
I agree the OP was hyperbolic, but I don’t think even the OP seriously argued that position. Just click-bait to start the thread.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
Having an entire class’ worth dependent on a single skill is a horrible idea. It puts that class in a position where it’s either amazing or total crap depending on the usefulness of the skill, it ruins the class’ flexibility, and it creates a situation where if that skill gets nerfed the class suddenly becomes terrible (i.e. what happened to necro and kindof rev).
Necromancer just needs more damage on its skills in general. Substantial damage buffs to 5-10 skills is probably the way to go.
Engineer has better DPS than other classes that actually get used. It’s is total crap because it needs all its utility slots to deal that damage and – despite being a “jack of all trades” class – is completely inflexible and unable to change skills or traits without losing a substantial amount of damage. I’ve written this elsewhere but I think best way to address these problems in pve is:
1.) In the explosives line, Glass Cannon (and maybe Shaped Charge) removed and replaced with something more specific to explosives
2.) Pistol autoattack bleed damage increased, rifle auto damage increased, hammer damage substantially increased.
3.) Alchemy line gains a trait which increases damage on allies affected by elixers.These are fair points, but I don’t think the developers have the desire or the means for complete structural changes.
I view these as quick fixes that immediately give these classes more of a spot on the team.
I agree that more expansive changes are ideal. The resources for them seem lacking though.
For necromancer I don’t see why it’s an issue. In the last patch something like 6 skills received damage buffs. If they had just made the numbers bigger for pve necro would be in a fine spot (albeit with power builds). Besides the existence of epidemic necro is actually a well designed class in pve, it just needs a numbers buff on scepter 1 2 3 dagger 5 and some power skills (I’m fairly ignorant about those so I can’t comment on which ones).
For engineer though you are right, I doubt even a minor rework is anywhere on anet’s radar. As an engi main it’s sad but that’s probably the way it is. Still, a very easy quick fix for engineer would be to buff weapon autoattack damage. If weapon damage were comparable to at least one kit’s damage for any build it would open up at least one utility slot. If the hammer auto was good enough then the scrapper line could be taken as well.
These kinds of numbers buffs happen every single patch so I don’t see why it would be difficult.
(edited by Dinosaurs.8674)
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
Having an entire class’ worth dependent on a single skill is a horrible idea. It puts that class in a position where it’s either amazing or total crap depending on the usefulness of the skill, it ruins the class’ flexibility, and it creates a situation where if that skill gets nerfed the class suddenly becomes terrible (i.e. what happened to necro and kindof rev).
Necromancer just needs more damage on its skills in general. Substantial damage buffs to 5-10 skills is probably the way to go.
Engineer has better DPS than other classes that actually get used. It’s is total crap because it needs all its utility slots to deal that damage and – despite being a “jack of all trades” class – is completely inflexible and unable to change skills or traits without losing a substantial amount of damage. I’ve written this elsewhere but I think best way to address these problems in pve is:
1.) In the explosives line, Glass Cannon (and maybe Shaped Charge) removed and replaced with something more specific to explosives
2.) Pistol autoattack bleed damage increased, rifle auto damage increased, hammer damage substantially increased.
3.) Alchemy line gains a trait which increases damage on allies affected by elixers.These are fair points, but I don’t think the developers have the desire or the means for complete structural changes.
I view these as quick fixes that immediately give these classes more of a spot on the team.
I agree that more expansive changes are ideal. The resources for them seem lacking though.
For necromancer I don’t see why it’s an issue. In the last patch something like 6 skills received damage buffs. If they had just made the numbers bigger for pve necro would be in a fine spot (albeit with power builds). Besides the existence of epidemic necro is actually a well designed class in pve, it just needs a numbers buff on scepter 1 2 3 dagger 5 and some power skills (I’m fairly ignorant about those so I can’t comment on which ones).
For engineer though you are right, I doubt even a minor rework is anywhere on anet’s radar. As an engi main it’s sad but that’s probably the way it is. Still, a very easy quick fix for engineer would be to buff weapon autoattack damage. If weapon damage were comparable to at least one kit’s damage for any build it would open up at least one utility slot. If the hammer auto was good enough then the scrapper line could be taken as well.
These kinds of numbers buffs happen every single patch so I don’t see why it would be difficult.
The numbers buff on necro was, well, sad. I’m not even sure what the point was. It gives little confidence that anet has the drive to do it.
Well, I guess the guy complaining about how hard it is to complete raids with the new changes is wrong then. If it’s not harder to complete raids, then there isn’t really a problem here. I’m glad we can agree that this thread is really unnecessary complaining.
I mean, if after all this, your response is “nothing changed” then my response is “then nothing to complain about”. Anet spent their time, put in some changes they wanted and if the result is zero sum effect on raids, then all this complaining is for nothing …
Now, I’m pretty sure you’re going to come back and change up your tune a little bit because certainly, anyone can see that this does affect the way people think about how they do raids and make the comps … YES? So perhaps glib answers aren’t so good if you are being honest about including yourself in a discussion?
Furthermore, as I’ve already illustrated, Inclusivity is not restricted by optimal comps because raids can be completed with non-optimal comps. So, no, that association is nonsense.
The point people have been making for 9 pages now is this:
Before changes: More classes are optimal, more comps (5-5, 4-4-2, 5-4-2, 7-2-1) are used without any big significant differences.
After changes: Less classes are optimal and if you use anything else aside from the 5-5 comp you see a significant change in performance.
Now whether you care about optimal or not is entirely your opnion and if you wanna believe it’s unnecessary complaining then so be it. But there’s no need to play ignorant. You know what changed and there’s no need to dismiss that.
I never argued what is optimal so don’t bother making that a point to argue with me.
You can all continue to argue that these changes screw with optimal builds/compositions, but that really ignores the fundamental concept that the raids aren’t designed and balanced around those optimal builds/compositions in the first place and therefore, that argument is entirely irrelevant.
I mean, the whole statement that if you don’t choose the optimal composition, your performance degrades goes without saying. The only real problem that anyone should be concerned about is when the number of compositions that are solutions to raids becomes dangerously low. That actually doesn’t happen in raids … not yet anyways.
The real problem you see is that players artificially lower the number of solution compositions, not Anet. This is a player perception issue and people are using class changes as scapegoats for their own perception of what works and not work.
Is there room to meet in the middle here?
Currently, all bosses are beatable with less than 10 players. Under your view, then, it would be acceptable for a class to have 50% effectiveness than another because the boss would still be beatable if you brought that sub-optimal class as the tenth player.
It seems wrong to just ignore inter-class balance just because the bosses are still beatable.
There seems to be 2 low-hanging fruit already: necro and engie.
Necro dps is low compared to other dps classes. I would recommend reverting the lich form nerf.
Engie dps is complicated. That said, groups brought them before the slick shoes nerf because of its excellent cc. I would recommend reverting the slick shoes nerf, at least for pve.
There’s other problems with balance, but I believe these are easy fixes that would make these classes more desirable, even if they’re not optimal.
I’m not saying there aren’t opportunities for individual class improvements that could make them more raid-desirable. In fact, it might not be obvious, but I think that’s why these kinds of class changes are made; even though they are nerfs, they give Anet the ability to maneuver with changes to the class later.
I’m sure this isn’t the proper thread to discuss those things. Those kind of useful suggestions just lost in the “OMG Anet ruined the game” noise this thread started out as.
I’m not sure I follow this logic: make a class less desirable now, so it’s more desirable in the future? If that’s the goal, then they would couple those changes. As it stands, it just makes certain classes less desirable for an undefined period of time.
I agree the OP was hyperbolic, but I don’t think even the OP seriously argued that position. Just click-bait to start the thread.
I don’t think the motivation for the nerfs are about balancing desire to play a class, at least not directly. So yeah, that logic probably doesn’t make sense in that perspective; I doubt that Anet really cares what classes get played more than others. Frankly, if the class changes make those classes less desirable to play, that alone increases the diversity that people will have for raid comps.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Anet does understand how their changes affect how players ‘solve’ raids … that’s why they make those changes.
Now that’s something I seriously doubt when I think of the consequences the last round of balancing had.
Really? Do you care to explain why? Let me start: Here is why I think it’s true:
Primarily, because raids were too easy with excessive boon durations and sharing.
Secondly, because the compositions were biased too much against unfavoured classesSo basically, if Anet is advertising an inclusive and challenging raiding environment, everything that got nerfed moves them in that direction.
Uhm what?
We still have the same amount of boonsharing, the chrono build actually got easier and there’s more classes getting knocked out now or only being able to join under very specific circumstances if at all. On top of that there’s more slots “fixed” than before, leaving less space for “random classes”.
So what are you trying to prove right now?
Besides, even if you don’t want to accept it, yes, ANet balance has a direct effect on how the meta looks like and what is being played and what is not. “B-but you can run 10 eles and still be fine!” yes you can, doesn’t matter. Players are trying to clear content in a timely manner with a comp that makes as much sense as possible while having a hopefully easy time, path of least resistance and whatnot. There is no reason for anyone to make it harder on themselves by dropping things as crucial as chronos, druids and PS-wars, just like you wouldn’t make it harder on yourself in real life except when you are looking for a challenge. And believe me, most players who are in for their weekly kills are not. Yes, it’s anet’s fault, simple as that.
//Oh I was a page behind, rip
(edited by NovaanVerdiano.6174)
Frankly, if the class changes make those classes less desirable to play, that alone increases the diversity that people will have for raid comps.
Suuure. Making less classes desirable for raids will increase the diversity somehow. Because reasons.
Really, you might want to check what diversity actually means, because it seems to me you are using some really nonstandard definition here.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Frankly, if the class changes make those classes less desirable to play, that alone increases the diversity that people will have for raid comps.
Suuure. Making less classes desirable for raids will increase the diversity somehow. Because reasons.
Really, you might want to check what diversity actually means, because it seems to me you are using some really nonstandard definition here.
What he’s saying isn’t necessarily wrong. Suppose that there were one class that were so much better than all others, such that every slot went to that class. All other classes are equally good. Then suppose the superclass got nerfed into the ground. Suddenly eight classes are great instead of just one. This could also happen if the nerfed class filled multiple specific niches that are difficult to fill otherwise.
Of course, just because it is theoretically possible doesn’t mean it is true in this particular case. And in this case it is pretty obvious that the nerfs to chrono, rev, and necro did in fact reduce class diversity. Necro dps is so far behind the other classes that bringing one will add substantial time to a boss kill. Revenant is strictly worse than guardian in most cases. Chrono is worse but still OP as hell so two is optimal and the number of “free” slots in a comp is down to four. Increased alacrity makes ele generally preferable to the utility-dry thief.
Honestly the current patch is far superior to the previous one in terms of gameplay, since it turns out that necro and rev were somewhat of a crutch in a few fights, but claiming that diversity was not reduced is absurd.
Frankly, if the class changes make those classes less desirable to play, that alone increases the diversity that people will have for raid comps.
Suuure. Making less classes desirable for raids will increase the diversity somehow.
When no one is exceptional, everyone is average. When everyone is average, there isn’t a reason to exclude people. That might be hard for someone that doesn’t understand what average is or that doesn’t understand that you don’t need optimal to succeed in raids, but nonetheless, it works. Whether you believe it or not is not a prerequisite to it being true.
Are we there yet? Probably not, but these changes are putting things in that direction. You can deny it if you like or believe it; neither is relevant. What matters is that it’s happening because Anet wants it to. You’re choice is to adapt or be miserable.
What he’s saying isn’t necessarily wrong. Suppose that there were one class that were so much better than all others, such that every slot went to that class. All other classes are equally good. Then suppose the superclass got nerfed into the ground. Suddenly eight classes are great instead of just one. This could also happen if the nerfed class filled multiple specific niches that are difficult to fill otherwise.
What your said makes sense. But in this case here, there’s little doubt abt what the supposed ‘superclass’ is now. This class obviously has 4 reserved slots in any group on most encounters, like double what every other class has. This part of reason why it’s sooo much easier to get a temp when u post for it than even a ps warrior, I mean c’mon.
Look I get it everyone’s hesitant to talk abt the elephant in the room so ill do that now. Ele dps is just ridiculous atm – it was alrdy always insanely op but now it’s gone too far. When u think abt a class that can reach close to 50k dps while almost all other class struggling to get half that, u know something wrong. Warrior meta dps was already pathetic to begin with, now it’s even more pathetic that it downright laughable when u put it in perspective. Warrior is what, mid 20ish dps.. compared to insane op damage that is made even more insanely op with alacrity and quickness? It’s like fighting swords with sticks.. no competition at all. /bows
So now that elephant has been saluted and recognised, I continue to speculate abt future patch. Ele being superclass atm will get nerfed to the ground, or other class be buffed. It’s simple rly.. and before anyone throw their hand up and say the end is nigh, I give one reason why this will be good thing:
- Pugs who struggle with eles, as they should
I rest my case. When u think abt amount of players who botch rotations on ele or are first to step up and sacrifice themselces without no preamble or purpose for grp, what u will realise is that their dps nerf has not been a complete nerf. It is a blessing in disguise that will actually stabilise diversity and dps overall
(edited by nagr.1593)
Frankly, if the class changes make those classes less desirable to play, that alone increases the diversity that people will have for raid comps.
Suuure. Making less classes desirable for raids will increase the diversity somehow.
When no one is exceptional, everyone is average. When everyone is average, there isn’t a reason to exclude people. That might be hard for someone that doesn’t understand what average is or that doesn’t understand that you don’t need optimal to succeed in raids, but nonetheless, it works. Whether you believe it or not is not a prerequisite to it being true.
Are we there yet? Probably not, but these changes are putting things in that direction. You can deny it if you like or believe it; neither is relevant. What matters is that it’s happening because Anet wants it to. You’re choice is to adapt or be miserable.
If you think that changes to necro were moving them from OP to average, then we really are playing a different game.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
So now that elephant has been saluted and recognised, I continue to speculate abt future patch. Ele being superclass atm will get nerfed to the ground, or other class be buffed. It’s simple rly.. and before anyone throw their hand up and say the end is nigh, I give one reason why this will be good thing:
Eles do not survive on their own, they require others to keep them alive, hugging the healer of the group is common practice. It might also come as a shock, but Ele dps is not sky high without all the stacking damage buffs they get from Warriors, Rangers, Mesmers and Might stacking.
Sure one way to increase diversity is to make Ele dps comparable to the dps of others. But that wouldn’t solve the problem of certain buff builds overshadowing everyone else. Spreading the buffs can also increase diversity (not stacking obviously)
Ele is hardly the superclass, LFG just treats it that way.
True, Ele is not superclass but it’s closest thing we have to one atm
The LFG excuse can be made for virtually any other niche class.
Point is with how pug mentality is now, they will blindly follow meta from fear of them running out of options and running around like headless chickens, which is a very realistic possibility.
So maybe 9/10 pugs will blindly fill niche roles of chrono, war, druid, and ele, with necro as possible replacement for ele.
Before recent balance patch, correct me if I’m wrong since I’ve not been doing this long but more empty slots meant they would be filled with ele anyway. as it is now ele still have 200% more in demand than all other class, which mean they’re leading superclass atm
I wish that was end of problem but it not. In very realistic situation, ~40k dps for ele is near optimal but possible. Using well known fact that pugs are awful at picking up new classes, when u add on skill lvl require of ele a well, u arrive at average dps of 30k, which is a lot worse. This might need to be adjusted for downed and dead dps as well, who knows
So that’s abt 40k dps gap between pro guild groups who run every week and pugs who aren’t that proficient with superclass.. thats a lot. You can fit in 1-2 classes to fill this gap between them in term of lacking dps. So if ele dps is more stabilized or lowered, then u will increase diversity and maintain dps at same time. Dunno that’s just my hunch
If I’m reading these comments right, you guys want ele nerfed to be easier to play so there is less gap between a good ele and a bad one, right?
www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt
If I’m reading these comments right, you guys want ele nerfed to be easier to play so there is less gap between a good ele and a bad one, right?
What I think they’re on about is to keep the difference between a good and bad ele, but making it more in line with the dps of other classes. That’s what I get from this.