(edited by Raine.1394)
Berserker is not overpowered! (with math)
1 2
While the numbers in the OP do provide a consistent baseline I’m skeptical that they accurately depict the real state of combat. A lot of factors (dodging, poison, kiting, stealth, control) are omitted, and they benefit the Berserker more than they benefit the Soldier, as far as I can tell. My 2c.
When it’s possible to Endure Pain, Reflect and dodge every incoming attack, are Soldier’s and Zerks balanced?
Nalhadia – Kaineng
(edited by Sarrs.4831)
I’d totally agree with the source of the problem being the ways that the encounters are designed. My issue is that you (and the OP) seem to be doing this:
1) If you ignore dodge Zerker is balanced
2) If the mechanics weren’t so broken Zerker is balanced
Right now, for PvE, Zerker is by far the best gear for pretty much every class in pretty much every encounter. You could say that the other classes need to be brought up instead of bringing down Zerker.
I think that’s irrelevant.
Zerker is better than everything else.
Fixing that should include changes to the mechanics, changes to the encounters, changes to condition stacks, changes to attack speed of mobs, changes to downscaling. Lots of changes.
I just think it’s ridiculous how strongly people react to a minor rebalancing of gear. Oh, your Hundred Blades is only going to hit for 22k instead of 24k now?
You can call it a nerf. I call it bad balancing from the start that’s finally getting fixed.
Karaoke – Guild Leader – [MEGA] Super Mega Happy Fun Time
www.getunicorned.com / northernshiverpeaks.org
www.getunicorned.com / northernshiverpeaks.org
While the numbers in the OP do provide a consistent baseline I’m skeptical that they accurately depict the real state of combat. A lot of factors (dodging, poison, kiting, stealth, control) are omitted, and they benefit the Berserker more than they benefit the Soldier, as far as I can tell. My 2c.
“dodging, poison, kiting, stealth, control” are all significant factors in combat. However, they are aspects of combat that depend on player skill to apply. They may be present they may not be present. Gear will always be present. If you are addressing gear, you want to assume equal skill and so you exclude or hold constant to the degree possible variables other than gear. You can, of course, evaluate various assumptions about variable states, and you’re free to do so if you believe the combination is material. BTW, if you read the first page we cover this ground in more detail.
How is PVP involved in the problem of the berserker gear?
Berserkers is primarily pve problem, pvp has nothing to do with this.
Ergo your math is pointless.
Not true. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that the game is balanced around PvP. In PvP, there are way more complaints about survival builds than there are about direct damage builds. With Ferocity not extending to PvP, the only PvP area affected by the coming change is WvW. While WvW was never “meant” to be balanced, there is always a question of fairness that accompanies any nerf. Seeing the math – while it’s limited in scope due to being based on one profession and one combat style — is still instructive. Having more data is never a bad thing, as long as it’s not out and out wrong.
Ferocity could have been implemented with no adjustment to critical damage percentage. Instead, it looks like top DPS builds are getting hit for 10%, with lesser DPS builds taking a smaller hit. Denying that this change will impact berserker builds in WvW — where they’re already considered too risky for all but the best players — is ignoring an issue for part of the community. That the WvW community gets ignored a lot does not make this fair or right.
__________________________________________________________________
In PvE, the reduction looks oddly similar to the damage attributed to the addition of Ascended gear. I’ve always felt there was something skewed about Ascended gear – and that was that critical % was too good.
The PvE dungeon meta has favored DPS since the game launched. However, the opposition to the preference for berserker has gotten more vehement since Ascended was added. Even ANet realized that critical damage % on Ascended trinkets was too good — the % increase on weapons and armor is miniscule to non-existent. It’s a pity that those who bought into, “The difference is insignificant, you can just ignore Ascended.” look to be getting hit as well.
Make no mistake, the Ferocity Crit % nerf is nothing but Anet correcting what they perceive to be the mistake of boosting critical damage too much via Ascended gear. Whether further changes will be made to address the real issue — the poor performance of other gear sets in PvE — remains to be seen.
I’d totally agree with the source of the problem being the ways that the encounters are designed. My issue is that you (and the OP) seem to be doing this:
1) If you ignore dodge Zerker is balanced
2) If the mechanics weren’t so broken Zerker is balancedRight now, for PvE, Zerker is by far the best gear for pretty much every class in pretty much every encounter. You could say that the other classes need to be brought up instead of bringing down Zerker.
I think that’s irrelevant.
Zerker is better than everything else.
Fixing that should include changes to the mechanics, changes to the encounters, changes to condition stacks, changes to attack speed of mobs, changes to downscaling. Lots of changes.
I just think it’s ridiculous how strongly people react to a minor rebalancing of gear. Oh, your Hundred Blades is only going to hit for 22k instead of 24k now?
You can call it a nerf. I call it bad balancing from the start that’s finally getting fixed.
The point of the OP is that the problem is not with the gear and I agree completely. You can degrade the success of a good DPS builds in unpredictable ways by nerfing the gear, but why would you do that if gear is not the problem?
(Edit: what I mean by this is that it won’t change anything in terms of enhancing the diversity of builds or gear sets. The best option will still be the now degraded gear and it won’t change the mix, it will just degrade performance a bit. It won’t solve the problem of the ‘zerker meta’. In fact, it won’t change anything materially at all. So, why do it? I, personally, believe the ‘zerker meta’ is a problem. If you agree with that why not address the problem.)
And, you mix issues by talking about warriors. Warriors fall into class balance and they may or may not need balancing. Interesting that the thread was moved to profession balance when it really had nothing to do with profession balance per se. But, since we are here, I suppose we have license to go for it.
(edited by Raine.1394)
“dodging, poison, kiting, stealth, control” are all significant factors in combat. However, they are aspects of combat that depend on player skill to apply. They may be present they may not be present. Gear will always be present. If you are addressing gear, you want to assume equal skill and so you exclude or hold constant to the degree possible variables other than gear. You can, of course, evaluate various assumptions about variable states, and you’re free to do so if you believe the combination is material. BTW, if you read the first page we cover this ground in more detail.
I’m fishing through and quite frankly I’m not particularly smart so a lot of it is going over my head.
The point of the OP is that the problem is not with the gear and I agree completely. You can degrade the success of a good DPS builds in unpredictable ways by nerfing the gear, but why would you do that if gear is not the problem?
The gear isn’t the problem when it’s analyzed in a vacuum, and the skills and game mechanics on their own aren’t a problem when they’re analyzed in a vacuum. The problem is the product of the two. I’m sorry I can’t really express myself much better at the moment, and maybe I’ll revisit the thread once I can collect my thoughts a bit better, but that’s why I think studying gear in a vacuum is disingenuous.
Nalhadia – Kaineng
Remove the hole stuff like berseker, kngith and create a celestial thing so everything is even.
If zerker gear is going to be nerfed, why anet won’t do anything with soldiers which are clearly strong in wvw?
If one set of armor is much stronger than another, there is a fundamental problem in deisgn right? Each provides the same level of stats (well except celestial but that is supposed to be the all mediocre model). What that means is that some stats are simply too valuable. What that implies is that the balance of offense to defense is wrong or the balance of physical to condition damage is wrong, etc.
That should be the underlying issue to get fixed versus the set.
All stats should be equally efficient.
If one set of armor is much stronger than another, there is a fundamental problem in deisgn right? Each provides the same level of stats (well except celestial but that is supposed to be the all mediocre model). What that means is that some stats are simply too valuable. What that implies is that the balance of offense to defense is wrong or the balance of physical to condition damage is wrong, etc.
That should be the underlying issue to get fixed versus the set.
All stats should be equally efficient.
Stat allocations on gear are all about trade-offs. It’s things like damage and survivability or direct damage and damage over time. And, of course, huge differences in stats between power and health would have to be addressed as peaks and valleys.
My problem with those who want to nerf zerker gear is that it won’t do anything or change anything of significance. Is the problem the zerker meta? Berserker gear will still be the highest DPS gear. Since we have only one combat role, DPS, Berserker gear will still be preferred in exactly the same proportions.
Is the problem the lack of diversity of gearsets? It won’t change anything here. Again, because DPS is the only thing that matters Berserker will still be king. You can’t address the condition damage problem through gear so nothing will change there. Condition damage is broken by the fact that it is managed as stacks on a mob rather than as damage by player. If you add 5 more necros to a group you’re adding a bit of white damage. Nerfing zerker won’t mean that parties are going to start beating down the necros’ door. Nothing will change here.
If you nerf zerker it does nothing to change the balance of anything…except of players vs the environment. It effectively lowers the power level of the game. This is were the speculation above about this being a balance to ascended gear becomes interesting. At any rate it won’t do anything that people think it’s addressing. If we think that it is doing something, we may put off doing those things which will fix true problems.
(edited by Raine.1394)
The issue with Zerker is actually very obvious. Part 1 is encounter design, but part 2 is indeed the stats themselves. Here’s why-
Precision masquerades as a normal additive stat but is actually a % multiplicative stat. Zerker (and its subordinates) are the only sets in the game that have bonuses to two % stats that directly affect each other. This creates a very obvious issue with relative scaling -
In a nutshell, zerker stats are backloaded, where all other stat combos are frontloaded. Zerker stats are weak at the baseline but scale hyperbolically. Other stats are healthy at the baseline and scale linearly with moderate diminishing returns. This can be seen as easily on a level 30 toon (where direct damage skills are weaker than condition skills) as it can be on a top-geared 80 (where it’s the opposite).
Changing crit damage from a percent to an additive stat was actually a very good move to make the whole system more scalable, and that’s how it should have originally been implemented, because that’s how it works for every other ‘grouping’. Now, direct damage will have a stronger baseline and scale in a more linear fashion, making it much easier to both achieve and maintain relative balance (assuming Anet doesn’t drop the ball somewhere).
Of course, it’s clearly not the only thing that needs adjusting, but it’s the best starting point.
(edited by Einlanzer.1627)
The issue with Zerker is actually very obvious. Part 1 is encounter design, but part 2 is indeed the stats themselves. Here’s why-
Precision masquerades as a normal additive stat but is actually a % multiplicative stat. Zerker (and its subordinates) are the only sets in the game that have bonuses to two % stats that directly affect each other. This creates a very obvious issue with relative scaling -
In a nutshell, zerker stats are backloaded, where all other stat combos are frontloaded. Zerker stats are weak at the baseline but scale hyperbolically. Other stats are healthy at the baseline and scale linearly with moderate diminishing returns. This can be seen as easily on a level 30 toon (where direct damage skills are weaker than condition skills) as it can be on a top-geared 80 (where it’s the opposite).
Changing crit damage from a percent to an additive stat was actually a very good move to make the whole system more scalable, and that’s how it should have originally been implemented, because that’s how it works for every other ‘grouping’. Now, direct damage will have a stronger baseline and scale in a more linear fashion, making it much easier to both achieve and maintain relative balance (assuming Anet doesn’t drop the ball somewhere).
Of course, it’s clearly not the only thing that needs adjusting, but it’s the best starting point.
The issue with zerker is obvious and combat mechanics are part of the answer. For most people the zerker issue is the ‘zerker meta’ where people feel that zerker gear is required and there is discrimination against other gearsets. Because stat allocations are, in this case, about trade-offs between damage and survivability, there will always be one gearset that provides the highest damage with adequate survivability. When the current changes are implemented, the damage will decrease by 10%. But, zerker gear will still be the highest damage. The nerf will not have changed the zerker issue and relative use of gearsets.
If you look up a a couple posts I described why any reasonable change to zerker will have no affect whatsoever in the direct damage/Condition damage gear choices. The numbers will be different, but direct damage (zerker) will still be preferred.
The number one issue for the commonly understood zerker problem is simply that GW2 combat has only one effective combat role at present and there will always be one gearset that confers the highest damage with adequate survivability. You can change the stat allocations all you want and this will not change. You may change the name of the gearset with enough monkeying around but you won’t address the problem of everyone preferring the same one. The problem has to be addressed by rethinking combat in terms of mechanics certainly but also combat roles. The problem, remember, is that we only have one role, DPS. We don’t necessarily need to add set roles, but certainly effective equivalents.
The only thing the 10% nerf does is effectively lower the power level of the game on the player side.
Edit: So, for all you zerkers who grinded out the 10% increase of vertical progression in its first year: Anet giveth and Anet taketh away.
(edited by Raine.1394)
The issue with Zerker is actually very obvious. Part 1 is encounter design, but part 2 is indeed the stats themselves. Here’s why-
Precision masquerades as a normal additive stat but is actually a % multiplicative stat. Zerker (and its subordinates) are the only sets in the game that have bonuses to two % stats that directly affect each other. This creates a very obvious issue with relative scaling -
In a nutshell, zerker stats are backloaded, where all other stat combos are frontloaded. Zerker stats are weak at the baseline but scale hyperbolically. Other stats are healthy at the baseline and scale linearly with moderate diminishing returns. This can be seen as easily on a level 30 toon (where direct damage skills are weaker than condition skills) as it can be on a top-geared 80 (where it’s the opposite).
Changing crit damage from a percent to an additive stat was actually a very good move to make the whole system more scalable, and that’s how it should have originally been implemented, because that’s how it works for every other ‘grouping’. Now, direct damage will have a stronger baseline and scale in a more linear fashion, making it much easier to both achieve and maintain relative balance (assuming Anet doesn’t drop the ball somewhere).
Of course, it’s clearly not the only thing that needs adjusting, but it’s the best starting point.
The issue with zerker is obvious and combat mechanics are part of the answer. For most people the zerker issue is the ‘zerker meta’ where people feel that zerker gear is required and there is discrimination against other gearsets. Because stat allocations are, in this case, about trade-offs between damage and survivability, there will always be one gearset that provides the highest damage with adequate survivability. When the current changes are implemented, the damage will decrease by 10%. But, zerker gear will still be the highest damage. The nerf will not have changed the zerker issue and relative use of gearsets.
If you look up a a couple posts I described why any reasonable change to zerker will have no affect whatsoever in the direct damage/Condition damage gear choices. The numbers will be different, but direct damage (zerker) will still be preferred.
The number one issue for the commonly understood zerker problem is simply that GW2 combat has only one effective combat role at present and there will always be one gearset that confers the highest damage with adequate survivability. You can change the stat allocations all you want and this will not change. You may change the name of the gearset with enough monkeying around but you won’t address the problem of everyone preferring the same one. The problem has to be addressed by rethinking combat in terms of mechanics certainly but also combat roles. The problem, remember, is that we only have one role, DPS. We don’t necessarily need to add set roles, but certainly effective equivalents.
The only thing the 10% nerf does is effectively lower the power level of the game on the player side.
Edit: So, for all you zerkers who grinded out the 10% increase of vertical progression in its first year: Anet giveth and Anet taketh away.
I’m not necessarily arguing against those points, I just think people aren’t seeing the bigger picture. Sure, Zerker gear will still be the most common. Sure, encounters and mob AI need to be redesigned to fully address the ‘zerker problem’, which includes non-DPS roles being unnecessary and lackluster. Sure, you may deal 10% less damage at the top end of the spectrum. However, the point is that you will feel more functional in sets other than Zerker, which is a good starting point.
Regardless, none of that changes what I said above. There is a scaling issue with the Zerker stats that is playing a role in the problem and is the simplest first step to remedying it. Moreover, the back-loaded nature of the Zerker set results in a wonky framework that is impossible to sustain balance within. Specifically because of how crit damage % is designed, Zerker will always be too strong (like it is at top tier) or too weak (like it is while leveling) relative to other sets.
They needed to make this change to bring the various stat combinations into roughly the same design schema so they can gauge and maintain better relative balance and improve scalability for the whole system.
I do hope, though, that they don’t drop the ball on the bigger Phase II of redesigning AI and mob stats. To fix the offense > defense problem, they need to make most mobs hit more frequently for less damage. They need to also find a way to resolve the condition cap conundrum, and they need to diversify boons and conditions and further empower healing.
(edited by Einlanzer.1627)
@Einlanzer, I agree with you that it could make people in other gearsets feel better. And, there may be less perceived discrimination. I don’t think anyone will change gearsets.
Scaling can be huge, especially when there is significant gear scaling at max level such as in WoW. Your spec can go down 10-15 levels in relative DPS ranking as you move from ilvl 496 to 561. And, it’s true that it’s much better to scale smoothly from start to max level. But, they could have dialed in the change in such a way that there was no reduction in damage. I think they were addressing the zerker issue politically, but in a way that leaves no significant change; and, I’m not sure (cf this thread) that zerker in terms of raw damage is significantly off on the scale of trade-offs.
Yeah, they have work to do and I, too, hope they don’t drop the ball. I think there is a lot of potential around skill/ability progression and I hope that gets off the ground. A lot of the missing ‘role’ aspect of the problem could be addressed by builds that brought interesting new abilities to the table.
The problem comes from multipliers.
Assuming Critical damage simply added +1000 damage.
Unfortunately, this is not the way it works. One easy way to prove this to yourself is the following: which attack deals more damage: Headshot (Thief) or Kill Shot (Warrior)? Kill Shot, obviously. Now, let’s assume you have 100% critical chance. Does it not follow that a 150% + Extra critical damage buff to Kill Shot will be more beneficial than the same thing to Headshot?
Stats in this game do not work in the way you describe, they work as multipliers- amplifiers- by amounts like 1%, 2%, and so on. Not by amounts of 100 damage, 1000 damage, or whatever.
Critical damage is not the problem. The problem is game mechanics like reflect, corner stacking and even dodging which allows players to avoid damage altogether without any defensive stats and coupled with the fact that everyone has their own healing skill and condition removal and healing and tanking not being viable in this game due to heals being weak and the lack of an aggro system, stacking as much damage as possible and killing things before they kill you will always be the meta.
I second this. Pve in GW2 is 1 dimensional. Big surprise our strategies are 1d too…
However you can’t start fixing fundamental game designs 2 years(?) after release, so they have to hammer kitten until it is broken in a different way (“work around”) at least in order to “fix” what is currently wrong with zerker gear.
(edited by Escadin.9482)
The issue is that ANET is trying to fix a PvE warrior issue by nerfing zerker gear. No one ever said.. “Let’s run COF. Give me 5 zerker mesmers”.
Unfortunately, ANET has a weird balance methodology. Instead of fixing the core problem, they try to make wide scale other changes. Great for job security I guess, but horrible for balance.
At the very least, these changes should be made in PvE and not applied to WvW.
The issue is that ANET is trying to fix a PvE warrior issue by nerfing zerker gear. No one ever said.. “Let’s run COF. Give me 5 zerker mesmers”.
Unfortunately, ANET has a weird balance methodology. Instead of fixing the core problem, they try to make wide scale other changes. Great for job security I guess, but horrible for balance.
At the very least, these changes should be made in PvE and not applied to WvW.
No, they are trying to balance the Zerker gear issue by nerfing Zerker gear. Except they aren’t just nerfing it, they’re redesigning it to fit into the schema that other gear sets use so it in a linear way like every other stat combination does.
Okay, look, here’s the problem: dodging is an active part of the game. Dodging increases the effective HP of the character. It essentially makes Toughness = infinity during the dodge cycle. It does this equally for both the Zerker and Soldier.
What that means is that, if you added in dodge cycles, during that time the Soldier’s toughness does NOTHING. That would alter the calculations a bit.
Furthermore, the Soldier has very low critical chance. There’s lots of on-crit effects, including boons and conditions, which would also alter this calculation. (Vigor on crit, for example, would allow the Zerker to dodge more and increase their effective HP even more.) Conditions on crit mean extra damage.
I know it’s nice to have numbers to go along with things, but these numbers ignore too much of the game (and make too many other assumptions) to be useful as a statement in every game mode.
I guess I’d say it this way: if Zerker is not overpowered in PvE, why is it considered the best gear BY FAR?
(The short answer: because you’re not really fighting a single other player wearing Soldier’s gear… the bosses have huge HP pools but not really a lot of toughness.)
I apologize for my original snark, it was unnecessary and unproductive. But the point I was trying to make still stands: this math, while potentially useful for certain game modes, tells us nothing about the relative power of Zerk vs Soldiers in PvE.
Assuming both players are using the same skills and actions (removing whatever impact player skill or skill interactions would have), dodges would have no impact on the fight other than to drag it out. This would give healing skills more time to come off cool-down which would give the side with the long-term fighting advantage slightly more time to get the upper hand.
That’s a good point about on-crit effects. Builds which used these would benefit berserker more than they would solder, but the overall impact is determined by things like ICDs. If your using something like the guaranteed might on a critical that the warriors greatsword gets then you’ll see a large advantage given to berserker, but things with ICD of a few seconds would be pretty equal between the two. Furthermore, in this next patch vigor on critical will get an increased cool-down and on-crit sigils will be guaranteed to activate on a critical, evening this out further.
Also remember that the tests in my OP are biased towards berserker giving both parties permanent fury and excluding the %HP buff WvW score provides, and if this bias was removed it would likely offset whatever benefit the above provided to berserker.
This test was also directed towards WvW, not PvE. In PvE they could bring down berserker damage to 5% above soldiers and people would still use it because defense has such little importance past a certain point, a point which berserker has already reached. What I was trying to demonstrate with this was that berserker already has trouble competing with soldiers in WvW, and bringing it down there as well as in PvE is not a good route to take.
(edited by Bri.8354)
My comments are bolded and in brackets…
The issue with Zerker is actually very obvious. Part 1 is encounter design, but part 2 is indeed the stats themselves. Here’s why-
Precision masquerades as a normal additive stat but is actually a % multiplicative stat [what? All stats stack up multiplicatively. For instance, a +100 increase in armor to a mesmer will reduce the amount of damage it takes to 94.83% of its original value. It’s not like “if I take X amount of a stat, I will increase Y by Z” where Z is some kind of integer.]. Zerker (and its subordinates) are the only sets in the game that have bonuses to two % stats that directly affect each other [Wrong again. First of all, every defensive stat scales with every other defensive stat (though HealPow’s relationship to Vitality is a bit different), and the same goes for every offensive stat. For instance, if I reduce the amount of direct damage I take by 10% by increasing my toughness, and I also increase my health by 10%, then those two effects stack together- i.e. I live longer than if those stats were independent. To an extent, even offensive stats scale with defensive stats. Second… Again, every stat in the game is a % stat, not some kind of direct integer increase]. This creates a very obvious issue with relative scaling -
In a nutshell, zerker stats are backloaded, where all other stat combos are frontloaded. Zerker stats are weak at the baseline but scale hyperbolically [This isn’t really true. First of all, as mentioned before, due to the scaling of defensive stats related to one another, I can argue that they scale hyperbolically as well. Secondly, and more importantly, however, is that it’s not really a hyperbolic relationship anyways. For instance, in sPvP, putting on a zerker amulet actually decreases the relative values of power and precision. It actually increases the value of critical damage dramatically, but because CritDam can only come in very small quantities anyways, this tends not to matter too much. Also, see note at the end of this post.] Other stats are healthy at the baseline and scale linearly with moderate diminishing returns [Diminishing returns applies just as much to offensive stats. For instance, 1 point of power initially increases your damage by 1.18 times the amount that 1 point of vitality increases your defense. However, increasing your power by a a mere ~165 makes these two stats become the same in terms of strength.] This can be seen as easily on a level 30 toon (where direct damage skills are weaker than condition skills) as it can be on a top-geared 80 (where it’s the opposite) [not necessarily].
Changing crit damage from a percent to an additive stat was actually a very good move to make the whole system more scalable [it already is], and that’s how it should have originally been implemented, because that’s how it works for every other ‘grouping’. Now, direct damage will have a stronger baseline and scale in a more linear fashion [no stat can or does scale in a linear fashion; it’s physically impossible without making the value of other variables effecting that stat’s strength go up at the same time. Economics 101], making it much easier to both achieve and maintain relative balance (assuming Anet doesn’t drop the ball somewhere).
Of course, it’s clearly not the only thing that needs adjusting, but it’s the best starting point.
Note: The question of whether or not offensive or defensive stats scale better with stats of their own type is somewhat controversial. In the final formulas that I use for offensive and defensive amplification, these amounts are indeed multiplied. However, in marginal analysis of these stats, these values are not multiplied together, for a variety of reasons. So it depends on your point of view.
My comments are bolded and in brackets…
The issue with Zerker is actually very obvious. Part 1 is encounter design, but part 2 is indeed the stats themselves. Here’s why-
Precision masquerades as a normal additive stat but is actually a % multiplicative stat [what? All stats stack up multiplicatively. For instance, a +100 increase in armor to a mesmer will reduce the amount of damage it takes to 94.83% of its original value. It’s not like “if I take X amount of a stat, I will increase Y by Z” where Z is some kind of integer.]. Zerker (and its subordinates) are the only sets in the game that have bonuses to two % stats that directly affect each other [Wrong again. First of all, every defensive stat scales with every other defensive stat (though HealPow’s relationship to Vitality is a bit different), and the same goes for every offensive stat. For instance, if I reduce the amount of direct damage I take by 10% by increasing my toughness, and I also increase my health by 10%, then those two effects stack together- i.e. I live longer than if those stats were independent. To an extent, even offensive stats scale with defensive stats. Second… Again, every stat in the game is a % stat, not some kind of direct integer increase]. This creates a very obvious issue with relative scaling -
In a nutshell, zerker stats are backloaded, where all other stat combos are frontloaded. Zerker stats are weak at the baseline but scale hyperbolically [This isn’t really true. First of all, as mentioned before, due to the scaling of defensive stats related to one another, I can argue that they scale hyperbolically as well. Secondly, and more importantly, however, is that it’s not really a hyperbolic relationship anyways. For instance, in sPvP, putting on a zerker amulet actually decreases the relative values of power and precision. It actually increases the value of critical damage dramatically, but because CritDam can only come in very small quantities anyways, this tends not to matter too much. Also, see note at the end of this post.] Other stats are healthy at the baseline and scale linearly with moderate diminishing returns [Diminishing returns applies just as much to offensive stats. For instance, 1 point of power initially increases your damage by 1.18 times the amount that 1 point of vitality increases your defense. However, increasing your power by a a mere ~165 makes these two stats become the same in terms of strength.] This can be seen as easily on a level 30 toon (where direct damage skills are weaker than condition skills) as it can be on a top-geared 80 (where it’s the opposite) [not necessarily].
Changing crit damage from a percent to an additive stat was actually a very good move to make the whole system more scalable [it already is], and that’s how it should have originally been implemented, because that’s how it works for every other ‘grouping’. Now, direct damage will have a stronger baseline and scale in a more linear fashion [no stat can or does scale in a linear fashion; it’s physically impossible without making the value of other variables effecting that stat’s strength go up at the same time. Economics 101], making it much easier to both achieve and maintain relative balance (assuming Anet doesn’t drop the ball somewhere).
Of course, it’s clearly not the only thing that needs adjusting, but it’s the best starting point.
Note: The question of whether or not offensive or defensive stats scale better with stats of their own type is somewhat controversial. In the final formulas that I use for offensive and defensive amplification, these amounts are indeed multiplied. However, in marginal analysis of these stats, these values are not multiplied together, for a variety of reasons. So it depends on your point of view.
Thank you for explaining to me how very basic math works. I use the terms loosely to illustrate contrast. The point is that, even though all relevant stat pairings have multiplicative synergy, the growth curve for most stat combinations is comparatively linear, and you gradually get diminishing returns, which is to be expected.
The Zerker trio, though, is a little different – is has an odd configuration where power, crit damage, and crit % all three have high, direct, persistent multiplicative synergy (note that Condition Duration is not available on standard gear and Healing Power is not really comparable) and are set at low effect for the baseline but scale more steeply as they accumulate. This results in a comparatively hyperbolic growth curve that is quite noticeable both at low level and at top tier.
While I’m not as familiar with the actual numbers as some other people probably are, they’d have to do some seriously superb formula calibration for Zerker to sustain good balance at all levels relative to other sets the way it is currently configured.
The Zerker trio, though, is a little different – is has an odd configuration where power, crit damage, and crit % all three have high, direct, persistent multiplicative synergy (note that Condition Duration is not available on standard gear and Healing Power is not really comparable) and are set at low effect for the baseline but scale more steeply as they accumulate. This results in a comparatively hyperbolic growth curve that is quite noticeable both at low level and at top tier.
While I’m not as familiar with the actual numbers as some other people probably are, they’d have to do some seriously superb formula calibration for Zerker to sustain good balance at all levels relative to other sets the way it is currently configured.
What counteracts the critical damage scaling is 2 important factors people seem to be ignoring:
The benefits precision and critical damage provide alone are lower than any other stat. In order to compete with the other stats you need to combine them together, and even then they have trouble competing at moderate levels.
Toughness, vitality, and healing power have their own percentage scaling bonuses!
Sharpening stones give a bonus to power based on a percentage of your toughness and vitality. Some traits give a bonus to power (as large as 10%) based on your toughness, vitality, or healing power. WvW score can give 10% or more to your maximum health.
These factors counteract the scaling of precision and critical damage, keeping other stats in line with it even at the highest possible levels.
(edited by Bri.8354)
I think the changes they are making to crit damage are fine, and make perfect sense. What I do not agree with is straight up nerfing the damage of people using full crit damage gear, which is what they are also doing with this change.
Players running glassy specs already sacrifice tons of survival for that damage, basically high risk high reward if they can pull it off. You don’t want to nerf high risk high reward specs, you want to nerf low risk high reward specs like condition bunkers…
Another big reason why this nerf is bullkitten is because it will nerf many builds in this game that are already struggling. Take a Power Necro for example… they can hit hard, but can be easily CC’d, and have no mobility, so they are easy to kill. If you nerf their damage by 10%, that is completely unjustified. If they plan on compensating power specs in some way then this change would be okay, but we all know they wont do that.
2x 80 Necro, 80 Ranger, 80 Thief
Players running glassy specs already sacrifice tons of survival for that damage, basically high risk high reward if they can pull it off.
The problem is that in most cases, the “high risk” right now isn’t there.
This is a courtesy of the active defence being exactly the same for all setups, and the larger a percentage of the fight you can cover with active defence, the less your passive defences matter. As soon as you can cover ~all of the fight (most of dungeons), the need for any defensive stat evaporates since there are no situations in which it’d contribute.
As such, there is no longer a high-risk-high-reward vs low-risk-low-reward choice.
It’s no-risk-high-reward vs no-risk-low-reward.
The strength of heart to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.
Players running glassy specs already sacrifice tons of survival for that damage, basically high risk high reward if they can pull it off.
The problem is that in most cases, the “high risk” right now isn’t there.
This is a courtesy of the active defence being exactly the same for all setups, and the larger a percentage of the fight you can cover with active defence, the less your passive defences matter. As soon as you can cover ~all of the fight (most of dungeons), the need for any defensive stat evaporates since there are no situations in which it’d contribute.As such, there is no longer a high-risk-high-reward vs low-risk-low-reward choice.
It’s no-risk-high-reward vs no-risk-low-reward.
I was actually speaking more from the pvp side of things(wvw). But as for PvE, having base health and no armor is still very high risk when compared to playing a dire or rabid condition build, soldiers, ect. Especially professions with 10.5k HP. I can survive in any dungeon on my glass Necro with ease, same with my Ranger.. but the thief.. oh man I had trouble with that.
2x 80 Necro, 80 Ranger, 80 Thief
The problem is that in most cases, the “high risk” right now isn’t there.
This is a courtesy of the active defence being exactly the same for all setups, and the larger a percentage of the fight you can cover with active defence, the less your passive defences matter. As soon as you can cover ~all of the fight (most of dungeons), the need for any defensive stat evaporates since there are no situations in which it’d contribute.As such, there is no longer a high-risk-high-reward vs low-risk-low-reward choice.
It’s no-risk-high-reward vs no-risk-low-reward.
Solution? Increase the skill floor of active defense usage.
Solution? Increase the skill floor of active defense usage.
Could very well be a good solution, though I’d do it indirectly by changing mob behaviour.
The strength of heart to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.
Caps suck. They are band-aid fixes for poor stat formulas and balancing. GW2 has probably some of the worst stats/formulas that I’ve seen in any MMO. Why some stat systems are linear and others are exponential is mind boggling and it’s worse when they are systems that are supposed to balance the other(toughness+vitalty vs power*Crit*critdmg*% dmg). This is why we end up seeing some incredibly silly numbers damage wise.
I don’t like caps either, but if there’s a choice between cap on stats or lowering all levels of critical damage (even that which isn’t a problem) to stop the top amount from being too high, I’ll choose the cap.
And after doing some new calculations (now updated my OP with them) it really doesn’t seem like critical damage is a problem in comparison to other stats.
If anything is a problem, it is probably the damage disparity being too high for the design of PvE. If monsters aren’t designed around high damage then they die too quickly for high damage groups. If they are designed around high damage than they die too slowly for everyone but high damage groups.
If they want to address this a good solution might be to bring all the armor stats closer together. Lower the maximum damage AND maximum defense armor can provide. This way you address that issue without screwing over one stat type in places like WvW.
I suppose this is something they could do.
This is what I’ve been saying. There should never have been tank or healing or dps gear in pve. There should have been one set for pve. The illusion of choice is what has caused this big clusterkitten. The pve set should obviously have been geared towards damage as that is what actually accomplishes things in this game, but it should have been more like the celestial set (meaning a baseline of health and healing power on it). Toughness shouldn’t even have existed in pve since that only makes them have to make mobs hit ridiculously hard to compensate. One set for all pve would have actually allowed them to skip this whole nerf zerker lunacy and just focus on balancing the game.
I was promised math in the first post. LIES, LIES. Also crit damage was blatantly over the top, you could get more crit damage than any other stat on ascended trinkets. Compare it to pve to pvp and you’ll see crit damage in pve/wvw is way over the top where it is being nerfed.
Necros don’t have reflects, invulns, vigor, blocks,
extra dodges, real stability, mobility skills,
burst skills, sustain, or good support. GG ANET.
extra dodges, real stability, mobility skills,
burst skills, sustain, or good support. GG ANET.
I was promised math in the first post. LIES, LIES.
Where your mouth is, money you should put.
1 2