plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,421Arc User
I like the unlock but that has nothing to do with RQ. I would like to send my alt OP, DC, etc to FBI for support purpose but I cannot bare with doing SKT more. Hence, I welcome that change.
For RQ, I would say just get rid of it. It will not serve the goals the dev wants as I stated above. RQ will not do anything good at all. Dev may have an ivory tower wish to do something "good" but it will not be used as the way dev wanted.
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
I don't think the problem is that more people want to do FBI or MSPC on their alts.
Sure, not having to do SKT to unlock ANYTHING is good, cos it means that just like I never intended to... I won't be playing SKT on any of my alts.
The problem remains... the disparity between CN and the 11k dungeons, and the vast swathe of SUB 11K players who could be given the keys to the city by way of unlocks who still won't be able to queue for level appropriate dungeons under the random queue system. People for whom this account wide unlock on all 11k+ alts does the square root of sod all. Those insignificant duds who don't even have a main past 10k. The only people who benefit from this are those with a stable of 11k alts... so on behalf of all those players yet to hit the dizzy heights and unlock that pile of donkey stools on ONE character let me say,
"Great way to look out for the little guys"
But what hell... acct wide unlock lets you coral even more people into Project "Please get people playing these end game dungeons". And I hate to sound like a broken record, but... that's what this is all about. Otherwise all these work arounds would be utterly unnecessary and you'd do the one thing môst people seem to agree would work best, and move FBI and MSP into the Hero's Accord category and be done with it... But oh... I forgot... "seals of the brave" or something... that's the fundamental road block to common sense restructuring of this mess. Yeah...
How can you play for as long as you have and not be over 11k? My newest character is only 2-3 months old and is 12.5k. The only expensive(ish) item on them is their weapon enchantment.
Getting to 12k is not hard, especially now we can get +4 Ostorian rings for 300 protector seals, The Mysterious Merchant does decent gear for guild marks, RD weapons are farmable by anyone over 10k and r8 normal enchantments are around 30k each (or if you're really broke, r7's for 3k...).
5 blue mounts with blue insignias (60k), 5 blue companions (50k) - r8 bondings currently going for less than 20k each! And item level boosted by boon completion.
Even with no guild boons, a player should be able to reach 11k and not have to spend more than 500k AD. Scraping a mere 15k per day, that is less than 5 weeks of effort. The rest can be Underdark armor & Drowned weapons or even save up a bit more AD and buy blue gear for diamonds in Chult.
But I do actually agree that FBI and MSP should be in the Hero's Accord category...
I AM over 11k.
I've mentioned that in several posts.
I've five alts on roughly 9.5-10.5. A couple knocking on 11k. I'm not saying all this because of how it will affect ME.
Sorry if that makes no sense, amid all these cries of, "Cool... they just dropped a free unlock on all my alts, so I'm alright, which means its all OK now... stuff the rest of you. Free Unlocks... woohoo... genius" etc.
I'm more concerned about the game as a whole and how it will impact the people in my guild and alliance, many... in fact most.. of whom will be rogered up the back alley by this idea.
I don't think the problem is that more people want to do FBI or MSPC on their alts.
Sure, not having to do SKT to unlock ANYTHING is good, cos it means that just like I never intended to... I won't be playing SKT on any of my alts.
The problem remains... the disparity between CN and the 11k dungeons, and the vast swathe of SUB 11K players who could be given the keys to the city by way of unlocks who still won't be able to queue for level appropriate dungeons under the random queue system. People for whom this account wide unlock on all 11k+ alts does the square root of sod all. Those insignificant duds who don't even have a main past 10k. The only people who benefit from this are those with a stable of 11k alts... so on behalf of all those players yet to hit the dizzy heights and unlock that pile of donkey stools on ONE character let me say,
"Great way to look out for the little guys"
But what hell... acct wide unlock lets you coral even more people into Project "Please get people playing these end game dungeons". And I hate to sound like a broken record, but... that's what this is all about. Otherwise all these work arounds would be utterly unnecessary and you'd do the one thing môst people seem to agree would work best, and move FBI and MSP into the Hero's Accord category and be done with it... But oh... I forgot... "seals of the brave" or something... that's the fundamental road block to common sense restructuring of this mess. Yeah...
How can you play for as long as you have and not be over 11k? My newest character is only 2-3 months old and is 12.5k. The only expensive(ish) item on them is their weapon enchantment.
Getting to 12k is not hard, especially now we can get +4 Ostorian rings for 300 protector seals, The Mysterious Merchant does decent gear for guild marks, RD weapons are farmable by anyone over 10k and r8 normal enchantments are around 30k each (or if you're really broke, r7's for 3k...).
5 blue mounts with blue insignias (60k), 5 blue companions (50k) - r8 bondings currently going for less than 20k each! And item level boosted by boon completion.
Even with no guild boons, a player should be able to reach 11k and not have to spend more than 500k AD. Scraping a mere 15k per day, that is less than 5 weeks of effort. The rest can be Underdark armor & Drowned weapons or even save up a bit more AD and buy blue gear for diamonds in Chult.
But I do actually agree that FBI and MSP should be in the Hero's Accord category...
I AM over 11k.
I've mentioned that in several posts.
I've five alts on roughly 9.5-10.5. A couple knocking on 11k. I'm not saying all this because of how it will affect ME.
Sorry if that makes no sense, amid all these cries of, "Cool... they just dropped a free unlock on all my alts, so I'm alright, which means its all OK now... stuff the rest of you. Free Unlocks... woohoo... genius" etc.
I'm more concerned about the game as a whole and how it will impact the people in my guild and alliance, many... in fact most.. of whom will be rogered up the back alley by this idea.
Ah ok, that makes more sense. I thought you were over 11k but I was confused by the initial statement (the old memory isn't what it used to be )
Ok, so the way I look at it from the new player perspective:
Current - 13.5k AD per day for 2 x three or five man & 2 x skirmish New - 13k AD per day for 1 x three man & 1 x skirmish
Ok, they lose 500 AD but gain ~25 mins. They can now manually queue for any T1 dungeon and will probably get it to pop faster due to the RQ that others are using and any salvage they get during that extra run makes up for the 500 AD & a bit more.
As far as I can see they will at least break even. If they qualify for T2's then they can manually queue for etos and CN as well for salvage and seals.
Yes, they would still need to complete SKT & RD to random queue for epics - as I said, I agree these should be moved to HA but it doesn't look like they're going to move on this point. As such, they will have to manually queue epics until they get that far or the devs change their minds?
I suspect that at some point they will move all T3 content to HA but aren't doing so yet for reasons of their own.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
I would be curious to see their figures on the percentage of the active player base that have completed FBI and MSP though - I suspect they are in the minority and that alone will significantly reduce the number of players using RQ for epics.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Completed or unlocked? I've unlocked FBI, I did it when they announced this, but that's my last visit to SKT. But I've never completed it because I've no need to even run it. I have zero interest in the rewards (or lack thereof) and very very few people in my alliance are up there doing that stuff, and I've never, not once, heard a report of a good experience from PUGging it. That being the case, I usually spend any time I'm not scrounging guild resources to run epic dungeons or skirmishes through my preferred random system. Selecting the ones I want/need to play and see what pops first. When the changes come, I'm not going to demean myself by taking 12k characters into the bloody Cloak Tower... I'll stick with my current method and just take longer to buy my monthly zen.
Its less the "new" new players that I'm bothered about and more the ones I know who are more casual than the likes of you and me. Who are about 10k, but a lot of that is not exactly the most useful contribution to their character. Those weirdoes who aren't legally able to claim dual citizenship due to spending half their life in Faerun. Probably the majority of people who play the game but don't frequent forum debates.
And that's another issue that the oh so wonderful account unlock will generate. People will do what they used to do to get their character "fit" for CN by slapping on the highest IL gear they can, regardless of its worth to their chosen character.
It's a point I made when the IL changes were made, but will become far more pertinent when people start dropping +4 brutality rings from their GWF and equipping +5 vanishing presence, and stocking up on purple insignia of prosperity, just boost their IL. In all innocence, they'll be hoping to drop into the RQ and land their newly minted 11k alt, whose never seen The River District, in EToS for some AD, but as I mentioned above... they are far more likely due to the lack of any randomness in the random queuing to end up as a low hope cog in the machine designed to make FBI and MSP pop faster.
here kopfgeld07, I didn't address the ability to switch classes because your current team is too weak and can't beat the dungeon with that class combo.
We do hear the feedback that the role requirements on queues do not match the current meta. However, there is a difference between sub-optimal and too-weak-to-complete. Internally we do all of our testing with groups that meet the entry requirements. (1 tank, 1 healer, 3 DPS for epic dungeons and 2 tank, 2 healer, 6 DPS for epic trials.) We test with various arrangements of classes in these roles, and before we ship we verify that a group around the minimum item level can complete the queue.
We are aware that at various points in the game's history the meta has not matched these role requirements. Naturally though, if the role requirements are sub-optimal, we knew the optimal meta would be able to complete the queue as well. I've talked a little in this thread about the fact that we are examining the meta carefully and there will be adjustments to classes in the future (as there always are.) We'll be working to make sure the role requirements and the meta match more carefully now that we are encouraging engagement in the public queues where those role requirements exist.
I can't go into a lot of specifics because we're still discussing the details—and there won't be any major overhauls for 12B—but there is one area I would like to address: the 2 clerics-in-a-5-man meta. This was a recent introduction when an attempt was made to make Divine Oracle a competitive paragon path. The designer who worked on those updates did not intend for it to become optimal to run 2 clerics in a 5 man.
The meta encouraging bringing 2 clerics to a 5 man is not something we are happy with for various reasons and so that is something we plan to address sooner rather than later. When we do make changes, we will absolutely attempt to ensure DO and AC are both viable builds, and that in a 10 man it would be best to have 1 of each. This is just a heads up that the days are numbered on 2 cleric groups.
One final thing I'd like to say on the topic as there is sometimes an adversarial feeling when we come out and talk about changes to a build or meta you might currently be using, and I'd like to dispel that as much as possible. Obviously there will be those that really love the way something currently works, and no explanation will be sufficient to lighten the blow. But—we aren't specifically out to ruin something you might be enjoying. The design team is responsible for creating things like the 2 cleric meta, and we absolutely don't blame everyone for taking advantage of it.
It's just not ideal that in a game with as many classes as we have that an optimal group setup involves bringing 2 of the same class, and 2 healer roles. We don't have anything against people wanting to bring their own interesting group comps into private queues, but bringing a 2nd healer should not beat out bringing another DPS for kill speed.
Will account wide dungeon unlocks only be for Fangbreaker Island?
Absolutely not—as I mentioned in my original post, this will be for all queues that are unlocked via campaign progress. This is something the design team has wanted to do for some time, and this was the perfect opportunity to find the time to make the adjustment.
You cherry picked the guy that was asking for separate RQs for each tier, ignoring all the rest of us that are asking you to simply move MSP and FBI into Hero's Accord where they clearly belong...
I've actually already answered this question, so the reason I responded to the other poster's question is that I had not yet answered the question they asked. I understand that this thread is quite long now, but it will only become even more cluttered if I repeatedly answer the same question. In addition, as I only have limited time to answer questions, I would prefer to answer unique questions.
This goes for everyone who has asked a question that has already been answered—I apologize if it seems like I am ignoring your question, please make an effort to skim over my previous posts if it really feels that you are being ignored, chances are I've already answered it, or am planning to make an attempt to answer it.
For those posters who have been going above and beyond to quote my previous answers or my original post when a question comes up over and over, I salute you! You're a great help.
Post edited by asterdahl on
7
plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,421Arc User
edited September 2017
This is all post @asterdahl posted since page 13 which he did an amendment. He may or may not answer your questions in these posts.
here kopfgeld07, I didn't address the ability to switch classes because your current team is too weak and can't beat the dungeon with that class combo.
We do hear the feedback that the role requirements on queues do not match the current meta. However, there is a difference between sub-optimal and too-weak-to-complete. Internally we do all of our testing with groups that meet the entry requirements. (1 tank, 1 healer, 3 DPS for epic dungeons and 2 tank, 2 healer, 6 DPS for epic trials.) We test with various arrangements of classes in these roles, and before we ship we verify that a group around the minimum item level can complete the queue.
We are aware that at various points in the game's history the meta has not matched these role requirements. Naturally though, if the role requirements are sub-optimal, we knew the optimal meta would be able to complete the queue as well. I've talked a little in this thread about the fact that we are examining the meta carefully and there will be adjustments to classes in the future (as there always are.) We'll be working to make sure the role requirements and the meta match more carefully now that we are encouraging engagement in the public queues where those role requirements exist.
I can't go into a lot of specifics because we're still discussing the details—and there won't be any major overhauls for 12B—but there is one area I would like to address: the 2 clerics-in-a-5-man meta. This was a recent introduction when an attempt was made to make Divine Oracle a competitive paragon path. The designer who worked on those updates did not intend for it to become optimal to run 2 clerics in a 5 man.
The meta encouraging bringing 2 clerics to a 5 man is not something we are happy with for various reasons and so that is something we plan to address sooner rather than later. When we do make changes, we will absolutely attempt to ensure DO and AC are both viable builds, and that in a 10 man it would be best to have 1 of each. This is just a heads up that the days are numbered on 2 cleric groups.
One final thing I'd like to say on the topic as there is sometimes an adversarial feeling when we come out and talk about changes to a build or meta you might currently be using, and I'd like to dispel that as much as possible. Obviously there will be those that really love the way something currently works, and no explanation will be sufficient to lighten the blow. But—we aren't specifically out to ruin something you might be enjoying. The design team is responsible for creating things like the 2 cleric meta, and we absolutely don't blame everyone for taking advantage of it.
It's just not ideal that in a game with as many classes as we have that an optimal group setup involves bringing 2 of the same class, and 2 healer roles. We don't have anything against people wanting to bring their own interesting group comps into private queues, but bringing a 2nd healer should not beat out bringing another DPS for
Will account wide dungeon unlocks only be for Fangbreaker Island?
Absolutely not—as I mentioned in my original post, this will be for all queues that are unlocked via campaign progress. This is something the design team has wanted to do for some time, and this was the perfect opportunity to find the time to make the adjustment.
You cherry picked the guy that was asking for separate RQs for each tier, ignoring all the rest of us that are asking you to simply move MSP and FBI into Hero's Accord where they clearly belong...
I've actually already answered this question, so the reason I responded to the other poster's question is that I had not yet answered the question they asked. I understand that this thread is quite long now, but it will only become even more cluttered if I repeatedly answer the same question. In addition, as I only have limited time to answer questions, I would prefer to answer unique questions.
This goes for everyone who has asked a question that has already been answered—I apologize if it seems like I am ignoring your question, please make an effort to skim over my previous posts if it really feels that you are being ignored, chances are I've already answered it, or am planning to make an attempt to answer it.
For those posters who have been going above and beyond to quote my previous answers or my original post when a question comes up over and over, I salute you! You're a great help.
@asterdahl so, with the DC changes you have in mind that will result in 3 supports + 2 dps or 2 supports + 3 supports you need to keep in mind that:
- It will take longer to clear endgame (rewards would need to be improved accross the board) - You'd need to slighty increase damage output of some classes which currently are dominant (like CW/HR/GWF) and to give others a pretty substantial one (SW and perhaps TR in pve) so the loss of buffs from having less support classes in the group can be countered (at least to some degree) with higher base damage.
SW has been nerfed to the ground and the incoming OBC ninjanerf further worsens that, if groups will be need every single one of its members to have excellent, competitive personal dps, it is absolutely necessary to rework this class which is underperforming compared to the others, in some cases even so vs support classes specced with their dps tree so, that a striker class deals less damage than a support one defies logic and it is certainly unacceptable.
If less supports are to be in a party you need to increase the damage boost given by their buffs and dps classes would, without exception, need a base damage increase otherwise running endgame content would be painfully slow.
Will I be penalized for removing my gear before queuing to keep a toon from going into a certain dungeon?
Example, I have a CW and HR that I have not played and would not at all be comfortable taking them through an end game dungeon despite them being geared to enter. Am I going to be considered an exploiter if I lower the IL of those toons to less than 11k for queuing?
It is not possible for you to queue at all unless you meet the gear score requirement for the entire random queue you are trying to sign up for.
Why does this question keep coming up? Why don't people read the OP?
Simple answer, some people learn and understand through experience, not from reading. Yes I read the OP, I read 26 pages of this thread however, I'm having trouble wrapping my head around all the changes despite being a player for 4 years and having several well geared toons.
This question will probably come up several more times until the mod drops simply due to the sheer amount of information in this/these thread(s).
@asterdahl I understand the point about two clerics. The actual thrust is 3 buffers and 2 DPS (or even 4 & 1), if players drop one DC they will look into bringing an MoF CW, SW or even a 2nd Paladin - possibly running a Devotion build.
The difficulty with this actually covers a topic you sometimes see on the forums; namely - how do you ensure the need for a 'healer' and a 'tank'. These roles are based around the concept of 'players need external healing' as well as 'dps players can't take too much damage so a Tank needs to hold threat'.
The trouble of course is that if you increase enemy damage to a point where dps can't rely on lifesteal and the tank needs to hold aggro, then external healing is redundant because everyone dies with one hit (you can't heal someone from zero HP).
And if you reduce lifesteal & keep enemy dps reasonable, so that they need a tank and external healing, then it negatively impacts solo play - which is a huge chunk of game play.
It's a horrible tightrope to walk. You'd probably need to get extra creative and consider various unheard of options such as:
Encourage a move from lifesteal to DR builds by introducing proc limits on DoTs or changing it back to how it used to work and counter the loss by: Increasing companion survivability & effectiveness (they hold their own in a fight & draw more aggro) Increasing the number of companions a player can summon simultaneously in open world (one offensive, one defensive?) Adding Mercenary NPCs which players can 'hire' in town to run open world content with them. (Personally I like the extra companion idea the most)
Whatever you do will kick up a storm though so I don't envy the task.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
I've actually already answered this question, so the reason I responded to the other poster's question is that I had not yet answered the question they asked. I understand that this thread is quite long now, but it will only become even more cluttered if I repeatedly answer the same question. In addition, as I only have limited time to answer questions, I would prefer to answer unique questions.
This goes for everyone who has asked a question that has already been answered—I apologize if it seems like I am ignoring your question, please make an effort to skim over my previous posts if it really feels that you are being ignored, chances are I've already answered it, or am planning to make an attempt to answer it.
You half answered it by disregarding the issue, meanwhile it keeps getting brought up as a glaring flaw over and over by many people... this was presented as a discussion correct? The question you haven't answered is why you guys insist on pushing out a new system with such a bad design, but answering that is clearly not your intention Its fairly disingenuous to blame the clutter on us when all you had to do was answer our concerns about it rather than dismiss the issue as something you'll monitor later I don't need free RAD now, and I won't run RQs as you've described them just to get it, but moreover I won't run them because the design doesn't work... My only reason for posting in this thread was to try to help you guys avoid a big mistake, but if that's what you are going to do, having been cautioned against it explicitly, more power to you If I had known trying to help would have been such a waste of time I wouldn't have bothered
Understand that the player base will adapt whether they like this set up or not. Just as the player base did for the dungeon key fiasco
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if the player base adapts in way that is not the direction the devs wish to go in. If/when this happens, the devs will implement changes to prevent us from running stuff the way we want and create other issues. Never ending loop.
You half answered it by disregarding the issue, meanwhile it keeps getting brought up as a glaring flaw over and over by many people... this was presented as a discussion correct? The question you haven't answered is why you guys insist on pushing out a new system with such a bad design, but answering that is clearly not your intention Its fairly disingenuous to blame the clutter on us when all you had to do was answer our concerns about it rather than dismiss the issue as something you'll monitor later I don't need free RAD now, and I won't run RQs as you've described them just to get it, but moreover I won't run them because the design doesn't work... My only reason for posting in this thread was to try to help you guys avoid a big mistake, but if that's what you are going to do, having been cautioned against it explicitly, more power to you If I had known trying to help would have been such a waste of time I wouldn't have bothered
I honestly believe that adding insult will get you nowhere.
I think @asterdahl has been kind enough to come on the forums and answer all sorts of questions for the community. This is probably the most active I have seen a dev. on the forums. They have been keeping us in the loop and have answered many, many concerns the community has regarding the upcoming changes.
Not everyone is going to like them 100% (myself included), but the changes are coming. Obviously, the company does not see it as a flaw and many people on the forums (compared to the actual community) are not going to force changes by just re-iterating what THEY think the changes should be.
As a community, we will adjust and who knows it may benefit us in the long run.
@asterdahl I may not like all the changes coming, but I appreciate the time you take to come on and answer questions. I, and I am guessing, many others appreciate it as well. Keep it up!
@asterdahl I like these changes, but can we please get the loot need or greed screen removed from the center of our screen? Now that all junk items will be useful for generic RP, this loot window is going to be even more of a hassle. In a random party, it will be madness. Just being able to move it to one side of the screen would be amazing.
There aren't going to be any changes to this for Module 12B, but the way the lotting window works drives me bananas as well, particularly as I play mostly on PlayStation 4 in my free time. I'll definitely pass this feedback along to the UI team.
@asterdahl I understand the point about two clerics. The actual thrust is 3 buffers and 2 DPS (or even 4 & 1), if players drop one DC they will look into bringing an MoF CW, SW or even a 2nd Paladin - possibly running a Devotion build.
The difficulty with this actually covers a topic you sometimes see on the forums; namely - how do you ensure the need for a 'healer' and a 'tank'. These roles are based around the concept of 'players need external healing' as well as 'dps players can't take too much damage so a Tank needs to hold threat'.
The trouble of course is that if you increase enemy damage to a point where dps can't rely on lifesteal and the tank needs to hold aggro, then external healing is redundant because everyone dies with one hit (you can't heal someone from zero HP).
And if you reduce lifesteal & keep enemy dps reasonable, so that they need a tank and external healing, then it negatively impacts solo play - which is a huge chunk of game play.
It's a horrible tightrope to walk.
I don't address much beyond the 2 cleric build because we don't have any specific changes to other areas that we've set in stone and are ready to talk about, but it is as you say—the issue is certainly complicated. The original systems design team that built the base classes did not think about the classes in terms of support vs. DPS. However, the combination of a lack of extremely disciplined guidelines for buffs and debuffs combined with underlying math that doesn't automatically curb the effectiveness of such abilities has naturally pushed support into a more and more important role as player strength increases.
This isn't just a DPS thing of course, but extends to effective hit points and healing. Most of my work is on boss fights—having designed every queued instance boss starting with Fangbreaker Island through Tomb of the Nine Gods with the exception of Kabal and Withers—so I am always hyper-aware of how difficult our meta has made it to balance incoming damage in PvE. It's very difficult to make something feel meaningful unless it's lethal. Obviously this is not great place to be in.
There are some out there who might find the current landscape of focusing on buffs and debuffs fun—and we don't want to destroy the idea that some builds might be more support focused—but we do think that overall the game would be in a better place, and most players would actually prefer it, if using abilities that heal or deal damage directly was more effective.
Some of you have brought up concerns about content taking longer as a result of changes. We're certainly going to keep an eye on it. I can say that there won't be any specific adjustments to rewards when we nerf the two cleric meta. This was introduced fairly recently, and we don't think it's light-years ahead of bringing an MoF or another support.
If we make some huge sweeping changes to the game's math that makes things take a lot longer, obviously we will make adjustments. Keep in mind, those sort of adjustments aren't on the immediate horizon, it's just something the design team would like to accomplish. Also, even if we shift things towards more active damage and healing, we're not actually looking to make things take twice as long, so if changes did happen, they would likely be accompanied by adjustments to enemy resistances and hit points, etc.
There are no insults in what I said, only observations Long ago, in a post far, far away, he did say they weren't interested in rearranging the epic que, and that they would monitor things for adjustments after release... In the light of all the player feedback in the player feedback thread since questioning that odd grouping and suggesting what is a pretty obvious solution there has only been silence Now we know the answer is that they refuse to tell us why... Ok Probably would have saved a lot of typing if he would have just said that at the get go
We do hear the feedback that the role requirements on queues do not match the current meta. However, there is a difference between sub-optimal and too-weak-to-complete. Internally we do all of our testing with groups that meet the entry requirements. (1 tank, 1 healer, 3 DPS for epic dungeons and 2 tank, 2 healer, 6 DPS for epic trials.) We test with various arrangements of classes in these roles, and before we ship we verify that a group around the minimum item level can complete the queue.
We are aware that at various points in the game's history the meta has not matched these role requirements. Naturally though, if the role requirements are sub-optimal, we knew the optimal meta would be able to complete the queue as well. I've talked a little in this thread about the fact that we are examining the meta carefully and there will be adjustments to classes in the future (as there always are.) We'll be working to make sure the role requirements and the meta match more carefully now that we are encouraging engagement in the public queues where those role requirements exist.
[...]
It's just not ideal that in a game with as many classes as we have that an optimal group setup involves bringing 2 of the same class, and 2 healer roles. We don't have anything against people wanting to bring their own interesting group comps into private queues, but bringing a 2nd healer should not beat out bringing another DPS for kill speed.
This is the point you are totally wrong with - the second cleric isn't a healer, it's a buff/debuff. As a Paladin it depends on paragon if you're a tank or a healer but as a cleric you're always heal? If you always call clerics a healer a Temptation Warlock is a healer too but you mark it as a DD. You should overthink all this because it's a total mess.
The mistake you made is to ignore buff/ debuff in your 'tank, healer, DD' system, it's outdated and not that simple anymore.
And you didn't answered what about splitting guilds and whole alliances cause they can't help each other in RQs due to queue requirements, i want to hear this.
There are some out there who might find the current landscape of focusing on buffs and debuffs fun—and we don't want to destroy the idea that some builds might be more support focused—but we do think that overall the game would be in a better place, and most players would actually prefer it, if using abilities that heal or deal damage directly was more effective.
That would be me, that's what I enjoy most about this game. I play almost exclusively support characters, and love the different utility mechanics and support interactions.
Support characters introduce variety and allow for synergy between different classes. Put another way, who you're running with matters and you adjust your build and play style to support them accordingly.
I think that it's a big part of what makes this game great, and would hate to see it return to a mostly-dps meta. It's my impression that at times past in this game, dps classes (and most classes) had an optimal build playstyle that was largely independent of their party members. That made for a much more boring game.
I implore you please be careful about how you adjust support interactions. I don't disagree that currently they are probably imbalanced, and leading to less emphasis on multiple damage dealers. But you could very easily render useless a large variety of support builds, and with it some of the magic that this game holds.
Regarding the 2 DC meta, there are a few things I feel that could be changed on the design end that would help to mitigate the desire for full buff groups. One, consider having mechanisms like Acererak tilting the platform be done based on boss HP thresholds the way that the Aboleth Overseers similar mechanism was. I don't know if it is currently random but it feels so and having it that way punishes parties that don't have the absolute highest DPS. While it is true that people want to clear the content as fast as possible, most of the time it isn't enforced by game mechanics. The longer you fight Ra Nsi, the more chances there are for a 1 shot, no rez death.
Additionally, having only single target damage be of any real importance during a boss fight doesn't help. My first character is a CW that I've played since Beta. Now, the bosses back then were nothing but adds and that wasn't great, but now we have no meaningful adds and no reason that parties would seek out dedicated AoE or Control. That is a change but not an improvement.
It seems as if there is now one generic DPS role that all 5 damage dealing classes are competing for. I know it can't be easy trying to balance classes for group PVE, PVP and being able to do dailies, but surely there can be some improvement. Let some classes do single target damage and some classes do AoE but the ones that do both shouldn't be masters of both.
"We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
1
rickcase276Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,404Arc User
They also need to be careful when adjusting them that they do not make it more difficult for support players to do solo pve. That is the other fine line they are working against.
1
treesclimberMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,161Arc User
@asterdahl NWO players are mind washed to see DPS as the most important thing in the game, if you ever want to do anything with Life steal consider make it something like life craving, instead of healing a full hit like now now, hit again for a % of the base damage and heal the player for that hit, this way people will feel the lack of survival but will be presented with more damage, which will make them less revolted. Now when it comes to solo content, I've heard people say "so just because I'm full dps i will need a healers companion to do campaign of my IL", of course yes, it makes sence, healer companion supports big dps player that cannot take much damage as big dps companions support low dps tanky characters because if we take a big picture of the 3 main protective stats some classes life steal contributes way more to solo survival than either defense or hit points, tuning it down will only make it on pair.
@asterdahl NWO players are mind washed to see DPS as the most important thing in the game, if you ever want to do anything with Life steal consider make it something like life craving, instead of healing a full hit like now now, hit again for a % of the base damage and heal the player for that hit, this way people will feel the lack of survival but will be presented with more damage, which will make them less revolted. Now when it comes to solo content, I've heard people say "so just because I'm full dps i will need a healers companion to do campaign of my IL", of course yes, it makes sence, healer companion supports big dps player that cannot take much damage as big dps companions support low dps tanky characters because if we take a big picture of the 3 main protective stats some classes life steal contributes way more to solo survival than either defense or hit points, tuning it down will only make it on pair.
This is the story about Lowbi. Lowbi is an upstart hitting level 70 recently. He is very exited and can't wait to run dungeons: "Yeah, no more leveling dungeons, now i can play with the big guys!" he's yelling. "Okay, where to start? Are, there - epic dungeon random queues. Sounds nice! Oh.. I do need to fit the requirements, huh." He was sad for a moment but then he carried on. "Hey, more queues! What's this? Private epic dungeon? Could be nice!". He asked some friend to take him with them and so they made some private runs. The first time he passed a dungeon he ran to the chests and wanted to open them. "You need keys for this!" his friends were saying. But Lowbi doesn't have any keys. So they made some other runs to get their friend some salvageable drop loot but again he had no luck. After this day he walked back to the Protectors Enclave and his pockets were as empty as at the beginning. Only some Protector Seals jingles in a small pouch hanging on his girdle. "Maybe i can use them for something." He walked to the seal vendor but he hadn't enough seals to get anything. Lowbi once again opened the queues and talked to himself "Well, guess i need to run skirmishes and level dungeons over and over again to gain some cash..". After two days Lowbi left Neverwinter and decided to never come back to this town.
But you ARE making changes that affect the time we take to clear a dungeon (Bondings nerf, remember?), someone pointed out that we are already getting purple salvage from ETOS, so why bother with the random queues after the first? I'm aware you already improved MSP and FBI rewards (thank you, btw) but its just too much of a difference to complete an ETOS than a MSP.
Personally I wouldn't complain as much about this whole Random Queue thing if the rewards were appropriate to the investment we put on each dungeon, right now its easier to do CN than EGWD but the latter can't get you a Rank 8, its way easier to do ETOS than either of them and it gives you the same salvage and a chance at unbound loot.
Loot doesn't even have to be unbound to be appreciated, an increase in the drop rate of Legendary Dragon Keys, Preservation Wards, Companion tokens, a chance to get even an account-bound Coal Ward would be welcome, the kind of stuff that we CAN actually use.
@asterdahl NWO players are mind washed to see DPS as the most important thing in the game, if you ever want to do anything with Life steal consider make it something like life craving, instead of healing a full hit like now now, hit again for a % of the base damage and heal the player for that hit, this way people will feel the lack of survival but will be presented with more damage, which will make them less revolted. Now when it comes to solo content, I've heard people say "so just because I'm full dps i will need a healers companion to do campaign of my IL", of course yes, it makes sence, healer companion supports big dps player that cannot take much damage as big dps companions support low dps tanky characters because if we take a big picture of the 3 main protective stats some classes life steal contributes way more to solo survival than either defense or hit points, tuning it down will only make it on pair.
So... make it like similar to classic lifesteal?
XDXDXD
I think he has a Lillend Fetish. He will not rest until we all must use one to do our dailies.
My joke is that Treeclimber's suggestion sounds similar to classic style Lifesteal (ie, Lifesteal affects Lifesteal Severity rather than % chance).
Which, if it happened, is yet another thing returning from Mod6/being brought up to Mod12 par.
See Item Level, Augment + Runestone, and weapon enchantment changes.
It's just not ideal that in a game with as many classes as we have that an optimal group setup involves bringing 2 of the same class, and 2 healer roles.
Maybe the problem is you believe that any healer role is required for the game or that you believe DCs are healers. If people want heals they will bring SW or OP. The first thought at endgame for healer is not DC.
While you are trying to realign class roles, maybe you should evaluate the lack of need for a controller. You use DPS as a generic title but D&D has much more depth to it. There is only one meaningful DPS in the game, GWF, everyone else is second class citizens.
Comments
I would like to send my alt OP, DC, etc to FBI for support purpose but I cannot bare with doing SKT more.
Hence, I welcome that change.
For RQ, I would say just get rid of it. It will not serve the goals the dev wants as I stated above.
RQ will not do anything good at all. Dev may have an ivory tower wish to do something "good" but it will not be used as the way dev wanted.
I've mentioned that in several posts.
I've five alts on roughly 9.5-10.5. A couple knocking on 11k.
I'm not saying all this because of how it will affect ME.
Sorry if that makes no sense, amid all these cries of, "Cool... they just dropped a free unlock on all my alts, so I'm alright, which means its all OK now... stuff the rest of you. Free Unlocks... woohoo... genius" etc.
I'm more concerned about the game as a whole and how it will impact the people in my guild and alliance, many... in fact most.. of whom will be rogered up the back alley by this idea.
Ok, so the way I look at it from the new player perspective:
Current - 13.5k AD per day for 2 x three or five man & 2 x skirmish
New - 13k AD per day for 1 x three man & 1 x skirmish
Ok, they lose 500 AD but gain ~25 mins. They can now manually queue for any T1 dungeon and will probably get it to pop faster due to the RQ that others are using and any salvage they get during that extra run makes up for the 500 AD & a bit more.
As far as I can see they will at least break even. If they qualify for T2's then they can manually queue for etos and CN as well for salvage and seals.
Yes, they would still need to complete SKT & RD to random queue for epics - as I said, I agree these should be moved to HA but it doesn't look like they're going to move on this point. As such, they will have to manually queue epics until they get that far or the devs change their minds?
I suspect that at some point they will move all T3 content to HA but aren't doing so yet for reasons of their own.
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
I've unlocked FBI, I did it when they announced this, but that's my last visit to SKT. But I've never completed it because I've no need to even run it. I have zero interest in the rewards (or lack thereof) and very very few people in my alliance are up there doing that stuff, and I've never, not once, heard a report of a good experience from PUGging it.
That being the case, I usually spend any time I'm not scrounging guild resources to run epic dungeons or skirmishes through my preferred random system. Selecting the ones I want/need to play and see what pops first.
When the changes come, I'm not going to demean myself by taking 12k characters into the bloody Cloak Tower... I'll stick with my current method and just take longer to buy my monthly zen.
Its less the "new" new players that I'm bothered about and more the ones I know who are more casual than the likes of you and me. Who are about 10k, but a lot of that is not exactly the most useful contribution to their character. Those weirdoes who aren't legally able to claim dual citizenship due to spending half their life in Faerun. Probably the majority of people who play the game but don't frequent forum debates.
And that's another issue that the oh so wonderful account unlock will generate.
People will do what they used to do to get their character "fit" for CN by slapping on the highest IL gear they can, regardless of its worth to their chosen character.
It's a point I made when the IL changes were made, but will become far more pertinent when people start dropping +4 brutality rings from their GWF and equipping +5 vanishing presence, and stocking up on purple insignia of prosperity, just boost their IL.
In all innocence, they'll be hoping to drop into the RQ and land their newly minted 11k alt, whose never seen The River District, in EToS for some AD, but as I mentioned above... they are far more likely due to the lack of any randomness in the random queuing to end up as a low hope cog in the machine designed to make FBI and MSP pop faster.
We are aware that at various points in the game's history the meta has not matched these role requirements. Naturally though, if the role requirements are sub-optimal, we knew the optimal meta would be able to complete the queue as well. I've talked a little in this thread about the fact that we are examining the meta carefully and there will be adjustments to classes in the future (as there always are.) We'll be working to make sure the role requirements and the meta match more carefully now that we are encouraging engagement in the public queues where those role requirements exist.
I can't go into a lot of specifics because we're still discussing the details—and there won't be any major overhauls for 12B—but there is one area I would like to address: the 2 clerics-in-a-5-man meta. This was a recent introduction when an attempt was made to make Divine Oracle a competitive paragon path. The designer who worked on those updates did not intend for it to become optimal to run 2 clerics in a 5 man.
The meta encouraging bringing 2 clerics to a 5 man is not something we are happy with for various reasons and so that is something we plan to address sooner rather than later. When we do make changes, we will absolutely attempt to ensure DO and AC are both viable builds, and that in a 10 man it would be best to have 1 of each. This is just a heads up that the days are numbered on 2 cleric groups.
One final thing I'd like to say on the topic as there is sometimes an adversarial feeling when we come out and talk about changes to a build or meta you might currently be using, and I'd like to dispel that as much as possible. Obviously there will be those that really love the way something currently works, and no explanation will be sufficient to lighten the blow. But—we aren't specifically out to ruin something you might be enjoying. The design team is responsible for creating things like the 2 cleric meta, and we absolutely don't blame everyone for taking advantage of it.
It's just not ideal that in a game with as many classes as we have that an optimal group setup involves bringing 2 of the same class, and 2 healer roles. We don't have anything against people wanting to bring their own interesting group comps into private queues, but bringing a 2nd healer should not beat out bringing another DPS for kill speed. Absolutely not—as I mentioned in my original post, this will be for all queues that are unlocked via campaign progress. This is something the design team has wanted to do for some time, and this was the perfect opportunity to find the time to make the adjustment. I've actually already answered this question, so the reason I responded to the other poster's question is that I had not yet answered the question they asked. I understand that this thread is quite long now, but it will only become even more cluttered if I repeatedly answer the same question. In addition, as I only have limited time to answer questions, I would prefer to answer unique questions.
This goes for everyone who has asked a question that has already been answered—I apologize if it seems like I am ignoring your question, please make an effort to skim over my previous posts if it really feels that you are being ignored, chances are I've already answered it, or am planning to make an attempt to answer it.
For those posters who have been going above and beyond to quote my previous answers or my original post when a question comes up over and over, I salute you! You're a great help.
He may or may not answer your questions in these posts.
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12983971/#Comment_12983971
The amendment post
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984080/#Comment_12984080
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984136/#Comment_12984136
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984145/#Comment_12984145
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984151/#Comment_12984151
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984153/#Comment_12984153
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984412/#Comment_12984412
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984416/#Comment_12984416
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984450/#Comment_12984450
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984502/#Comment_12984502
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984526/#Comment_12984526
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12984916/#Comment_12984916
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12986295/#Comment_12986295
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12986314/#Comment_12986314
https://forum.arcgames.com/neverwinter/discussion/comment/12986515/#Comment_12986515
Ok. The link does not jump to the post directly as I hope it would. It does jump to the page.
- It will take longer to clear endgame (rewards would need to be improved accross the board)
- You'd need to slighty increase damage output of some classes which currently are dominant (like CW/HR/GWF) and to give others a pretty substantial one (SW and perhaps TR in pve) so the loss of buffs from having less support classes in the group can be countered (at least to some degree) with higher base damage.
SW has been nerfed to the ground and the incoming OBC ninjanerf further worsens that, if groups will be need every single one of its members to have excellent, competitive personal dps, it is absolutely necessary to rework this class which is underperforming compared to the others, in some cases even so vs support classes specced with their dps tree so, that a striker class deals less damage than a support one defies logic and it is certainly unacceptable.
If less supports are to be in a party you need to increase the damage boost given by their buffs and dps classes would, without exception, need a base damage increase otherwise running endgame content would be painfully slow.
This question will probably come up several more times until the mod drops simply due to the sheer amount of information in this/these thread(s).
The difficulty with this actually covers a topic you sometimes see on the forums; namely - how do you ensure the need for a 'healer' and a 'tank'. These roles are based around the concept of 'players need external healing' as well as 'dps players can't take too much damage so a Tank needs to hold threat'.
The trouble of course is that if you increase enemy damage to a point where dps can't rely on lifesteal and the tank needs to hold aggro, then external healing is redundant because everyone dies with one hit (you can't heal someone from zero HP).
And if you reduce lifesteal & keep enemy dps reasonable, so that they need a tank and external healing, then it negatively impacts solo play - which is a huge chunk of game play.
It's a horrible tightrope to walk. You'd probably need to get extra creative and consider various unheard of options such as:
Encourage a move from lifesteal to DR builds by introducing proc limits on DoTs or changing it back to how it used to work
and counter the loss by:
Increasing companion survivability & effectiveness (they hold their own in a fight & draw more aggro)
Increasing the number of companions a player can summon simultaneously in open world (one offensive, one defensive?)
Adding Mercenary NPCs which players can 'hire' in town to run open world content with them.
(Personally I like the extra companion idea the most)
Whatever you do will kick up a storm though so I don't envy the task.
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
The question you haven't answered is why you guys insist on pushing out a new system with such a bad design, but answering that is clearly not your intention
Its fairly disingenuous to blame the clutter on us when all you had to do was answer our concerns about it rather than dismiss the issue as something you'll monitor later
I don't need free RAD now, and I won't run RQs as you've described them just to get it, but moreover I won't run them because the design doesn't work... My only reason for posting in this thread was to try to help you guys avoid a big mistake, but if that's what you are going to do, having been cautioned against it explicitly, more power to you
If I had known trying to help would have been such a waste of time I wouldn't have bothered
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if the player base adapts in way that is not the direction the devs wish to go in. If/when this happens, the devs will implement changes to prevent us from running stuff the way we want and create other issues. Never ending loop.
I think @asterdahl has been kind enough to come on the forums and answer all sorts of questions for the community. This is probably the most active I have seen a dev. on the forums. They have been keeping us in the loop and have answered many, many concerns the community has regarding the upcoming changes.
Not everyone is going to like them 100% (myself included), but the changes are coming. Obviously, the company does not see it as a flaw and many people on the forums (compared to the actual community) are not going to force changes by just re-iterating what THEY think the changes should be.
As a community, we will adjust and who knows it may benefit us in the long run.
@asterdahl I may not like all the changes coming, but I appreciate the time you take to come on and answer questions. I, and I am guessing, many others appreciate it as well. Keep it up!
This isn't just a DPS thing of course, but extends to effective hit points and healing. Most of my work is on boss fights—having designed every queued instance boss starting with Fangbreaker Island through Tomb of the Nine Gods with the exception of Kabal and Withers—so I am always hyper-aware of how difficult our meta has made it to balance incoming damage in PvE. It's very difficult to make something feel meaningful unless it's lethal. Obviously this is not great place to be in.
There are some out there who might find the current landscape of focusing on buffs and debuffs fun—and we don't want to destroy the idea that some builds might be more support focused—but we do think that overall the game would be in a better place, and most players would actually prefer it, if using abilities that heal or deal damage directly was more effective.
Some of you have brought up concerns about content taking longer as a result of changes. We're certainly going to keep an eye on it. I can say that there won't be any specific adjustments to rewards when we nerf the two cleric meta. This was introduced fairly recently, and we don't think it's light-years ahead of bringing an MoF or another support.
If we make some huge sweeping changes to the game's math that makes things take a lot longer, obviously we will make adjustments. Keep in mind, those sort of adjustments aren't on the immediate horizon, it's just something the design team would like to accomplish. Also, even if we shift things towards more active damage and healing, we're not actually looking to make things take twice as long, so if changes did happen, they would likely be accompanied by adjustments to enemy resistances and hit points, etc.
Long ago, in a post far, far away, he did say they weren't interested in rearranging the epic que, and that they would monitor things for adjustments after release... In the light of all the player feedback in the player feedback thread since questioning that odd grouping and suggesting what is a pretty obvious solution there has only been silence
Now we know the answer is that they refuse to tell us why... Ok
Probably would have saved a lot of typing if he would have just said that at the get go
The mistake you made is to ignore buff/ debuff in your 'tank, healer, DD' system, it's outdated and not that simple anymore.
And you didn't answered what about splitting guilds and whole alliances cause they can't help each other in RQs due to queue requirements, i want to hear this.
Support characters introduce variety and allow for synergy between different classes. Put another way, who you're running with matters and you adjust your build and play style to support them accordingly.
I think that it's a big part of what makes this game great, and would hate to see it return to a mostly-dps meta. It's my impression that at times past in this game, dps classes (and most classes) had an optimal build playstyle that was largely independent of their party members. That made for a much more boring game.
I implore you please be careful about how you adjust support interactions. I don't disagree that currently they are probably imbalanced, and leading to less emphasis on multiple damage dealers. But you could very easily render useless a large variety of support builds, and with it some of the magic that this game holds.
Additionally, having only single target damage be of any real importance during a boss fight doesn't help. My first character is a CW that I've played since Beta. Now, the bosses back then were nothing but adds and that wasn't great, but now we have no meaningful adds and no reason that parties would seek out dedicated AoE or Control. That is a change but not an improvement.
It seems as if there is now one generic DPS role that all 5 damage dealing classes are competing for. I know it can't be easy trying to balance classes for group PVE, PVP and being able to do dailies, but surely there can be some improvement. Let some classes do single target damage and some classes do AoE but the ones that do both shouldn't be masters of both.
XDXDXD
~~ A Fairytale ~~
This is the story about Lowbi. Lowbi is an upstart hitting level 70 recently. He is very exited and can't wait to run dungeons: "Yeah, no more leveling dungeons, now i can play with the big guys!" he's yelling. "Okay, where to start? Are, there - epic dungeon random queues. Sounds nice! Oh.. I do need to fit the requirements, huh." He was sad for a moment but then he carried on. "Hey, more queues! What's this? Private epic dungeon? Could be nice!". He asked some friend to take him with them and so they made some private runs. The first time he passed a dungeon he ran to the chests and wanted to open them. "You need keys for this!" his friends were saying. But Lowbi doesn't have any keys. So they made some other runs to get their friend some salvageable drop loot but again he had no luck. After this day he walked back to the Protectors Enclave and his pockets were as empty as at the beginning. Only some Protector Seals jingles in a small pouch hanging on his girdle. "Maybe i can use them for something." He walked to the seal vendor but he hadn't enough seals to get anything. Lowbi once again opened the queues and talked to himself "Well, guess i need to run skirmishes and level dungeons over and over again to gain some cash..". After two days Lowbi left Neverwinter and decided to never come back to this town.
~~ The End ~~
Personally I wouldn't complain as much about this whole Random Queue thing if the rewards were appropriate to the investment we put on each dungeon, right now its easier to do CN than EGWD but the latter can't get you a Rank 8, its way easier to do ETOS than either of them and it gives you the same salvage and a chance at unbound loot.
Loot doesn't even have to be unbound to be appreciated, an increase in the drop rate of Legendary Dragon Keys, Preservation Wards, Companion tokens, a chance to get even an account-bound Coal Ward would be welcome, the kind of stuff that we CAN actually use.
Which, if it happened, is yet another thing returning from Mod6/being brought up to Mod12 par.
See Item Level, Augment + Runestone, and weapon enchantment changes.
While you are trying to realign class roles, maybe you should evaluate the lack of need for a controller. You use DPS as a generic title but D&D has much more depth to it. There is only one meaningful DPS in the game, GWF, everyone else is second class citizens.