Just from that dps log, I can tell there's multiple things wrong.
- The player in question is using shield permanently in a PvE run.
- The player is using the corrupted black ice jewelry set.
- The player is using a lightning enchantment, likely a lesser one since the damage from it is so low.
- He's barely using his spells. 47 hits of sudden storm is a very small amount. Whereas he has 235 hits of chilling cloud.
- He's using ray of frost instead of arcane missile as the secondary at-will. Missiles are better dps for single target and have the benefit of increasing the damage of steal time and oppressive force.
All of this unoptimal play leads to having passive damage dealing much more damage than it really should have.
He isn't using lightning enchantment, Chained Lightning is from Tiamat's breath attack. The lightning enchantment is "Lightning Weapon". You're such a pro and you don't know that?
You can ask anyone to provide results and they will be the just as, if not more, skewed towards passive damage. I can go log every encounter and provide numerous examples. I don't see you providing any proof for your claims. Why don't you show us your "optimal play"?
I'm sorry but if this is Tiamat, the damage numbers are pathetic.
I assumed this was something like castle never.
My steal time and sudden storm deals over twice the damage of the max hit of this guy...
This guy has a ridiculously low amount of power at any rate because otherwise, his passive damage (creeping frost and assaillant) doesn't scale with power so if he had an adequate amount, their dps contribution would be a lot higher.
Not just that, Tiamat is terrible for substained damage due to people knocking adds everywhere, which makes thaumaturge's dots a lot more powerful than they normally should be.
I,m sorry to tell you but this is a terrible parse to take data from.
And I'm sorry that I don't know the proc name of enchants that are sub par.
Jesus how can you guys get so dramatic about all this? What's with the whole "you have to play like this and that otherwise you suck" attitude lately? Just have fun whatever way you want. Also comparing single parses proves nothing but I'm sure you already know that.
Jesus how can you guys get so dramatic about all this? What's with the whole "you have to play like this and that otherwise you suck" attitude lately? Just have fun whatever way you want. Also comparing single parses proves nothing but I'm sure you already know that.
It's just to show how big of a disparity there is on the damage of the hits. The player in question was saying that CW dps is nothing but passive procs to which I respond with that parse. Now, of course, I am not thaumaturge but thaumaturge dot damage do not scales with stats the way that spells does.
So, practically, GWF players can't be the top tier now next to the CW/DC/TR when it comes to the mob controlling. The few who went into another skill tree have returned to the Destroyer.
Imagine, GWF needs to be up close to hit a mob? OMG, he can't shoot magic from a Sword. Sorry, MOD4/MOD5 needs you to invest more in the HP.
In a single target way, GWF still beats CW by a large margin. And in all honesty, GWF shouldn't be in the game at all. When they appeared they were the most OP class, every TR user chose them over the TR, only to return now in MOD5.
So I don't know what more could you people who lack the party mentality - want?! CW's have lost a tremendous amount of Controlling power and it's not like the CWs are dominating the PvP. Now, there're no more stupid GWF kids who demand CW's only to have the rooms clear of MOBS by using Singularity and Repel. And no more stupid GWF rushing into the mobs to fight them alone, unless you have a lot of HP.
GWF should use a lot of Come and get it ability, especially for the controlling purpose and to pull mobs on Icy Terrain. That way they become party-friendly.
And DC's should simply repel the mobs as they see fit, but people simply don't care enough for the party composition, especially in the PuG cases.
True Neutral
Left the Game due to heavy Damage Control & Missing Spanish Language
0
beatannierMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 692Arc User
Oh no! They nerfed my best skill!
Let`s use 0 DPS shileld instead.
Yes! Defense is what I need in PvE as a DPS class.
Well… I am sure I will not be kicked in first 5 minutes of dungeon for using a shield.
Oh no. I just got kicked. 10 times in a row. What`s wrong with the community.
I have to open another thread and talk about these kickers. They are everywhere.
You all are newbies. You don`t play same as me and this is why you kick me all the time.
You are jelly of me!!!1
[/ironic]This topic went wrong way.
PS
I will state it again.
The fact that Shard got nerfed is not a reason to change it into a… shield.
And you have 5K lower DPS than the "newb CW". Thanks for proving my point.
Tiamat is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE fight to factor dps in.
There's so much forced downtime that it's ridiculous.
Seriously, dps is the last thing that you should look into for a parse of Tiamat.
Edit: Just in case you don't understand why
- The higher the group dps, the faster the adds die, the less dps time you get
- The higher the group dps, the more downtime you have between heads relatively to how much time you spend on them (say moving target takes 10 seconds, if you have 45 seconds of dps time on a head with a low dps group vs 25 seconds of dps time with a high dps group, your dps will be a lot lower due to a higher percentage of your time being spent on movement).
- The closer the dps is to being able to do tiamat in two phases (but not being able to) the more wasted time you'll have due to having to stop early on the white head (which, in this parse, had something like a 60 seconds downtime).
0
katbozejziemiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 856Arc User
edited December 2014
You have 5K lower DPS than a "newb CW who was using shield instead of 4th damage spell for more damage".
You have 5K lower DPS than a "newb CW who was using shield instead of 4th damage spell for more damage".
Spare me the excuses.
If you are too dumb to understand why Tiamat is a terrible encounter for dps comparison, especially after I layed down the reasons, then I don't know what to tell you
I like these people who blame the use of Shield in Tiamat. Some low GS people don't have nor have invested in the Repel skill and the Shield is a nice alternative to push away the mobs as a little bit extra, which is how they do contribute.
In fact, the whole defending of the clerics can be done tactically with Repel on Tab when it comes to the protection of the Clerics. I've finished Tiamat several times by using this tactic and it was extremely effective, when you have a team of skilled people who understand the mechanics and not just the DPS percentage increase.
True Neutral
Left the Game due to heavy Damage Control & Missing Spanish Language
I like these people who blame the use of Shield in Tiamat. Some low GS people don't have nor have invested in the Repel skill and the Shield is a nice alternative to push away the mobs as a little bit extra, which is how they do contribute.
.
Meh, I kinda wish Cryptic would just let us queue with our own parties/friends like MOST REAL RAIDs IN MOST REAL MMOs.
I don't mind them using shield, but this whole artificially making the mindless raid harder by forcing everyone to group up with idiots isn't exactly what players were looking for when they said give us "challenging content".
Pugs using shield because they die too easily is the least of anyone's concerns. They are doing it to last longer.
Something people may not remember is that CWs were putting out about the same damage & a bit more before Storm Spell was made into the monster passive. They nerfed the living daylights out of all of our encounters, and put passive Storm Spell in to get the damage back up to close to where it was. I think it was the same time they nerfed the living daylights out of the Thaum tree by taking away all of the debuffs.
Something people may not remember is that CWs were putting out about the same damage & a bit more before Storm Spell was made into the monster passive. They nerfed the living daylights out of all of our encounters, and put passive Storm Spell in to get the damage back up to close to where it was. I think it was the same time they nerfed the living daylights out of the Thaum tree by taking away all of the debuffs.
And the boost to storm spell to what it is now is ridiculous. This is the point that the OP was making and all of this banter about Tiamat, shield, play style, etc is irrelevant to the fact that CW's are totally stupid broken.
All the balance changes that were made to bring CW's down to earth were quickly undone by this type of process boost HAMSTER in order to "bring the damage back up to where it was" when the reality is that it never should have been there to begin with.
CW's need to have their damage reduced. Period. If you wanted to do massive damage then you should have rolled a different class not the Control one.
They can achieve higher crits and damage than dedicated strikers while enjoying the advantage of range and control. They are an abomination in their current state and need to be changed. There is no arguing this.
It is disgusting that the CW has been so broken for so long and all due to the outcry of players who want to have their cake and eat it too.
Something people may not remember is that CWs were putting out about the same damage & a bit more before Storm Spell was made into the monster passive. They nerfed the living daylights out of all of our encounters, and put passive Storm Spell in to get the damage back up to close to where it was. I think it was the same time they nerfed the living daylights out of the Thaum tree by taking away all of the debuffs.
Actually we still put out less damage than we did in module 2. Try killing the training room dummies. In module 2 it was easily possible with a 15-16k GS CW.
0
aulduronMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,351Arc User
edited December 2014
If you wanted to do massive damage then you should have rolled a different class not the Control one.
CWs have been the AE damage kings since open beta. Anyone wanting to "do massive (AE) damage" should pick the CW. Dealing "high amounts of damage" and "unleashing torrents of damage on enemy parties" is even in the official description.
"Controllers focus on affecting multiple targets at once, either by damaging or debuffing them, or by altering the battlefield's terrain. Some classes, such as Wizards and Invokers, are focused towards ranged combat, while Druids can specialize in ranged or melee combat alike."
"Strikers are focused on mobility, dealing heavy damage to single targets and avoiding attacks. Some Striker classes and builds are focused towards either melee or ranged combat, the role as a whole is not however."
Ah yes the old semantics standpoint. I respectfully request then that the name of the control wizard class be changed to the "unleashing torrents of damage on enemy parties" wizard instead as we have all apparently been wrong about what the word control means.
Apparently it means to DPS... silly me.
Much obliged. Yet unfortunately the clarity does nothing to address the issue at hand. CW is broken. It has been broken for too long. It needs to be fixed.
Much obliged. Yet unfortunately the clarity does nothing to address the issue at hand. CW is broken. It has been broken for too long. It needs to be fixed.
Why?
No seriously why?
At the moment
GF can help kite if needed for group survival and buff everyones dps. It has a definite helpful role and is always welcome.
TR can do high ST damage and is welcome
SW can do high damage and is welcome
CW can do high damage and is welcome
DC can do high damage and is welcome
HR can do moderate to high damage and control with high survival ability and is welcome
GWF hits like a wet noodle and melts fast.
I see 2 classes that could use a toon up. HR's getting a bit more damage in pve, and GWF needing a whole lot of everything. No where in this do I see a problem with CW's in pve.
Really? There are many threads which have already stated reasons why you are welcome to read but I will summarize with this. No other class renders the rest obsolete with the scope of overpowering capability than the CW. None. Best damaging, best controlling, best range, one of the best dodges, and an extra encounter which benefits from empowerment when it is slotted. No other class can boast the perks the plethora of perks the CW enjoys. When looked atvas a whole they have no deficiency unlike the rest of the classes. This is imbalance pure and simple.
The easiest and most sensible way to adjust this is to create a deficiency. In the case of the CW the one which you can alter without hurting the relevance of the class is damage output.
You could cut CW's current damage in half (I'm not joking) and they would still be desired based on their other merits alone.
The "balance pass" the devs did was correct in spirit but wrong in implementation. Reduce CW damage and you immediately make other classes more relevant from that one adjustment alone.
Really? There are many threads which have already stated reasons why you are welcome to read but I will summarize with this. No other class renders the rest obsolete with the scope of overpowering capability than the CW. None. Best damaging, best controlling, best range, one of the best dodges, and an extra encounter which benefits from empowerment when it is slotted. No other class can boast the perks the plethora of perks the CW enjoys. When looked atvas a whole they have no deficiency unlike the rest of the classes. This is imbalance pure and simple.
The easiest and most sensible way to adjust this is to create a deficiency. In the case of the CW the one which you can alter without hurting the relevance of the class is damage output.
You could cut CW's current damage in half (I'm not joking) and they would still be desired based on their other merits alone.
The "balance pass" the devs did was correct in spirit but wrong in implementation. Reduce CW damage and you immediately make other classes more relevant from that one adjustment alone.
I completely and 100% reject your premise. At this point in the game you could make a 5 person team of probably every class but GWF (and even them if geared high enough) and clear any content. Class doesn't matter, it's not just CW. Now if you want to talk about lowbie runs near the min gs, you still wouldn't want to stack only CW's at this point. Does more control help? Of course, but all CW will not complete content at min gs.
0
aulduronMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,351Arc User
edited December 2014
I'd say HRs are better at range. CWs have to get in the middle of everything to be effective.
HRs have 6 encounters. DCs have nearly unlimited encounters, as long as you throw some at wills in there.
What deficiencies do other classes have?
You act as though nothing can be done without a CW in the group.
Yes: CWs shine in the addfests that made up mods1-3, but there is no longer any reason to go to them. Everything is moving toward single target now, with few controllable mobs, and CWs are NOT the kings of single target damage.
I just ran ToS 3 times. Twice I blew everyone out of the water, as should be expected, but on the 3rd run, and HR beat me. What did I get for all the "OPness"? A few thousand RAD, a few thousand RP and 2 vorpal shards. Except for the shards, I can get that doing obsolete dailies.
In ToD, TRs, HRs and SWs usually beat me. My DC often beats CWs in SoT. A DCs chains and a TRs Smoke Bomb is just as effective as a CWs control in those places. In places like this, my GPF brings more to the group than everything else I have. Which is why I gave that GPF to my DC. He contributes much more to these groups than my CW can.
I'm certainly not going to cry about being out damaged.
I completely and 100% reject your premise. At this point in the game you could make a 5 person team of probably every class but GWF (and even them if geared high enough) and clear any content. Class doesn't matter, it's not just CW. Now if you want to talk about lowbie runs near the min gs, you still wouldn't want to stack only CW's at this point. Does more control help? Of course, but all CW will not complete content at min gs.
Argumentum non sequitor.
Please reread my post. My stance is upon the CW's capabilities, not the ease of content and thus stands. Good day sir.
Please reread my post. My stance is upon the CW's capabilities, not the ease of content and thus stands. Good day sir.
Best restate your argument, because it sounded like you are repeating the often made "CW's are too strong, all people want is 5 cw's or 4 cw's + 1 other" Problem is that that whole argument is from the ease of content, not the strength of the CW. Take a CW at min gs into a t2. You'll find the CW's weaknesses.
Comments
You can ask anyone to provide results and they will be the just as, if not more, skewed towards passive damage. I can go log every encounter and provide numerous examples. I don't see you providing any proof for your claims. Why don't you show us your "optimal play"?
I assumed this was something like castle never.
My steal time and sudden storm deals over twice the damage of the max hit of this guy...
This guy has a ridiculously low amount of power at any rate because otherwise, his passive damage (creeping frost and assaillant) doesn't scale with power so if he had an adequate amount, their dps contribution would be a lot higher.
Not just that, Tiamat is terrible for substained damage due to people knocking adds everywhere, which makes thaumaturge's dots a lot more powerful than they normally should be.
I,m sorry to tell you but this is a terrible parse to take data from.
And I'm sorry that I don't know the proc name of enchants that are sub par.
right click -> open imagine in new tab
I have flanking and non flanking damage separated for ease of knowledge.
This was the whole Tiamat fight.
It's just to show how big of a disparity there is on the damage of the hits. The player in question was saying that CW dps is nothing but passive procs to which I respond with that parse. Now, of course, I am not thaumaturge but thaumaturge dot damage do not scales with stats the way that spells does.
Imagine, GWF needs to be up close to hit a mob? OMG, he can't shoot magic from a Sword. Sorry, MOD4/MOD5 needs you to invest more in the HP.
In a single target way, GWF still beats CW by a large margin. And in all honesty, GWF shouldn't be in the game at all. When they appeared they were the most OP class, every TR user chose them over the TR, only to return now in MOD5.
So I don't know what more could you people who lack the party mentality - want?! CW's have lost a tremendous amount of Controlling power and it's not like the CWs are dominating the PvP. Now, there're no more stupid GWF kids who demand CW's only to have the rooms clear of MOBS by using Singularity and Repel. And no more stupid GWF rushing into the mobs to fight them alone, unless you have a lot of HP.
GWF should use a lot of Come and get it ability, especially for the controlling purpose and to pull mobs on Icy Terrain. That way they become party-friendly.
And DC's should simply repel the mobs as they see fit, but people simply don't care enough for the party composition, especially in the PuG cases.
Let`s use 0 DPS shileld instead.
Yes! Defense is what I need in PvE as a DPS class.
Well… I am sure I will not be kicked in first 5 minutes of dungeon for using a shield.
Oh no. I just got kicked. 10 times in a row. What`s wrong with the community.
I have to open another thread and talk about these kickers. They are everywhere.
You all are newbies. You don`t play same as me and this is why you kick me all the time.
You are jelly of me!!!1
[/ironic]This topic went wrong way.
PS
I will state it again.
The fact that Shard got nerfed is not a reason to change it into a… shield.
Tiamat is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE fight to factor dps in.
There's so much forced downtime that it's ridiculous.
Seriously, dps is the last thing that you should look into for a parse of Tiamat.
Edit: Just in case you don't understand why
- The higher the group dps, the faster the adds die, the less dps time you get
- The higher the group dps, the more downtime you have between heads relatively to how much time you spend on them (say moving target takes 10 seconds, if you have 45 seconds of dps time on a head with a low dps group vs 25 seconds of dps time with a high dps group, your dps will be a lot lower due to a higher percentage of your time being spent on movement).
- The closer the dps is to being able to do tiamat in two phases (but not being able to) the more wasted time you'll have due to having to stop early on the white head (which, in this parse, had something like a 60 seconds downtime).
Spare me the excuses.
If you are too dumb to understand why Tiamat is a terrible encounter for dps comparison, especially after I layed down the reasons, then I don't know what to tell you
In fact, the whole defending of the clerics can be done tactically with Repel on Tab when it comes to the protection of the Clerics. I've finished Tiamat several times by using this tactic and it was extremely effective, when you have a team of skilled people who understand the mechanics and not just the DPS percentage increase.
Meh, I kinda wish Cryptic would just let us queue with our own parties/friends like MOST REAL RAIDs IN MOST REAL MMOs.
I don't mind them using shield, but this whole artificially making the mindless raid harder by forcing everyone to group up with idiots isn't exactly what players were looking for when they said give us "challenging content".
Pugs using shield because they die too easily is the least of anyone's concerns. They are doing it to last longer.
And the boost to storm spell to what it is now is ridiculous. This is the point that the OP was making and all of this banter about Tiamat, shield, play style, etc is irrelevant to the fact that CW's are totally stupid broken.
All the balance changes that were made to bring CW's down to earth were quickly undone by this type of process boost HAMSTER in order to "bring the damage back up to where it was" when the reality is that it never should have been there to begin with.
CW's need to have their damage reduced. Period. If you wanted to do massive damage then you should have rolled a different class not the Control one.
They can achieve higher crits and damage than dedicated strikers while enjoying the advantage of range and control. They are an abomination in their current state and need to be changed. There is no arguing this.
It is disgusting that the CW has been so broken for so long and all due to the outcry of players who want to have their cake and eat it too.
Gloom level 60 Control Wizard
Dusk level 60 Trickster Rogue
Dawn level 60 Devoted Cleric
Eclipse level 60 Hunter Ranger
Wrath level 60 Great Weapon Fighter
Jinx level 60 Scourge Warlock
Actually we still put out less damage than we did in module 2. Try killing the training room dummies. In module 2 it was easily possible with a 15-16k GS CW.
CWs have been the AE damage kings since open beta. Anyone wanting to "do massive (AE) damage" should pick the CW. Dealing "high amounts of damage" and "unleashing torrents of damage on enemy parties" is even in the official description.
"Controllers focus on affecting multiple targets at once, either by damaging or debuffing them, or by altering the battlefield's terrain. Some classes, such as Wizards and Invokers, are focused towards ranged combat, while Druids can specialize in ranged or melee combat alike."
"Strikers are focused on mobility, dealing heavy damage to single targets and avoiding attacks. Some Striker classes and builds are focused towards either melee or ranged combat, the role as a whole is not however."
Apparently it means to DPS... silly me.
Gloom level 60 Control Wizard
Dusk level 60 Trickster Rogue
Dawn level 60 Devoted Cleric
Eclipse level 60 Hunter Ranger
Wrath level 60 Great Weapon Fighter
Jinx level 60 Scourge Warlock
You're welcome for the official definition.
Not even to mention all the people that looked up what class does the best aoe damage and rolled a CW at this point.
Much obliged. Yet unfortunately the clarity does nothing to address the issue at hand. CW is broken. It has been broken for too long. It needs to be fixed.
Gloom level 60 Control Wizard
Dusk level 60 Trickster Rogue
Dawn level 60 Devoted Cleric
Eclipse level 60 Hunter Ranger
Wrath level 60 Great Weapon Fighter
Jinx level 60 Scourge Warlock
Why?
No seriously why?
At the moment
GF can help kite if needed for group survival and buff everyones dps. It has a definite helpful role and is always welcome.
TR can do high ST damage and is welcome
SW can do high damage and is welcome
CW can do high damage and is welcome
DC can do high damage and is welcome
HR can do moderate to high damage and control with high survival ability and is welcome
GWF hits like a wet noodle and melts fast.
I see 2 classes that could use a toon up. HR's getting a bit more damage in pve, and GWF needing a whole lot of everything. No where in this do I see a problem with CW's in pve.
Really? There are many threads which have already stated reasons why you are welcome to read but I will summarize with this. No other class renders the rest obsolete with the scope of overpowering capability than the CW. None. Best damaging, best controlling, best range, one of the best dodges, and an extra encounter which benefits from empowerment when it is slotted. No other class can boast the perks the plethora of perks the CW enjoys. When looked atvas a whole they have no deficiency unlike the rest of the classes. This is imbalance pure and simple.
The easiest and most sensible way to adjust this is to create a deficiency. In the case of the CW the one which you can alter without hurting the relevance of the class is damage output.
You could cut CW's current damage in half (I'm not joking) and they would still be desired based on their other merits alone.
The "balance pass" the devs did was correct in spirit but wrong in implementation. Reduce CW damage and you immediately make other classes more relevant from that one adjustment alone.
Gloom level 60 Control Wizard
Dusk level 60 Trickster Rogue
Dawn level 60 Devoted Cleric
Eclipse level 60 Hunter Ranger
Wrath level 60 Great Weapon Fighter
Jinx level 60 Scourge Warlock
I completely and 100% reject your premise. At this point in the game you could make a 5 person team of probably every class but GWF (and even them if geared high enough) and clear any content. Class doesn't matter, it's not just CW. Now if you want to talk about lowbie runs near the min gs, you still wouldn't want to stack only CW's at this point. Does more control help? Of course, but all CW will not complete content at min gs.
HRs have 6 encounters. DCs have nearly unlimited encounters, as long as you throw some at wills in there.
What deficiencies do other classes have?
You act as though nothing can be done without a CW in the group.
Yes: CWs shine in the addfests that made up mods1-3, but there is no longer any reason to go to them. Everything is moving toward single target now, with few controllable mobs, and CWs are NOT the kings of single target damage.
I just ran ToS 3 times. Twice I blew everyone out of the water, as should be expected, but on the 3rd run, and HR beat me. What did I get for all the "OPness"? A few thousand RAD, a few thousand RP and 2 vorpal shards. Except for the shards, I can get that doing obsolete dailies.
In ToD, TRs, HRs and SWs usually beat me. My DC often beats CWs in SoT. A DCs chains and a TRs Smoke Bomb is just as effective as a CWs control in those places. In places like this, my GPF brings more to the group than everything else I have. Which is why I gave that GPF to my DC. He contributes much more to these groups than my CW can.
I'm certainly not going to cry about being out damaged.
Argumentum non sequitor.
Please reread my post. My stance is upon the CW's capabilities, not the ease of content and thus stands. Good day sir.
Gloom level 60 Control Wizard
Dusk level 60 Trickster Rogue
Dawn level 60 Devoted Cleric
Eclipse level 60 Hunter Ranger
Wrath level 60 Great Weapon Fighter
Jinx level 60 Scourge Warlock
Best restate your argument, because it sounded like you are repeating the often made "CW's are too strong, all people want is 5 cw's or 4 cw's + 1 other" Problem is that that whole argument is from the ease of content, not the strength of the CW. Take a CW at min gs into a t2. You'll find the CW's weaknesses.