I don't know where the topic's heading is going ?! I continue to find it strangely embarrassing to say that he is more skilled than the other, given that they never met. If it were me I would have invited us to go to the server preview and we would have tested whether the statement was true or false in a PVP battle. I even searched the PVP leaderbord to see what position he was in, but I didn't find it. It would be nice to see him and his super skillful friends participate in the pvp tournament that the community is organizing, to see how they would fare against random and unscheduled movements from other players
Skill in PVP and PVE have absolutely nothing to do with each other. In its current form PVP in this game is more a measure of a players's patience (Que times) and willingness to overlook the flaws and imbalance. Many who would participate decide not to because PVP is totally broken. I hope that the developers eventually separate the two permanently so that they can give PVP the balance and attention is sorely needs. But like I said there is no comparison in PVP - PVE "skill". It would be like comparing a professional baseball player to a professional football player, both athletes but different skill sets and games.
Mmm, I still see the changes I outlined above easier to implement, and anyway you'll be using Aimed Shot a lot which will make you immediately recognizable as an archer. What could be interesting would be the chance to replace the stance change power with a fourth encounter, like spell mastery does for wizards. I opened a thread in the wilds called "State of the Ranger" and would be very interested in your comments there.
I was kind of hoping that since we got a dev to respond in a non bug report non CDP thread (shocker, I know), offering suggestions might getslightly more attention from they-that-program-new-stuff (hope over experience, I know).
Also, I poked my head in that thread, but I still feel really silly offering up suggestions to Ranger mains when the last time I seriously played Ranger was in Mod 15. In this derailed thread, it's not like there's Ranger mains that will shame me for trying to change their class when I barely played it ... right?
Back to the original topic: I still see a need to work on class balance. I see some things that need to be improved. That said, it is better than what was originally done at the start of Mod 16 through 17. The balance was probably the worst I have seen in game during these mods. So much so that if you were in the classes that were the best in ToMM at end game your AD is through the roof. Those who were in the less desirable classes didn't get to reap those benefits. In fact most players left from those classes. Even though the balance of classes was comparably bad in mod 15 and earlier. Those mods used a setup that every class was wanted in end game. That isn't the case now based on the combat change.
Mod 16's rework of the combat system is strange because I understand the reasoning behind the decisions, but loathe the execution.
Like, the whole thing with (attempting) to make all the DPS "equal" was so you don't waste your time trying to hunt for (x) specific classes, you just pick 3x DPS and go slay some monsters.
But in making everyone follow the same format of DPS "style", there's a decent many people that are going to pick what is objectively the best tools for the situation, which is where I see the class (im)balance comes in.
Take Barbarian, for example, being mediocre at at single target damage and great at AoE. This would be theoretically balanced in a traditional sense of having a strength and a tradeoff in another place.
However, in NW, it's effectively fake balance because the game has an overt bias towards single target damage potential:
-For most packs of mobs, they are merely speed bumps on the way to bosses (if you are struggling with mobs, there is something else wrong with your preparations, like lacking too little ArmorPen). -If there are adds in boss fights, they are usually fodder that you ignore or just poke you for scratch damage -if there are relevant adds in boss fights, they usually show up for mechanics and in small numbers (aka: being a single target enemy you need to shift your attention to or die), or they don't even show up at all, making good AoE damage irrelevant -most of the high rewarding content in the game is based around boss fights, which all follow the fight design of having adds that don't really matter and don't necessitate having good AoE damage
So, I would actually try suggesting changing the enemy placement/abilities so the strengths and weaknesses of classes are things that add tension/relieve tension depending on your strategy.
One example would be a boss fight in which the "gimmick" is that a CCable boss eats the adds that show up on the field and regains health + deals more damage to the party for each add eaten.
You could opt to clear the field of adds so the boss doesn't gain as many adds to eat to regain health, could slow the boss so they don't get to the adds as fast (giving you more time to kill the adds), just load up on all single target damage dealers and attempt to simply burn the boss, and so on: your success is how you use the tools within the combat sandbox, rather than if you brought the highest tier DPS class and have the correct gear numbers to play.
... But, I'd guess that difficulty is just going to be numbers hard and that boss fights will still be "one room with beefy enemy", so I don't fault you or anyone else for wanting all classes to be both good at single target and AoE.
> @admiralwarlord#3792 said: > I don't know where the topic's heading is going ?! > > The creator of the topic spoke how happy he was to see that all classes are capable of carrying out any content today. I only replied that despite appearing, I disagreed with the current balance of class by citing something he had already mentioned. When I saw that Dev had entered the discourse, I went to read the whole topic to understand what he said in his post and I see an act of elitism and a statement of which I agreed. I don't care if he was in the first ToMM to be performed, I still don't agree with his statement that he is more skilled than the other. In another topic I about the balance of classes I made a challenge for Dev, but it would be useful for players like him who say they are more skilled than others, I said to try to finish ToMM with 1 healer DC, 1 healer SW, 6 DPS that could be GWF GF SW and DC, did anyone? The few GWFs that have the weapons of the Lion set have probably succeeded in another character. I know why I kept playing this trash class while most switched to another. Points of intelligence for them, that unlike me, I preferred to continue playing my class, even though I had a GF Tank and a CW with full campaigns, even though I participated in the tragedy that was the preview of Mod 16 and knowing what would come through front. >
The funny thing we have just done that with the class that you mentioned.
Now the second thing is you propably don't know your class as well. I'm in the few Barbie's that got weapons as dps for tank is easy
You can't say bc I can't they changed class and farmed tomm. I know your frustrations is just that need a lot of gear to Be good dps and rotation. And people willing to take you. But now in mod 18 I don't see anyone have problem with any class.
we didn't change class or didn't take people with us bc of their class but you need to play with people that want to try and to help took us longer then other people to farm tomm but we did it eventually and we still do.
I said what I meant. I purposely did not say that all players are equal. That is something that you said. Several times. And, yes I did understand that you put it up as a windmill to tilt against, but still... In your defense of the idea that skill is the reason for the differences in outcome, as opposed to gear, or hours played (veterency) , or the number of runs performed within a certain subset, or (god forbid) the number of place-holders in you Astral Diamond balance, you invoked the Almighty Bell Curve. The problem is... all of those other things, can be expressed numerically. They are quantitative. Skill is not. As such it cannot be measured using the bell curve.
I didn't put anything as windmill to tilt, I don't know what you want here. You jumped in and trying to get to something or somewhere, trying to bend things.
There was a simple post, and a simple question, what do you want with it. I understand that your will twist everything and anything in some weird attempt to make me look bad in your own perception or to self validate your some perception.
Here is the best example ever:
" In your defense of the idea that skill is the reason for the differences in outcome, as opposed to gear, or hours played (veterency) , or the number of runs performed within a certain subset, or (god forbid) the number of place-holders in you Astral Diamond balance,"
In no way form or shape I ever said that!
And like I've wrote before, you don't bother to read, or care to understand. I wrote multiple times, and we can do the history dive all again, though obviously it will be a waste of time, that player performance depends on their experience, gear, class and meta synergy and multiple other factors. Skill is a factor, one of many others. Hence in my question it was phrased as "all other things equal", this is how you do analysis of a single variable in a static system, but you should know that . I never in any post "defended" that skill is the difference as opposed to other things.
Like you yourself tried to "mock" with that mention that I've been sanding players to "learn to play". Cute. But interestingly the game difficulty adjusted in way that if most players will take the little time needed and try to learn the dungeon mechanics or class or what other factors there are, it can easily compensate, for the variance in skill, a run can be slower, with more deaths, but it will work out. Together with other factors like gear, experience, and so on.
What is your point? You argue against me hypothetically saying all players equal, which I also never said btw, I did say that we all started from the same starting point in the game (though it was in the context of someone who started also at around the same time). Or now you arguing against factors that make players not equal. So you just like to spend time with me on the forums? It will be more pleasant if you will actually try to understand the intended meaning instead of summarizing into your preconceptions.
There is no minimum data set for performing statistical analysis. Most people looking at data would prefer a minimum of 1,000 data-points. But if you are evaluating drive-thru service times at a fast food restaurant, no matter how much the boss would like, that ain't gonna happen. If 90 or 120 responses are what you have, that's your sample size. Good luck.
That was not the question. My question was specific, and while it was long long ago, it may surprise you that I did learn statistics, and I knew the pitfalls of various types of research well enough.
The "people" under the bell curve do not eat, or breathe, or take a nap, of have to go potty. They are there to represent a data point. That measures a specific action that the "person" performed. Went thru the drive-thru & got their lunch in fewer than 90 seconds. Drives a hybrid vehicle. Uses a drug, but received a negative result on a drug test. Does not have cancer, but received a positive result on a cancer screening. Completed Neverwinter's newest dungeon wearing gear
To start, that is not how Elo works.
But lets try differently, can we, in the context of class balance, define players skill? Please do look at my original question at which you first replied for that.
Lets define that, and then move to it's well studied parallel, and well debated as a predictive model.
While some people do attempt to make statistical analysis of qualitative data, the results are more often than not unable to fit into the normal distribution. The data is often separated into categories, do people prefer to drive red cars or blue cars? Or green tractors? These studies often end up with results that are skewed one way or the other. Since the numbers represent feelings, or preferences, they are considered less reliable, Soft data vs. hard data.
I suggest you look up the questions I've asked before. They were not asked from ignorance. Statistics has many limitations, but it is a science, and many things can be derived when understanding those limitations.
To the current context, we do not discuss new things here, reaction time, spatial awareness, learning, decision making time, and other factors are well researched in sports, education, military. Some of them using very modern tools like VR and eye tracking cameras, saw some live, but that besides the point.
Twitch reactions. Huh. That's new one. I'm guessing something along the lines of How many seconds between the red circle shows up & the player dodges. So, where does skill end, and ping begin? Somewhere in the graphics card, perhaps. Variables. The devil is in the details.
New? Not at all. Can I measure all of the factors separately? Can we put them in numbers? Can we account for each one of them. I'm sure you can look the topic up, the tolerances in tournaments, in different game types, why they do LAN tournaments and so on. What orders of magnitude each factors contributes and so on. But do we even care? Here you have a 100% measurable, quantifiable skill factor, once we remove all those other pesky variables, that can be shoved perfectly into a normal distribution.
So now lets reduce the problem to the following, given the same location, same ping, same hardware, and all the same conditions otherwise, will be a difference in reaction time within different people?
You're right... that is not how Elo works. Because that part was the part you cut out.
0
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
I said what I meant. I purposely did not say that all players are equal. That is something that you said. Several times. And, yes I did understand that you put it up as a windmill to tilt against, but still... In your defense of the idea that skill is the reason for the differences in outcome, as opposed to gear, or hours played (veterency) , or the number of runs performed within a certain subset, or (god forbid) the number of place-holders in you Astral Diamond balance, you invoked the Almighty Bell Curve. The problem is... all of those other things, can be expressed numerically. They are quantitative. Skill is not. As such it cannot be measured using the bell curve.
I didn't put anything as windmill to tilt, I don't know what you want here. You jumped in and trying to get to something or somewhere, trying to bend things.
There was a simple post, and a simple question, what do you want with it. I understand that your will twist everything and anything in some weird attempt to make me look bad in your own perception or to self validate your some perception.
Here is the best example ever:
" In your defense of the idea that skill is the reason for the differences in outcome, as opposed to gear, or hours played (veterency) , or the number of runs performed within a certain subset, or (god forbid) the number of place-holders in you Astral Diamond balance,"
In no way form or shape I ever said that!
And like I've wrote before, you don't bother to read, or care to understand. I wrote multiple times, and we can do the history dive all again, though obviously it will be a waste of time, that player performance depends on their experience, gear, class and meta synergy and multiple other factors. Skill is a factor, one of many others. Hence in my question it was phrased as "all other things equal", this is how you do analysis of a single variable in a static system, but you should know that . I never in any post "defended" that skill is the difference as opposed to other things.
Like you yourself tried to "mock" with that mention that I've been sanding players to "learn to play". Cute. But interestingly the game difficulty adjusted in way that if most players will take the little time needed and try to learn the dungeon mechanics or class or what other factors there are, it can easily compensate, for the variance in skill, a run can be slower, with more deaths, but it will work out. Together with other factors like gear, experience, and so on.
What is your point? You argue against me hypothetically saying all players equal, which I also never said btw, I did say that we all started from the same starting point in the game (though it was in the context of someone who started also at around the same time). Or now you arguing against factors that make players not equal. So you just like to spend time with me on the forums? It will be more pleasant if you will actually try to understand the intended meaning instead of summarizing into your preconceptions.
There is no minimum data set for performing statistical analysis. Most people looking at data would prefer a minimum of 1,000 data-points. But if you are evaluating drive-thru service times at a fast food restaurant, no matter how much the boss would like, that ain't gonna happen. If 90 or 120 responses are what you have, that's your sample size. Good luck.
That was not the question. My question was specific, and while it was long long ago, it may surprise you that I did learn statistics, and I knew the pitfalls of various types of research well enough.
The "people" under the bell curve do not eat, or breathe, or take a nap, of have to go potty. They are there to represent a data point. That measures a specific action that the "person" performed. Went thru the drive-thru & got their lunch in fewer than 90 seconds. Drives a hybrid vehicle. Uses a drug, but received a negative result on a drug test. Does not have cancer, but received a positive result on a cancer screening. Completed Neverwinter's newest dungeon wearing gear
To start, that is not how Elo works.
But lets try differently, can we, in the context of class balance, define players skill? Please do look at my original question at which you first replied for that.
Lets define that, and then move to it's well studied parallel, and well debated as a predictive model.
While some people do attempt to make statistical analysis of qualitative data, the results are more often than not unable to fit into the normal distribution. The data is often separated into categories, do people prefer to drive red cars or blue cars? Or green tractors? These studies often end up with results that are skewed one way or the other. Since the numbers represent feelings, or preferences, they are considered less reliable, Soft data vs. hard data.
I suggest you look up the questions I've asked before. They were not asked from ignorance. Statistics has many limitations, but it is a science, and many things can be derived when understanding those limitations.
To the current context, we do not discuss new things here, reaction time, spatial awareness, learning, decision making time, and other factors are well researched in sports, education, military. Some of them using very modern tools like VR and eye tracking cameras, saw some live, but that besides the point.
Twitch reactions. Huh. That's new one. I'm guessing something along the lines of How many seconds between the red circle shows up & the player dodges. So, where does skill end, and ping begin? Somewhere in the graphics card, perhaps. Variables. The devil is in the details.
New? Not at all. Can I measure all of the factors separately? Can we put them in numbers? Can we account for each one of them. I'm sure you can look the topic up, the tolerances in tournaments, in different game types, why they do LAN tournaments and so on. What orders of magnitude each factors contributes and so on. But do we even care? Here you have a 100% measurable, quantifiable skill factor, once we remove all those other pesky variables, that can be shoved perfectly into a normal distribution.
So now lets reduce the problem to the following, given the same location, same ping, same hardware, and all the same conditions otherwise, will be a difference in reaction time within different people?
You're right... that is not how Elo works. Because that part was the part you cut out.
You had to post something, so my mistake in splitting the quotes was it? After multiple posts going Don Quixote because you saw the bell curve which is also not really relevant as no one asked to quantify the difference, the question was only if there is difference.
You should have commented on my usage of paragraphs, or perhaps syntax mistakes, at least that would have any use.
Post edited by micky1p00 on
0
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
I don't know where the topic's heading is going ?!
The creator of the topic spoke how happy he was to see that all classes are capable of carrying out any content today. I only replied that despite appearing, I disagreed with the current balance of class by citing something he had already mentioned. When I saw that Dev had entered the discourse, I went to read the whole topic to understand what he said in his post and I see an act of elitism and a statement of which I agreed. I don't care if he was in the first ToMM to be performed, I still don't agree with his statement that he is more skilled than the other. In another topic I about the balance of classes I made a challenge for Dev, but it would be useful for players like him who say they are more skilled than others, I said to try to finish ToMM with 1 healer DC, 1 healer SW, 6 DPS that could be GWF GF SW and DC, did anyone? The few GWFs that have the weapons of the Lion set have probably succeeded in another character. I know why I kept playing this trash class while most switched to another. Points of intelligence for them, that unlike me, I preferred to continue playing my class, even though I had a GF Tank and a CW with full campaigns, even though I participated in the tragedy that was the preview of Mod 16 and knowing what would come through front.
I don't know mountaineering championships well, but I know that the competitors start from the same one to reach the goal that is the summit. I'm sure, since they are professionals in what they do, they trained to do that. Now imagine mountaineer X having the perfect equipment (even more than he should) on the day of the race, and mountaineer Y with the equipment that was told it was possible (when in fact it was not), went to compete, which of the 2 do you think would win?
I continue to find it strangely embarrassing to say that he is more skilled than the other, given that they never met. If it were me I would have invited us to go to the server preview and we would have tested whether the statement was true or false in a PVP battle. I even searched the PVP leaderbord to see what position he was in, but I didn't find it. It would be nice to see him and his super skillful friends participate in the pvp tournament that the community is organizing, to see how they would fare against random and unscheduled movements from other players
To be clear I didn't say he is more skilled or you or anyone. Your first (and now) statement indicated that PvP is the way to measure skill, and in PvE there is no "skill", that is inherently not correct, because what affects PvP affects PvE. The difference in skill in NW has much less effect, just because the PvE setting is much easier and adjusted to accommodate wide audience and can be compensated more easily by experience due to the static content though there will be difference in how fast the person has adjusted to the content. For one it takes a day to get ToMM right.. for others, it takes months (me for example).
But when balancing classes the learning curve of the class should be taken into account. Two people will perform differently on the same class even when attacking a dummy, or it will take them different time to reach the same results. (And this is the only reason I've commented that there is a gamut of skill in the player base)
----
The first group to beat X or Y there in the comment is not about him more skilled but about previous context of CW outside of this thread.
----
It may surprise you, but, I'm finishing ToMM daily with mostly GWFs as DPS (3-4 in a group).
I don't know where the topic's heading is going ?!
The creator of the topic spoke how happy he was to see that all classes are capable of carrying out any content today. I only replied that despite appearing, I disagreed with the current balance of class by citing something he had already mentioned. When I saw that Dev had entered the discourse, I went to read the whole topic to understand what he said in his post and I see an act of elitism and a statement of which I agreed. I don't care if he was in the first ToMM to be performed, I still don't agree with his statement that he is more skilled than the other. In another topic I about the balance of classes I made a challenge for Dev, but it would be useful for players like him who say they are more skilled than others, I said to try to finish ToMM with 1 healer DC, 1 healer SW, 6 DPS that could be GWF GF SW and DC, did anyone? The few GWFs that have the weapons of the Lion set have probably succeeded in another character. I know why I kept playing this trash class while most switched to another. Points of intelligence for them, that unlike me, I preferred to continue playing my class, even though I had a GF Tank and a CW with full campaigns, even though I participated in the tragedy that was the preview of Mod 16 and knowing what would come through front.
I don't know mountaineering championships well, but I know that the competitors start from the same one to reach the goal that is the summit. I'm sure, since they are professionals in what they do, they trained to do that. Now imagine mountaineer X having the perfect equipment (even more than he should) on the day of the race, and mountaineer Y with the equipment that was told it was possible (when in fact it was not), went to compete, which of the 2 do you think would win?
I continue to find it strangely embarrassing to say that he is more skilled than the other, given that they never met. If it were me I would have invited us to go to the server preview and we would have tested whether the statement was true or false in a PVP battle. I even searched the PVP leaderbord to see what position he was in, but I didn't find it. It would be nice to see him and his super skillful friends participate in the pvp tournament that the community is organizing, to see how they would fare against random and unscheduled movements from other players
1. The statement about being in the first group to complete ToMM, had nothing to do with my response to chemjeff. It had to do with the fact that someone assumed I had not run ToMM before and only ran IC. 2. That challenge isn't even a challenge. We have done it, multiple times. People that think its a challenge need a fresh dose of reality. Challenge runs are the equivalent of the run in that other thread, or doing ToMM without a healer. But no, surprisingly, I am not your dog at your beck and call, it is not my job to produce a run every time says something is impossible. My favourite thing about the people who try to issue challenges is they are never satisfied either, "but you had this," they always make excuses. The goal is never to get you to complete the challenge, they don't care if the challenge can be done or not, the only time they are happy is if you fail and they will keep making excuses until you eventually do. So no, I am not giving anyone the chance to move the goalposts. 3. My guild is full of people who have completed ToMM on their mains without switching classes. 4. I have met chemjeff before, multiple mods ago, he asked me to run an etos with him. I don't need to do it again, because believe it or not, I know he is nowhere near close to as good a player as viral, there are continents between the 2 of them in terms of how well they play. Reaction time, as well as tertiary information that is easily obtainable by reading forum threads (chemjeff cannot do the push pull in cradle, despite it being many mods since codg, I can do the push pull with a ping of over 5000, there is a very clear difference). 5. Your assertion that PVE has no skill has been disproven, multiple times within this thread. Just because you are too blind to see it, does not negate this fact. 6. I don't enjoy domination so I don't see why I should play it just to prove a point, see point 2. But even assuming I did, it would not prove anything, even if I did end up on page 1. Why? Because PVP right now is just a test of 2 things. Number 1, how good is your gear (spoilers, I can afford anything in the game) and 2, your ability to make a premade. Thats not particularly difficult for me, I am good friends with quite a few people on page 1, blackmore is an easy example, hes a part of my regular group of friends I run content with. Playing like that doesn't reflect my individual skill at all, but it would very likely put me on page 1.
Yes, I am so blind that I read this comment on Facebook.
"That CDP and several of the conversations after that eventually just turned into a Sharpedge love fest between him and Janne fawning over how they're the only ones who can possibly know what to do in NW. Unfortunately their ideas are just a continuation of the fails we've seen to date. Either C. Whiteside has his own ideas he'll implement and choose from other voices in that CDP or there isn't enough creativity left in the community to bring people back and keep current ones there. "
I laughed and then enjoyed ... wow how long it was since I had a good laugh for a HAMSTER that really won't change anything in my life. Do people also lose their sight from the top of the pyramid?
2
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
edited February 2020
You had to go as far as Facebook? Damn. I can point out few people in this thread alone that will love to add choice words. I'm sure you can find way more creative posts too. As long as you had a laugh, then it is worth it, see, we are making the world a better place one smile at a time.
I think the whole issue here with that "skill" dispute was because of a previous context that you were not aware of.
Its kinda interesting/funny/sad what happened to this thread Back to topic: i think the devs did a good job in terms of class balance - sure there are smaller problems to be solved, but overall the class balance is in a good shape atm.
I laughed and then enjoyed ... wow how long it was since I had a good laugh for a HAMSTER that really won't change anything in my life. Do people also lose their sight from the top of the pyramid?
My pyramid is "enjoying various mounts" and I am not on the top, because I'm broke. If we don't have to consider standing on others pyramids it's fine, but if we all want to stand on the top of the same fkn pyramid, goddamn thats some lack of space (and variation). And, as always, not the smartest will still stand on top at the end, only the loudest/most stubborn or those that remained, while the others went to fetch a drink because they realized that you don't even need a pyramid.
(Choice words included, even tho its a hamster mess)
Oh, and as a general note: You don't want the neighbours cat to HAMSTER in your garden, stop feeding it. Really. There is just some people you, I, we will never in a quadrillion years get along with. To get those to a point where they want to see your point (and opposite around) is a completely idiotic wish, because they will just walk in, see what you love, HAMSTER on it and tell you afterwards that it is now indeed HAMSTER. Then it won't matter if they can describe that HAMSTER in 100 different languages or in a more professional manner or with graphs or can calculate how much that HAMSTER would weigh because they don't wanna touch it - its HAMSTER, and your joy is gone.
Currently Best to worst dps in TOMM from my experience are:
Arbiter Wizard Ranger Rogue Warlock Fighter
A skill ceiling ranger can now and then beat a skill ceiling wizard but generally wizards have more damage potential in TOMM than a ranger otherwise i don't second that warden has higher dps than wizard.
Warlocks can also come close to rogues but again, rogues have more damage potential overall in TOMM.
Lastly, nothing can come close to Arbiter when played to its full potential and again that can only be seen in skill ceiling arbiters, which are seldom. But outside TOMM i would say a ranger is on par with an Arbiter.
Overall, dps classes are in a really good position, at least better than previous 2 mods. Fighters and warlocks still need some ST dps love.
@thefabricant No, they are not. Wizards underperform. They are overdamaged in single target by 3 classes and in AoE by all classes. And more -overpowered AoE of 2 classes matches single target with the added bonus of sleeping while winning. .
@sobi- I got 5 lol of this post. Your post does not say something about the 3 class outside ToMM in single target. Other than that I wait to see if you get 5 lol too or you have membership credentials. .
I never said Wizard was the top single target dps this mod, I actually agree with the list he made. But I also don't think the difference between classes is large enough so that it matters.
Please devs buff Barbie's st dps so we can enter in the list😃
LMAO i completely forgot!! Yh barbie dolls need some ST love
I don't think putting barbie in the list would be fair now, lets have a minute silence for them.
2
thefabricantMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 5,248Arc User
edited February 2020
I think if there were to be balance changes they should be:
Raise Wizard's AoE.
Nerf Barbarian's AoE.
Increase the Single target of Barbarian.
Lower the single target of Arbiter VERY SLIGHTLY. If very slightly is too hard to do, just leave it alone (I am fine with it being where it is considering the skill investment required to play it).
Buff Whisperknife.
Fix the abomination that is thaumaturge. Remove the bugs that are causing a "debuff spec" to exist when it clearly states on the tooltip that it shouldn't stack and should be personal and it both stacks and is not personal. Then buff it and give it a viable role.
Buff the non functional specialization of the stance switching class which I always get the name of wrong and people always complain that I do it (hence I was very general in this post).
Fix a certain warlock feat behaving as not intended and buff warlocks a little bit.
Buff fighter DpS a bit.
However, I don't really think any of these are really absolutely necessary. As I said in my opening post, balance is (in my opinion) overall in a good place.
I think if there were to be balance changes they should be:
Raise Wizard's AoE.
Nerf Barbarian's AoE.
Increase the Single target of Barbarian.
Lower the single target of Arbiter VERY SLIGHTLY. If very slightly is too hard to do, just leave it alone (I am fine with it being where it is considering the skill investment required to play it).
Buff Whisperknife.
Fix the abomination that is thaumaturge. Remove the bugs that are causing a "debuff spec" to exist when it clearly states on the tooltip that it shouldn't stack and should be personal and it both stacks and is not personal. Then buff it and give it a viable role.
Buff the non functional specialization of the stance switching class which I always get the name of wrong and people always complain that I do it (hence I was very general in this post).
Fix a certain warlock feat behaving as not intended and buff warlocks a little bit.
Oh He Who Love Fests Over CDPs, please enlighten us with your "wisdom" and give some examples of how to buff and nerf these things, I'm sure people aren't going to get mad at all about it.
Hellbringer and Dreadnought need TAB reworks. The class mechanic shouldn't be an afterthought.
Goofy Fighters I think are pretty willing to swap mechanics with Warlocks, at least Soul Scorch attempts to have a purpose of poking enemies for more damage. :P
@thefabricant "Buff the non functional specialization of the stance switching class which I always get the name of wrong and people always complain that I do it (hence I was very general in this post)." What do you mean by functional specialization? That stance switching would buff combat warden, that combat warden has to actually utilize stance switching, nerfing combat warden and/or buffing trapper, stance switching buffing archer equally as combat, theoretically (so reworking focused) or is that a general statement as in "HRs most functional build has no need for Tab and this is wrong"? I'm curious, HR main...
- bye bye -
1
thefabricantMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 5,248Arc User
@thefabricant "Buff the non functional specialization of the stance switching class which I always get the name of wrong and people always complain that I do it (hence I was very general in this post)."
What do you mean by functional specialization? That stance switching would buff combat warden, that combat warden has to actually utilize stance switching, nerfing combat warden and/or buffing trapper, stance switching buffing archer equally as combat, theoretically (so reworking focused) or is that a general statement as in "HRs most functional build has no need for Tab and this is wrong"?
I'm curious, HR main...
The stance switching class = hunter, or ranger, keep forgetting can't be bothered to check. I call it the, "stance switching class" because both paths can stance switch.
Non functional path = the bow pew pew path.
The people who play this class always get antagonistic every time I misname the class so I tried to be as general as possible because I genuinely can never remember what its called even after looking at it 2 minutes earlier, sorry.
I know what class you mean. I play it. I wonder what you would change about whatever you mean when yoz say functional specialization, which is either (or both) stance switching('s rather underperforming feats compared to static combat) or roots, which roots (ha a pun) in the same issues. Or archer, but pls no... Noooo... Pls don't propose messing with what you don't play. Get some HR friend pf yours to do that.
Yeah, yet we are not CW. We don't play Thaum/Arc, right? I don't run a "Warden". I will stop now, but I am just saying that I am not talking about how to rescue Barb, because I don't play it.
- bye bye -
0
thefabricantMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 5,248Arc User
I know what class you mean. I play it. I wonder what you would change about whatever you mean when yoz say functional specialization, which is either (or both) stance switching('s rather underperforming feats compared to static combat) or roots, which roots (ha a pun) in the same issues.
Or archer, but pls no... Noooo...
Pls don't propose messing with what you don't play. Get some HR friend pf yours to do that.
???
At no point did I list how I think I would go about fixing it, because I agree, I don't know much about it and people who don't know much about something shouldn't be the ones trying to fix it. I just know the problem exists and it should be fixed. Its perfectly possible to be able to identify that a problem exists, without going and suggesting how to fix it.
Problem = Hunter does not perform well, it needs a solution. What that solution is = ? I am not suggesting one, just pointing out that the problem exists.
FFS, even when you are trying to not offend people by not messing up their class names, they go and get their panties in a knot...
Comments
Also, I poked my head in that thread, but I still feel really silly offering up suggestions to Ranger mains when the last time I seriously played Ranger was in Mod 15. In this derailed thread, it's not like there's Ranger mains that will shame me for trying to change their class when I barely played it ... right? Mod 16's rework of the combat system is strange because I understand the reasoning behind the decisions, but loathe the execution.
Like, the whole thing with (attempting) to make all the DPS "equal" was so you don't waste your time trying to hunt for (x) specific classes, you just pick 3x DPS and go slay some monsters.
But in making everyone follow the same format of DPS "style", there's a decent many people that are going to pick what is objectively the best tools for the situation, which is where I see the class (im)balance comes in.
Take Barbarian, for example, being mediocre at at single target damage and great at AoE. This would be theoretically balanced in a traditional sense of having a strength and a tradeoff in another place.
However, in NW, it's effectively fake balance because the game has an overt bias towards single target damage potential:
-For most packs of mobs, they are merely speed bumps on the way to bosses (if you are struggling with mobs, there is something else wrong with your preparations, like lacking too little ArmorPen).
-If there are adds in boss fights, they are usually fodder that you ignore or just poke you for scratch damage
-if there are relevant adds in boss fights, they usually show up for mechanics and in small numbers (aka: being a single target enemy you need to shift your attention to or die), or they don't even show up at all, making good AoE damage irrelevant
-most of the high rewarding content in the game is based around boss fights, which all follow the fight design of having adds that don't really matter and don't necessitate having good AoE damage
So, I would actually try suggesting changing the enemy placement/abilities so the strengths and weaknesses of classes are things that add tension/relieve tension depending on your strategy.
One example would be a boss fight in which the "gimmick" is that a CCable boss eats the adds that show up on the field and regains health + deals more damage to the party for each add eaten.
You could opt to clear the field of adds so the boss doesn't gain as many adds to eat to regain health, could slow the boss so they don't get to the adds as fast (giving you more time to kill the adds), just load up on all single target damage dealers and attempt to simply burn the boss, and so on: your success is how you use the tools within the combat sandbox, rather than if you brought the highest tier DPS class and have the correct gear numbers to play.
... But, I'd guess that difficulty is just going to be numbers hard and that boss fights will still be "one room with beefy enemy", so I don't fault you or anyone else for wanting all classes to be both good at single target and AoE.
> I don't know where the topic's heading is going ?!
>
> The creator of the topic spoke how happy he was to see that all classes are capable of carrying out any content today. I only replied that despite appearing, I disagreed with the current balance of class by citing something he had already mentioned. When I saw that Dev had entered the discourse, I went to read the whole topic to understand what he said in his post and I see an act of elitism and a statement of which I agreed. I don't care if he was in the first ToMM to be performed, I still don't agree with his statement that he is more skilled than the other. In another topic I about the balance of classes I made a challenge for Dev, but it would be useful for players like him who say they are more skilled than others, I said to try to finish ToMM with 1 healer DC, 1 healer SW, 6 DPS that could be GWF GF SW and DC, did anyone? The few GWFs that have the weapons of the Lion set have probably succeeded in another character. I know why I kept playing this trash class while most switched to another. Points of intelligence for them, that unlike me, I preferred to continue playing my class, even though I had a GF Tank and a CW with full campaigns, even though I participated in the tragedy that was the preview of Mod 16 and knowing what would come through front.
>
The funny thing we have just done that with the class that you mentioned.
Now the second thing is you propably don't know your class as well.
I'm in the few Barbie's that got weapons as dps for tank is easy
You can't say bc I can't they changed class and farmed tomm. I know your frustrations is just that need a lot of gear to Be good dps and rotation. And people willing to take you. But now in mod 18 I don't see anyone have problem with any class.
we didn't change class or didn't take people with us bc of their class but you need to play with people that want to try and to help took us longer then other people to farm tomm but we did it eventually and we still do.
The imaginary Friends
Main Kingslayer.jr(barb)
You should have commented on my usage of paragraphs, or perhaps syntax mistakes, at least that would have any use.
But when balancing classes the learning curve of the class should be taken into account. Two people will perform differently on the same class even when attacking a dummy, or it will take them different time to reach the same results.
(And this is the only reason I've commented that there is a gamut of skill in the player base)
----
The first group to beat X or Y there in the comment is not about him more skilled but about previous context of CW outside of this thread.
----
It may surprise you, but, I'm finishing ToMM daily with mostly GWFs as DPS (3-4 in a group).
2. That challenge isn't even a challenge. We have done it, multiple times. People that think its a challenge need a fresh dose of reality. Challenge runs are the equivalent of the run in that other thread, or doing ToMM without a healer. But no, surprisingly, I am not your dog at your beck and call, it is not my job to produce a run every time says something is impossible. My favourite thing about the people who try to issue challenges is they are never satisfied either, "but you had this," they always make excuses. The goal is never to get you to complete the challenge, they don't care if the challenge can be done or not, the only time they are happy is if you fail and they will keep making excuses until you eventually do. So no, I am not giving anyone the chance to move the goalposts.
3. My guild is full of people who have completed ToMM on their mains without switching classes.
4. I have met chemjeff before, multiple mods ago, he asked me to run an etos with him. I don't need to do it again, because believe it or not, I know he is nowhere near close to as good a player as viral, there are continents between the 2 of them in terms of how well they play. Reaction time, as well as tertiary information that is easily obtainable by reading forum threads (chemjeff cannot do the push pull in cradle, despite it being many mods since codg, I can do the push pull with a ping of over 5000, there is a very clear difference).
5. Your assertion that PVE has no skill has been disproven, multiple times within this thread. Just because you are too blind to see it, does not negate this fact.
6. I don't enjoy domination so I don't see why I should play it just to prove a point, see point 2. But even assuming I did, it would not prove anything, even if I did end up on page 1. Why? Because PVP right now is just a test of 2 things. Number 1, how good is your gear (spoilers, I can afford anything in the game) and 2, your ability to make a premade. Thats not particularly difficult for me, I am good friends with quite a few people on page 1, blackmore is an easy example, hes a part of my regular group of friends I run content with. Playing like that doesn't reflect my individual skill at all, but it would very likely put me on page 1.
"That CDP and several of the conversations after that eventually just turned into a Sharpedge love fest between him and Janne fawning over how they're the only ones who can possibly know what to do in NW. Unfortunately their ideas are just a continuation of the fails we've seen to date. Either C. Whiteside has his own ideas he'll implement and choose from other voices in that CDP or there isn't enough creativity left in the community to bring people back and keep current ones there. "
I laughed and then enjoyed ... wow how long it was since I had a good laugh for a HAMSTER that really won't change anything in my life. Do people also lose their sight from the top of the pyramid?
As long as you had a laugh, then it is worth it, see, we are making the world a better place one smile at a time.
I think the whole issue here with that "skill" dispute was because of a previous context that you were not aware of.
If we don't have to consider standing on others pyramids it's fine, but if we all want to stand on the top of the same fkn pyramid, goddamn thats some lack of space (and variation).
And, as always, not the smartest will still stand on top at the end, only the loudest/most stubborn or those that remained, while the others went to fetch a drink because they realized that you don't even need a pyramid.
(Choice words included, even tho its a hamster mess)
Oh, and as a general note: You don't want the neighbours cat to HAMSTER in your garden, stop feeding it.
Really. There is just some people you, I, we will never in a quadrillion years get along with. To get those to a point where they want to see your point (and opposite around) is a completely idiotic wish, because they will just walk in, see what you love, HAMSTER on it and tell you afterwards that it is now indeed HAMSTER. Then it won't matter if they can describe that HAMSTER in 100 different languages or in a more professional manner or with graphs or can calculate how much that HAMSTER would weigh because they don't wanna touch it - its HAMSTER, and your joy is gone.
Arbiter
Wizard
Ranger
Rogue
Warlock
Fighter
A skill ceiling ranger can now and then beat a skill ceiling wizard but generally wizards have more damage potential in TOMM than a ranger otherwise i don't second that warden has higher dps than wizard.
Warlocks can also come close to rogues but again, rogues have more damage potential overall in TOMM.
Lastly, nothing can come close to Arbiter when played to its full potential and again that can only be seen in skill ceiling arbiters, which are seldom. But outside TOMM i would say a ranger is on par with an Arbiter.
Overall, dps classes are in a really good position, at least better than previous 2 mods. Fighters and warlocks still need some ST dps love.
Please devs buff Barbie's st dps so we can enter in the list😃
The imaginary Friends
Main Kingslayer.jr(barb)
I don't think putting barbie in the list would be fair now, lets have a minute silence for them.
- Raise Wizard's AoE.
- Nerf Barbarian's AoE.
- Increase the Single target of Barbarian.
- Lower the single target of Arbiter VERY SLIGHTLY. If very slightly is too hard to do, just leave it alone (I am fine with it being where it is considering the skill investment required to play it).
- Buff Whisperknife.
- Fix the abomination that is thaumaturge. Remove the bugs that are causing a "debuff spec" to exist when it clearly states on the tooltip that it shouldn't stack and should be personal and it both stacks and is not personal. Then buff it and give it a viable role.
- Buff the non functional specialization of the stance switching class which I always get the name of wrong and people always complain that I do it (hence I was very general in this post).
- Fix a certain warlock feat behaving as not intended and buff warlocks a little bit.
- Buff fighter DpS a bit.
However, I don't really think any of these are really absolutely necessary. As I said in my opening post, balance is (in my opinion) overall in a good place.I'd making the gameplay not "unload all encounters then hold down At-wills because there's nothing else to do", rather than buffing the damage output.
At least if it's fun, you won't be noticing you're tickling enemies... Goofy Fighters I think are pretty willing to swap mechanics with Warlocks, at least Soul Scorch attempts to have a purpose of poking enemies for more damage. :P
What do you mean by functional specialization? That stance switching would buff combat warden, that combat warden has to actually utilize stance switching, nerfing combat warden and/or buffing trapper, stance switching buffing archer equally as combat, theoretically (so reworking focused) or is that a general statement as in "HRs most functional build has no need for Tab and this is wrong"?
I'm curious, HR main...
Non functional path = the bow pew pew path.
The people who play this class always get antagonistic every time I misname the class so I tried to be as general as possible because I genuinely can never remember what its called even after looking at it 2 minutes earlier, sorry.
Or archer, but pls no... Noooo...
Pls don't propose messing with what you don't play. Get some HR friend pf yours to do that.
I will stop now, but I am just saying that I am not talking about how to rescue Barb, because I don't play it.
At no point did I list how I think I would go about fixing it, because I agree, I don't know much about it and people who don't know much about something shouldn't be the ones trying to fix it. I just know the problem exists and it should be fixed. Its perfectly possible to be able to identify that a problem exists, without going and suggesting how to fix it.
Problem = Hunter does not perform well, it needs a solution. What that solution is = ? I am not suggesting one, just pointing out that the problem exists.
FFS, even when you are trying to not offend people by not messing up their class names, they go and get their panties in a knot...