Won't power reaper be efficient in organized groups — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Won't power reaper be efficient in organized groups

Crystal Paladin.3871Crystal Paladin.3871 Member ✭✭✭
edited August 13, 2019 in Necromancer

People often make this comment when they talk about reaper in organized group content fractals,raids

They say other classes outperform reaper coz boon uptimes favor other classes more when compared to reaper

But... The trait "awaken the pain" gives extra 1000 power for 25 stacks of might with some condi dmg too... And include this with extra 600 ferocity in shroud form. Afaik, no other class gets this much ferocity and extra power and to top it off... Reaper cleave radius is huge
And gravedigger doesn't have a cooldown when the boss reaches 50% hp (combine this with soul Barbs while exiting shroud) and gravedigger becomes a relentless nuke

But still ppl consider it less efficient in organized groups...

<1

Comments

  • LucianDK.8615LucianDK.8615 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2019

    Reaper is a selfish espec.
    It doesnt do what others can do better already, ie with boon uptime for the whole group.
    Low damage.
    Cant be healed in shroud.
    On the other hand, if Anet ever kills perma boonspam, then Reapers might see a comeback.

  • Methuselah.4376Methuselah.4376 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2019

    It's true that Reaper is very self efficient and holds its own really well, but it has a lower dps ceiling than other classes. Usually if you're playing a selfish class, you're expected to do top tier dps and while Reaper's dps has improved greatly over the years and is good, there are better options for speed clearing.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    People only look at the damage potential of the different profession and count on the support to provide all boons. Unfortunately, despite all those advantage you listed the reaper is still pretty close to be bottom of the barrel in term of damage potential.

    Reaper sure have it's pros but those are not advantages that the average simple minded player will take into consideration willingly. Those players only seek to be able to do the maximum damage possible in the shortest amount of time because that's the best way to disregard bothersome bosses mechanisms in this game. The encounter design only really reward maximum dps, this is a flaw in itself but it tend to satisfy the point of view of the raiding crew.

  • Taygus.4571Taygus.4571 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Afaik, reaper (and scourge) are great for pugs. It's easier to reach Reapers top DPS then it is on other classes...and reapers dps is enough. Yes, it's not a speed clesr class, but it's a safer class to play and I do think teams should be more accepting of it. (Well, they are in fractals, I don't know about raids).

  • @Taygus.4571 said:
    Afaik, reaper (and scourge) are great for pugs. It's easier to reach Reapers top DPS then it is on other classes...and reapers dps is enough. Yes, it's not a speed clesr class, but it's a safer class to play and I do think teams should be more accepting of it. (Well, they are in fractals, I don't know about raids).

    May I ask how you compared the easiness of reaching top-dps between all classes, have you played all other classes in raids and T4 fractals or is it just from hearsay? Cause I have played all of them in raids and T4, and I know words like easy, hard, etc. are subjective terms, but in my experience none in general is really that much easier or harder than the other.
    Because in the end it's all about knowing your encounters: Imo, ANet actually did quite a good job leaving a lot of RNG out of their PvE endgame. So once you're experienced enough in those encounters, you'll figure out that any class is easy enough to get near to its own top-DPS (not the golem benchmarks of course, but what's considered average top-dps per raid/fractal). And once you get to that point, I'm afraid it all boils down to what every class is capped to, and the Necro has for some kind of reason - which I still really don't understand - always (pretty much since launch) been at the bottom of the barrel, with all other classes having at least several different DPS builds (Power AND Condi) available outperforming the Power Reaper's DPS ceiling .... and mostly even bringing more support/utility to the squad/party as well (banners, blocks, stances, etc.), next to their significantly higher (up to 20%) DPS af course.

  • Kaladel.1670Kaladel.1670 Member ✭✭
    edited August 14, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    And once you get to that point, I'm afraid it all boils down to what every class is capped to, and the Necro has for some kind of reason - which I still really don't understand - always (pretty much since launch) been at the bottom of the barrel, with all other classes having at least several different DPS builds (Power AND Condi) available outperforming the Power Reaper's DPS ceiling .... and mostly even bringing more support/utility to the squad/party as well (banners, blocks, stances, etc.), next to their significantly higher (up to 20%) DPS af course.

    Shroud is the excuse the devs use since 6-7 years. Every time. It's like they don't play the class and only have a vague idea of it.
    And WvW (and maybe PvP) performances are hindering PvE too. (See Scourge in 2017 for a recent example)
    Some ignorants even accused us of willing to be the meta profession above the other, when all most necro want is to be on par with the other professions or at least bring something useful to a party.

  • See the issue is people worry too much about benchmarks. I play reaper regularly in both my static and in pugs. Yeah i'm not hitting 30k dps most of the time. Usually around 20-23k, but how often do you ever see people hitting 30k target dps? almost never. You're talking something that literally only the top 1% of players do.

    It may be bottom of the barrel for those players, but for the vast majority of people that is not their experience with it. The notion that they are bad dps is just nonsense at this point.

  • The one to Rule.2593The one to Rule.2593 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 14, 2019

    Furthermore this " but they are selfish dps" is also nonsense. So is literally every other dps class. DH brings no party buffs and hardly any utility unless it's for niche use. theives only basi venom, power holo nothing, power chrono nothing, weaver nothing. Neither power or condi SLB use spotter so again nothing. The only one that brings much of anything is maybe condi renegade( kallas fervor and soulcleave) and quickbrand in some encounters( is actually OP and will most likely get tuned down in the future)

  • Nephalem.8921Nephalem.8921 Member ✭✭✭

    @Crystal Paladin.3871 said:
    People often make this comment when they talk about reaper in organized group content fractals,raids

    They say other classes outperform reaper coz boon uptimes favor other classes more when compared to reaper

    But... The trait "awaken the pain" gives extra 1000 power for 25 stacks of might with some condi dmg too... And include this with extra 600 ferocity in shroud form. Afaik, no other class gets this much ferocity and extra power and to top it off... Reaper cleave radius is huge
    And gravedigger doesn't have a cooldown when the boss reaches 50% hp (combine this with soul Barbs while exiting shroud) and gravedigger becomes a relentless nuke

    But still ppl consider it less efficient in organized groups...

    That trait only gives 250 extra power. Gravedigger spam is also lower dps than reaper shroud which is good, otherwise the rotation would be pretty boring.
    The problem in organized fractals is that weaver brings way more dps and can stack fury. You need to force the fb to run axe or sword but the group will lack might then. Forcing the warr to go ps will also lower group dps.
    Reaper is ok in fractals if you do them casually with a healer that stacks fury and might on its own otherwise you'll notice necros lack of boon support. Boon corrupt is helpful vs no pain no gain so the ren doesnt have to run mallyx but you really need fury and might.

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    May I ask how you compared the easiness of reaching top-dps between all classes, have you played all other classes in raids and T4 fractals or is it just from hearsay? Cause I have played all of them in raids and T4, and I know words like easy, hard, etc. are subjective terms, but in my experience none in general is really that much easier or harder than the other.
    Because in the end it's all about knowing your encounters: Imo, ANet actually did quite a good job leaving a lot of RNG out of their PvE endgame. So once you're experienced enough in those encounters, you'll figure out that any class is easy enough to get near to its own top-DPS (not the golem benchmarks of course, but what's considered average top-dps per raid/fractal). And once you get to that point, I'm afraid it all boils down to what every class is capped to, and the Necro has for some kind of reason - which I still really don't understand - always (pretty much since launch) been at the bottom of the barrel, with all other classes having at least several different DPS builds (Power AND Condi) available outperforming the Power Reaper's DPS ceiling .... and mostly even bringing more support/utility to the squad/party as well (banners, blocks, stances, etc.), next to their significantly higher (up to 20%) DPS af course.

    I've played all classes except ranger in t4, as well as spent many, many hours benchmarking on a test golem. Multiple builds for each profession, too. The conclusion I came to is pretty similar: Power Reaper DPS is one of the easier peak rotations. The reasons for this are simple:

    (1): Low resource management. You have life force and weapon swap. This is less than any other profession in the game.
    (2): Low punishment for mistakes. There's nothing that is super clutch, requiring split second timing. The auto attack is solid, too.
    (3): Skill simplicity. There's only a small number of skills you need to keep track of, and most of them keep track of themselves.
    (4): All the DPS is focused into Shroud 4, making it easy to "burst" with.
    (5): There's plenty of self-buffing on the reaper, filling boon caps that would be on other professions.

    The difficulty of a profession's rotation is much less subjective than what you're implying. You can boil the difficulty to the rotations down into how many resources you need to keep track of, how many skills you need to keep track of, whether the order of those skills is simple or complex, how fast you need to press each button, how strict the timing is on each skill, how punishing it is to mess up, and the ease of use of each of these techniques. Almost all of these factors are objective, and the hardest rotations in the game (engineer, mesmer, renegade) have them in the worst degree.

    There's only a few things that count against power reaper. First, taking damage in shroud reduces DPS, making it less consistent. This isn't that much of a tradeoff, considering that other professions straight up go down if they take too much damage. Second, pets aren't always cooperative, and they can die. The minions, however, do very little damage on their own, so this isn't much of a loss if something goes wrong. Third, all of the DPS skills are melee, so if there is any sort of forced disengagement, falling back on axe for damage is not ideal. Unless you're YOLO pugging t4 fractals, this generally won't happen. All in all, this makes the power reaper one of the safest and easiest classes to use in high end PVE, even if the ceiling is low.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Nimon.7840Nimon.7840 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    May I ask how you compared the easiness of reaching top-dps between all classes, have you played all other classes in raids and T4 fractals or is it just from hearsay? Cause I have played all of them in raids and T4, and I know words like easy, hard, etc. are subjective terms, but in my experience none in general is really that much easier or harder than the other.
    Because in the end it's all about knowing your encounters: Imo, ANet actually did quite a good job leaving a lot of RNG out of their PvE endgame. So once you're experienced enough in those encounters, you'll figure out that any class is easy enough to get near to its own top-DPS (not the golem benchmarks of course, but what's considered average top-dps per raid/fractal). And once you get to that point, I'm afraid it all boils down to what every class is capped to, and the Necro has for some kind of reason - which I still really don't understand - always (pretty much since launch) been at the bottom of the barrel, with all other classes having at least several different DPS builds (Power AND Condi) available outperforming the Power Reaper's DPS ceiling .... and mostly even bringing more support/utility to the squad/party as well (banners, blocks, stances, etc.), next to their significantly higher (up to 20%) DPS af course.

    I've played all classes except ranger in t4, as well as spent many, many hours benchmarking on a test golem. Multiple builds for each profession, too. The conclusion I came to is pretty similar: Power Reaper DPS is one of the easier peak rotations. The reasons for this are simple:

    (1): Low resource management. You have life force and weapon swap. This is less than any other profession in the game.
    (2): Low punishment for mistakes. There's nothing that is super clutch, requiring split second timing. The auto attack is solid, too.
    (3): Skill simplicity. There's only a small number of skills you need to keep track of, and most of them keep track of themselves.
    (4): All the DPS is focused into Shroud 4, making it easy to "burst" with.
    (5): There's plenty of self-buffing on the reaper, filling boon caps that would be on other professions.

    The difficulty of a profession's rotation is much less subjective than what you're implying. You can boil the difficulty to the rotations down into how many resources you need to keep track of, how many skills you need to keep track of, whether the order of those skills is simple or complex, how fast you need to press each button, how strict the timing is on each skill, how punishing it is to mess up, and the ease of use of each of these techniques. Almost all of these factors are objective, and the hardest rotations in the game (engineer, mesmer, renegade) have them in the worst degree.

    There's only a few things that count against power reaper. First, taking damage in shroud reduces DPS, making it less consistent. This isn't that much of a tradeoff, considering that other professions straight up go down if they take too much damage. Second, pets aren't always cooperative, and they can die. The minions, however, do very little damage on their own, so this isn't much of a loss if something goes wrong. Third, all of the DPS skills are melee, so if there is any sort of forced disengagement, falling back on axe for damage is not ideal. Unless you're YOLO pugging t4 fractals, this generally won't happen. All in all, this makes the power reaper one of the safest and easiest classes to use in high end PVE, even if the ceiling is low.

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

  • @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Nimon.7840Nimon.7840 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Sure give a class more dmg if it's much harder to play than another. Playing the piano vs spamming 1,1,1,1... Should definitely be able to do more dmg

    I really couldn't understand a point of someone, who said, that even though, his class already did more dmg than necro, either necro needs to be nerfed, or his class buffed, because his class has less health and is less tankier.
    And I told him: just switch out one trait, or one skill, and take one, that makes you tankier, and will still let you do more dps than necro.
    He was like:" but then we can't compare, because then it's not Glasscanon Vs Glasscanon."

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

  • @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    May I ask how you compared the easiness of reaching top-dps between all classes, have you played all other classes in raids and T4 fractals or is it just from hearsay? Cause I have played all of them in raids and T4, and I know words like easy, hard, etc. are subjective terms, but in my experience none in general is really that much easier or harder than the other.
    Because in the end it's all about knowing your encounters: Imo, ANet actually did quite a good job leaving a lot of RNG out of their PvE endgame. So once you're experienced enough in those encounters, you'll figure out that any class is easy enough to get near to its own top-DPS (not the golem benchmarks of course, but what's considered average top-dps per raid/fractal). And once you get to that point, I'm afraid it all boils down to what every class is capped to, and the Necro has for some kind of reason - which I still really don't understand - always (pretty much since launch) been at the bottom of the barrel, with all other classes having at least several different DPS builds (Power AND Condi) available outperforming the Power Reaper's DPS ceiling .... and mostly even bringing more support/utility to the squad/party as well (banners, blocks, stances, etc.), next to their significantly higher (up to 20%) DPS af course.

    I've played all classes except ranger in t4, as well as spent many, many hours benchmarking on a test golem.

    Hmm, that explains it, probably more golem hours than T4/raids hours, right? Don't get me wrong, you have to start somewhere, and Golem is a good start, but after a while, you'll have enough experience with rotations, they're all somewhat similar to each other at least for me they are: word of advice: think of your most important skills (in every build, doesn't matter which class), and at least make sure that that they won't be interrupted and will be cast on recharge. Imo, that way it's much easier to adapt to the encounters, instead of knowing exactly which buttons you need to press in which order. Cause you then also know which skills to drop when you or your team makes a mistake. I actually found the most difficult multiple kits engineer/holo rotations really easy that way, and I was ALWAYS top dps in raids!
    Anyway, let me go through your quite distorted view of the Necro (Reaper) with the reasons you listed, which clearly is from hearsay (or playing it casually only) instead of real experience ... love to debunk them once again:

    (1): Low resource management. You have life force and weapon swap. This is less than any other profession in the game.

    At least they have a (dynamic) resource management system: there are many classes out there, that simply doesn't have it: just (static) recharges, or even easier (read: less prone to dynamic influences) resource systems, like thief's or warrior's. Which by your logic means that the Reaper is one of most difficult classes to play. And then about the weapon swap, I don't really know what you mean with that, but the Reaper virtually has 3 weapon sets, whereas there are multiple classes out there that just have 2 of which some just require camping in 1 (Daredevil, Deadeye, Power Berserker)!

    (2): Low punishment for mistakes. There's nothing that is super clutch, requiring split second timing. The auto attack is solid, too.

    And this is actually a 180, really: you couldn't be more wrong: the punishment might be even the most severe one: missing a shroud, or using it to soak up damage, or even worse: popping it in the middle of a knock down (I've seen them, I've really seen them!) plummets your dps to almost support chrono levels, definitely when you have to stay in Axe afterwards as well. You more useless than a downed player that way!
    About your second part: I don't know how you go in Shroud, but you need to learn how to cancel aftercasts, definitely for Reaper, otherwise your DPS will be even lower (and it's already the lowest of the pack)!
    And lastly: the auto attack is solid??? Maybe for shroud. But Greatsword requires Quickness ... from other sources, otherwise it's one of the slowest hitting weapons in the game (so not THAT solid). Well, and that leaves Axe ... I think there might be no weapon for any class out there that has worse auto-attack than the Axe for the Necro ...

    (3): Skill simplicity. There's only a small number of skills you need to keep track of, and most of them keep track of themselves.

    True, but may I point you in the direction of: Berserker (power is even only one weapon set!!!), Dragonhunter, Thief (Daredevil AND Deadeye), Soulbeast, Mirage, etc.

    (4): All the DPS is focused into Shroud 4, making it easy to "burst" with.

    But this is also its major flaw: see point 2.

    (5): There's plenty of self-buffing on the reaper, filling boon caps that would be on other professions.

    Except it misses THE most important boons in the game: Alacrity, Fury (which for the Necro is even more important because of the Ferocity bonus from Grandmaster trait: Death Perception) and (100%) Quickness. Only Might is not a problem, but the Reaper is hardly the only class out there that has that privilege!

    The difficulty of a profession's rotation is much less subjective than what you're implying. You can boil the difficulty to the rotations down into how many resources you need to keep track of, how many skills you need to keep track of, whether the order of those skills is simple or complex, how fast you need to press each button, how strict the timing is on each skill, how punishing it is to mess up, and the ease of use of each of these techniques. Almost all of these factors are objective, and the hardest rotations in the game (engineer, mesmer, renegade) have them in the worst degree.

    You forget one of the worst ones, being the Ele, nut hey, I'll let that one slip. And btw, mesmer these days (not even the Chrono) isnt that hard according to your logic. But all this in the end is just a trick, like I said, after you know how to do all general rotations, and you know the mechanics of the encounters, it's all a trick, just that. It's not like we're playing dark souls here or where the endgame is all about being lucky and a lot of randomness happens. And I'm actually quite happy that's the case in this game, but that also means that the PvE endgame is completely DPS oriented (dps builds are ALL berserker/assassin or viper stats), leaving no room for optional defences, because you simply don't need them. And like I said before, then it all boils down to what every build is capped at: and Necro is in a really poor spot, and always has been in that regard. And imo, they just don't deserve that. Let any other class take that spot from now on (and for all I care, let it rotate every 3 months or something), not the Necro please!

  • @Nimon.7840 said:

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    Not really. The mechanics are set at fixed health intervals for most bosses, and at the rates we're discussing are about 10%-30% per person. This isn't including durability or ease of use, or other factors. If you look at snowcrow's list of recommendations for each boss, for everything other than Chrono + Druid there is a wide swath of green and red squares for each build on every profession. So overall, it is a little more complicated than just more DPS = Easier.

    @Nimon.7840 said:
    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    It counts for warrior. Nothing I said would say otherwise. The weaknesses of the warrior are the incredibly weak ranged game, poor condi cleanse, and general lack of utility. The warrior's skills are so plain that their power builds just run axe/axe with signets. That's how unimpactful they are. The warrior is given good damage for their bulk because they don't have any other options. The necromancer, by comparison, has a third weapon swap and a second health bar, alongside of more conditions and better condition management. That's quite a lot of options in comparison.

    You can talk about raid effectiveness, but that's not what Anet is balancing around.

    @Nimon.7840 said:
    Sure give a class more dmg if it's much harder to play than another. Playing the piano vs spamming 1,1,1,1... Should definitely be able to do more dmg

    I really couldn't understand a point of someone, who said, that even though, his class already did more dmg than necro, either necro needs to be nerfed, or his class buffed, because his class has less health and is less tankier.
    And I told him: just switch out one trait, or one skill, and take one, that makes you tankier, and will still let you do more dps than necro.
    He was like:" but then we can't compare, because then it's not Glasscanon Vs Glasscanon."

    Yeah, I'm not sure who you're talking about or what is going on in this anecdote you have here.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    Anyway, let me go through your quite distorted view of the Necro (Reaper) with the reasons you listed, which clearly is from hearsay (or playing it casually only) instead of real experience ... love to debunk them once again:

    I stopped there. You're arguing the case for relativity and indeterminance, I.E. YOUR truth vs. THE truth. Because you're arguing a negative, the only thing you need to do to win is be as stubborn as an ox. You're twisting my words, calling me a liar right to my face, and expect me to be convinced by this? That's not how a discussion works, buddy. Special knowledge does not trump logic, reason, authority, or the general experience of the population at large. So quit wasting my time.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Xxnecroxx.4039Xxnecroxx.4039 Member ✭✭✭

    just don't play necro/scourge/reaper
    no matter what you spec there is a class that can and will do it better
    damage? HA what a joke, necros are not supposed to be allowed to do damage
    healing? Druids do it better in every way
    boon sharing? yeah no, just no
    the only thing we are allowed to be is boon corrupt bots AND NOTHING ELSE, that is how anet sees necros

  • Methuselah.4376Methuselah.4376 Member ✭✭✭

    @Xxnecroxx.4039 said:
    just don't play necro/scourge/reaper
    no matter what you spec there is a class that can and will do it better
    damage? HA what a joke, necros are not supposed to be allowed to do damage
    healing? Druids do it better in every way
    boon sharing? yeah no, just no
    the only thing we are allowed to be is boon corrupt bots AND NOTHING ELSE, that is how anet sees necros

    Maybe you're just a bad necro player? No necro doesn't have top tier dps, but it does well enough to be acceptable across all content if you know how to play it. No necro doesn't have access to a lot of direct healing, but support scourge is highly respectable as an off healer in raids and accepted as main healer in fractals. Boons? Ye you're right, necro has the worst boon sharing with the possible exception of might from scourge and regen from staff 2, which is fine because it doesn't have to be the best at everything. You seem to be confusing the fact that just because this class can't do it all at top tier level, then it is by proxy a horrible class....which is a very shallow and myopic view to take. Yes sure there are classes out there that can do it all; chrono is a great dpser, boon sharer and not a horrible healer with traited wells....but that does not by extension mean that just because a class can't do it all as well then it is garbage.

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2019

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

  • Sigmoid.7082Sigmoid.7082 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2019

    @Xxnecroxx.4039 said:
    just don't play necro/scourge/reaper
    no matter what you spec there is a class that can and will do it better
    damage? HA what a joke, necros are not supposed to be allowed to do damage
    healing? Druids do it better in every way
    boon sharing? yeah no, just no
    the only thing we are allowed to be is boon corrupt bots AND NOTHING ELSE, that is how anet sees necros

    Do you post anything but salt because condi reaper got nerfed and isn't a thing? You quit the game long ago.

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

    We're not arguing. We're talking. See, when Nimon and I exchange ideas, we actually get somewhere. He doesn't just scream idiotic things under a veiled agenda.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Warscythes.9307Warscythes.9307 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2019

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

  • Nimon.7840Nimon.7840 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

    Wait. Where did I say, that warrior has weak ranged game or that warrior is weak? I was saying the opposite. Lul

  • Lahmia.2193Lahmia.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    "Surrender and serve me in life, or die and slave for me in death."

  • Warscythes.9307Warscythes.9307 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2019

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    Is not just HP but rather core mechanics as well. For example DH is naturally "tanky" die to F3 and heal skill allowing massive healing. You do not want homogenized classes especially because there are other aspects of balance than just give more damage. Utility such as CC for example is incredibly important and is completely ok if a class has lower damage but strong utility via things such as CC. Not to mention this sort of massive game change is incredibly late to do at this point. It is better to design raid encounters that allow the individual classes to work than to give everybody the same defense.

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2019

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

    Wait. Where did I say, that warrior has weak ranged game or that warrior is weak? I was saying the opposite. Lul

    Ah, interpunction ... :) I meant:
    Don't bother arguing, Nimon. This person (Blood Red Arachnid) is in a complete different world ... cause he/she is the one coming with arguments like that (not you).
    I think he/she is playing a different game or something.

    I didnt want to put even more energy in this, but another example: it's almost laughable how this person thinks almost all mechanics being health interval based ... I mean, I literally don't know ANY endgame encounter where there aren't timed interval mechanics: from green circles up to telegraphed boss attacks .... pfffff

  • Nimon.7840Nimon.7840 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

    Wait. Where did I say, that warrior has weak ranged game or that warrior is weak? I was saying the opposite. Lul

    Ah, interpunction ... :) I meant:
    Don't bother arguing, Nimon. This person (Blood Red Arachnid) is in a complete different world ... cause he/she is the one coming with arguments like that (not you).
    I think he/she is playing a different game or something.

    I didnt want to put even more energy in this, but another example: it's almost laughable how this person thinks almost all mechanics being health interval based ... I mean, I literally don't know ANY endgame encounter where there aren't timed interval mechanics: from green circles up to telegraphed boss attacks .... pfffff

    Yep. I mean: imagine cm earth boss with very bad DPS. That would make you loos the whole platform xD
    Or having to deal with a lot of shackles on dhuum...

    It's all about skipping those mechanics as good as you can, cause they potentially wipe the group, or parts of the group

    And there's also max-health-% dmg attacks. Where more health gives you exactly nothing and makes it just harder for the healer to heal it back up.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    Which would mean, that that doesn't count for warrior?
    Has high health as well
    Does slightly more dps with two support skills equipped while boosting everyone's dmg with them?
    Or does a lot more dps on a DPS role?

    Don't bother arguing Nimon, this person is in a complete different world than the rest of us are: he lives in his own truth bubble and won't get out of that. I mean, if he comes up with the Warrior's weak ranged game: while its strongest DPS build (the condi berserker currently benching 36k) has a big 1200 range longbow rotation part ....

    Wait. Where did I say, that warrior has weak ranged game or that warrior is weak? I was saying the opposite. Lul

    Ah, interpunction ... :) I meant:
    Don't bother arguing, Nimon. This person (Blood Red Arachnid) is in a complete different world ... cause he/she is the one coming with arguments like that (not you).
    I think he/she is playing a different game or something.

    I didnt want to put even more energy in this, but another example: it's almost laughable how this person thinks almost all mechanics being health interval based ... I mean, I literally don't know ANY endgame encounter where there aren't timed interval mechanics: from green circles up to telegraphed boss attacks .... pfffff

    Yep. I mean: imagine cm earth boss with very bad DPS. That would make you loos the whole platform xD
    Or having to deal with a lot of shackles on dhuum...

    It's all about skipping those mechanics as good as you can, cause they potentially wipe the group, or parts of the group

    And there's also max-health-% dmg attacks. Where more health gives you exactly nothing and makes it just harder for the healer to heal it back up.

    If you want to take the really extreme case, yeah that is the case. But, I'm assuming that all parties are competent in this scenario. We're talking about 10%-30% differences between professions for sustained DPS on fights that take a handful of minutes to complete. If it takes you 30 seconds to move between phases, converting every single DPS build into a reaper would only change that from 33-39 seconds. That's not a lot, certainly enough to hit enrage timers nor bury you in unfinished mechanics.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    In my young and naive days I toyed with a couple of ideas for different kinds of MMOs. From a turn-based MMO with a complicated environmental effects + combination system, to a squad based RTS style game with six-way PVP combat. In each of those, I made the conscious decision not to paint myself into the corner that Anet has with GW2. Don't get me wrong, I still prefer GW2's system to any trinity game, but GW2's system still bears all of the hallmarks of a role based game.

    The reason why I hate the trinity system is because it isn't a series of strengths. It is a series of weaknesses. All players are inept by default. Which, for one, doesn't make sense from a roleplaying perspective, and two, is frustrating to play for everyone who isn't a DPS role. If damage is how anything gets done in the game, then it is a pretty bad idea to make it so 2/3rds of the group dynamic is restrained by being incapable of doing damage. While it isn't fun to play, for a trinity game it "works" because the DPS players have a series of holes in their toons that need to be filled by support roles. But in an action game a la Phantasy Star or Guild Wars 2 where everybody is capable of being self-sufficient, giving one class less damage in exchange for un-needed excess in other areas seems like a bad design. If an elementalist with 11k HP is capable of thriving on their own, then what is the point of the necromancer with its 19k HP?

    Building a game to not have this problem is fairly simple. You start by normalizing damage, and then giving each class its gimmick. You have the DPS + Tank, the DPS + Healer, the DPS + Buffer, the DPS + Debuffer, the DPS + Manipulator, DPS + mana bar, and then you can divide that up into more groups with a special/physical damage split, an elemental system, varying attack ranges, etc. Then, you have a series of classes where everyone is effective, but there is still group dynamics and structured compositions for dealing with different encounters.

    Fixing a game, however, is not simple. GW2 sort-of did the above with their design, but they balanced DPS around defenses. This is because GW2 was built PVP upward, where trading off offense for defense makes sense. The PVE impact of their design is largely happenstance. As much as I would like to see offense normalized in PVE, to do this while maintaining a sense of parity between the professions would require rebuilding each profession from the ground up. It would be very time consuming for very little payoff, since most players here are fine with the legacy system anyway. So, Anet makes PVE content easy enough to be beaten by anyone of moderate competency, and lets us solve the interpersonal hurdles personally.

    Now, if only they could make it so the DPS rotations didn't hurt so much to do.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    In my young and naive days I toyed with a couple of ideas for different kinds of MMOs. From a turn-based MMO with a complicated environmental effects + combination system, to a squad based RTS style game with six-way PVP combat. In each of those, I made the conscious decision not to paint myself into the corner that Anet has with GW2. Don't get me wrong, I still prefer GW2's system to any trinity game, but GW2's system still bears all of the hallmarks of a role based game.

    The reason why I hate the trinity system is because it isn't a series of strengths. It is a series of weaknesses. All players are inept by default. Which, for one, doesn't make sense from a roleplaying perspective, and two, is frustrating to play for everyone who isn't a DPS role. If damage is how anything gets done in the game, then it is a pretty bad idea to make it so 2/3rds of the group dynamic is restrained by being incapable of doing damage. While it isn't fun to play, for a trinity game it "works" because the DPS players have a series of holes in their toons that need to be filled by support roles. But in an action game a la Phantasy Star or Guild Wars 2 where everybody is capable of being self-sufficient, giving one class less damage in exchange for un-needed excess in other areas seems like a bad design. If an elementalist with 11k HP is capable of thriving on their own, then what is the point of the necromancer with its 19k HP?

    Building a game to not have this problem is fairly simple. You start by normalizing damage, and then giving each class its gimmick. You have the DPS + Tank, the DPS + Healer, the DPS + Buffer, the DPS + Debuffer, the DPS + Manipulator, DPS + mana bar, and then you can divide that up into more groups with a special/physical damage split, an elemental system, varying attack ranges, etc. Then, you have a series of classes where everyone is effective, but there is still group dynamics and structured compositions for dealing with different encounters.

    Fixing a game, however, is not simple. GW2 sort-of did the above with their design, but they balanced DPS around defenses. This is because GW2 was built PVP upward, where trading off offense for defense makes sense. The PVE impact of their design is largely happenstance. As much as I would like to see offense normalized in PVE, to do this while maintaining a sense of parity between the professions would require rebuilding each profession from the ground up. It would be very time consuming for very little payoff, since most players here are fine with the legacy system anyway. So, Anet makes PVE content easy enough to be beaten by anyone of moderate competency, and lets us solve the interpersonal hurdles personally.

    Now, if only they could make it so the DPS rotations didn't hurt so much to do.

    GW2 is definitely a step in the right direction away from trinity but I think if Anet made any bigger of a jump, people just wouldn't have connected with the game. You're view is very reasonable and demonstrates a good grasp of what the reality of this game is. Too bad more players are still stuck in their own heads when they complain about 'balance'.

    I do believe of all that games I've played, SWTOR does (or did) the balance thing right if anyone wants to take a look; it's a holy trinity and everyone has almost the same ability to do DPS with bearable rotations. It's main problem was that there wasn't much room for error, or your performance took a massive dive.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2019

    The necromancer's defense is just an illusion in PvE. The necromancer defense is based around health point which is pointless when bosses strike as a %age of health point. This is mainly why the necromancer's community feel that it's unfair to have their damage reduced in PvE due to having "more" survivability. Especially when there is a double damage cost to this surviability (Yes soaking damage with the shroud drop the dps).

    Your arguments about profession's role are all good but don't fit GW2's PvE. GW2's PvE is ruled by 2 roles, DPS and support. The game however also include "tanking" abilities and debuffing but those have effects reduced to an insignificant level in PvE. And that's where the issue lie because in term of design and thematic this is where the necromancer's niche is.

    Ultimately the developpers balance things by assuming that dps, support, debuffing and "survivability" are on equal ground but reality show that the design of the environment in gw2 make half of these points of balance weaker or infinitely less relevant than the other 2. This allow players to narrow builds options and build the meta around the 2 most relevant and rewarding aspects: damage and support. And indirectly this also push the necromancer whose thematic and design favor the 2 least relevant aspects in an unattractive state.

    Ultimately, the necromancer and it's specialization mainly need ANet to balance the PvE environment in such a way that survivability and debuffing matter. What GW2's end game encounter lack ultimately to make the necromancer and it's focus relevant are:

    • Bosses phases/mechanisms that make survivability a must, allowing players to outlast their foes (Yes enrage timer destroy this possibility which is why I don't like GW2's raids design)
    • A simple way to make boon corruption always valuable in bosses encounter (when the breakbar can't be broken and there is no boon to corrupt, count boon corruption effect as if they were corrupting vigor. When the breackbar can be broken and there is no boon to corrupt, count boon corruption effect as if it were corrupting stability)

    Ultimately it boil down to this 2 points to make the necromancer "viable" in PvE end game: rethink the design philosophy of the raid encounters and minor change to the interaction of boon corruption and the breakbar system.

    When ANet choose to "buff" power reaper's damages at the cost of it's survivability and it's condi potential, they already turned their back to the true way to fix the necromancer's "imbalanced" state in PvE end game. They added more and more powercreep to try to fix the necromancer/reaper in PvE and only ended up breaking it in PvP when the issue was the environment in PvE. ANet will never balance the professions as long as PvE have an imbalance in what players need to prioritize.

  • @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    I agree that you don't want a perfect balance that way (or at least, I don't) ... but I've also seen games that put the factor time into their balancing equation, where the best DPS is (completely) different every 3 months or so, as well as the worst DPS of course (and support, healing, etc.). Diablo 3 was an example of that, I really liked that philosophy. And because it would change regularly anyway, PUGs weren't to snappy too try new builds and accept a lot more diversity in their teams, etc. Or at least, that was my experience. Now it looks like their game is in an automatic support state orso (not much difference with GW2, btw), I think Diablo 4 might be in the making ... ?!??? (also similarities with GW there, maybe???)

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I do believe of all that games I've played, SWTOR does (or did) the balance thing right if anyone wants to take a look; it's a holy trinity and everyone has almost the same ability to do DPS with bearable rotations. It's main problem was that there wasn't much room for error, or your performance took a massive dive.

    From my experience swtor's healers and tanks are/were completly broken. It bring me to a few years, but both roles make the scrapper that suffered so many complaints laughably weak in comparison.

    However, if you say this with the freedom of role choices for each classe, I do agree that it's in a better state that GW2.

  • The one to Rule.2593The one to Rule.2593 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2019

    @Xxnecroxx.4039 said:
    just don't play necro/scourge/reaper
    no matter what you spec there is a class that can and will do it better
    damage? HA what a joke, necros are not supposed to be allowed to do damage
    healing? Druids do it better in every way
    boon sharing? yeah no, just no
    the only thing we are allowed to be is boon corrupt bots AND NOTHING ELSE, that is how anet sees necros

    I mean flat out wrong. Scourge actually provides more healing per second than druid and has access to a ton of barrier to mitigate damage entirely in the first place. Heal scourge has single handedly made matthias and many other raid bosses a joke because of barrier/transfusion/insane amounts of condi cleanse. My group runs a heal scourge as an offhealer because it's flat out better than double druid.

    Necro benching at over 30k how is that low? Sure it's lower benchmarks than other classes at top end play but i can count on one hand the number of times i see players consistently able to pull off even 30k so all in all, doesn't matter. Their damage is fine.

    Boon sharing- Okay fine, necro wasn't designed around the concept though so i don't care.

    The only aspect of necro i'd change a bit is maybe a bit more damage on scourge, but even then, condi scourge is still in a decent spot.

    All in all, necro right now is in a better spot than it has ever been in.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2019

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I do believe of all that games I've played, SWTOR does (or did) the balance thing right if anyone wants to take a look; it's a holy trinity and everyone has almost the same ability to do DPS with bearable rotations. It's main problem was that there wasn't much room for error, or your performance took a massive dive.

    From my experience swtor's healers and tanks are/were completly broken. It bring me to a few years, but both roles make the scrapper that suffered so many complaints laughably weak in comparison.

    However, if you say this with the freedom of role choices for each classe, I do agree that it's in a better state that GW2.

    I think that's an EXCELLENT example of how balance is not even fully achieved EVEN when DPS is equivalent across classes. Even when DPS is equal, you still get 'broken' classes ... that's because balance isn't just about achieving an optimal DPS rotation. That's why when people QQ about Reaper DPS and lack of balance, those people are ignorant.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    I agree that you don't want a perfect balance that way (or at least, I don't) ... but I've also seen games that put the factor time into their balancing equation, where the best DPS is (completely) different every 3 months or so, as well as the worst DPS of course (and support, healing, etc.). Diablo 3 was an example of that, I really liked that philosophy. And because it would change regularly anyway, PUGs weren't to snappy too try new builds and accept a lot more diversity in their teams, etc. Or at least, that was my experience. Now it looks like their game is in an automatic support state orso (not much difference with GW2, btw), I think Diablo 4 might be in the making ... ?!??? (also similarities with GW there, maybe???)

    Sure, there is lots of flavour out there. If GW2 isn't a flavour people like because of 'balance', it's pretty silly for them to complain about it. It would be hard to make this a selling point of the game but ...

    ... the fact is that lack of traditional balance in this game is an attractive feature for the philosophy this game is designed around. Basically, people can play like a scrub and still succeed and have fun. That doesn't require balance. Therein is the trade off ANY player that commits to playing this game makes.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    I agree that you don't want a perfect balance that way (or at least, I don't) ... but I've also seen games that put the factor time into their balancing equation, where the best DPS is (completely) different every 3 months or so, as well as the worst DPS of course (and support, healing, etc.). Diablo 3 was an example of that, I really liked that philosophy. And because it would change regularly anyway, PUGs weren't to snappy too try new builds and accept a lot more diversity in their teams, etc. Or at least, that was my experience. Now it looks like their game is in an automatic support state orso (not much difference with GW2, btw), I think Diablo 4 might be in the making ... ?!??? (also similarities with GW there, maybe???)

    Sure, there is lots of flavour out there. If GW2 isn't a flavour people like because of 'balance', it's pretty silly for them to complain about it. It would be hard to make this a selling point of the game but ...

    ... the fact is that lack of traditional balance in this game is an attractive feature for the philosophy this game is designed around. Basically, people can play like a scrub and still succeed and have fun. That doesn't require balance. Therein is the trade off ANY player that commits to playing this game makes.

    But that's exactly why I like the ever changing balance philosophy even better, it really accommodates to the casual AND veteran players. Casuals get a free ride on the uncertainty that's always there (and they won't care or even know about it). Veterans can theorycraft and try/experience different flavours on regular intervals.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    I agree that you don't want a perfect balance that way (or at least, I don't) ... but I've also seen games that put the factor time into their balancing equation, where the best DPS is (completely) different every 3 months or so, as well as the worst DPS of course (and support, healing, etc.). Diablo 3 was an example of that, I really liked that philosophy. And because it would change regularly anyway, PUGs weren't to snappy too try new builds and accept a lot more diversity in their teams, etc. Or at least, that was my experience. Now it looks like their game is in an automatic support state orso (not much difference with GW2, btw), I think Diablo 4 might be in the making ... ?!??? (also similarities with GW there, maybe???)

    Sure, there is lots of flavour out there. If GW2 isn't a flavour people like because of 'balance', it's pretty silly for them to complain about it. It would be hard to make this a selling point of the game but ...

    ... the fact is that lack of traditional balance in this game is an attractive feature for the philosophy this game is designed around. Basically, people can play like a scrub and still succeed and have fun. That doesn't require balance. Therein is the trade off ANY player that commits to playing this game makes.

    But that's exactly why I like the ever changing balance philosophy even better, it really accommodates to the casual AND veteran players. Casuals get a free ride on the uncertainty that's always there (and they won't care or even know about it). Veterans can theorycraft and try/experience different flavours on regular intervals.

    Right and we get that all time ... Anet is always flipping things over. Almost every balance patch is a random set of changes that give people the ability to try and experience different things. The introduction of more especs as well. This game is well suited to anyone that DOESN'T like repetitive and stale play. The class changes we get are ACTUALLY causing people to rethink how they play all the time.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    @Warscythes.9307 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Fractals with pugs is a whole different story.
    But people here want necro to be on par with other classes in organised groups!
    Mostly in raids.

    I wouldn't mind some clarity in this myself. On the engineer forum, I remarked that with the recent holosmith buffs that Necromancers are meant to be the lowest DPS class, since as soon as any other class (except power rev) gets lower than them, they immediately get buffs. Technically, this makes necromancers a unit of measurement, since they're supposed to be the lowest of all other classes.

    Biggest problem here is that Anet is colliding against the social hurdle to raiding. If we just went with objective requirements you could complete most raids with snowflake builds, assuming the player was competent. 28k peak DPS is more than enough to beat everything in the game with flying colors. Anything more is vanity. However, the community doesn't see it like that. The end-game is full of wannabe speed runners.

    This puts Anet into a catch-22 like scenario. See, they still balance DPS around non-DPS factors. Stuff like effective health, ease of use, boons, attack range, etc. In a certain way, they're right to do so if you consider the individual player experience in a box. If you were to make it so scourges and reapers did 39k DPS tomorrow, Anet would be flooded with complaints from Thieves and Elementalists. "It's not fair that they do so much damage while having so much health!" they'll say. "I don't get rewarded for playing a frail profession that's harder to play! There's no reason to take an Elementalist over a Necromancer!" It doesn't matter if these buffs are PVE only. Anet will still get complaints. Keep in mind, the amount of players actually concerned with maintaining maximum DPS that won't switch classes to get it is very small.

    I can understand their desire to keep Necromancer low because of this. However, all of this is speculation, since Anet won't say a word on their PVE balance philosophy. To be frank, I suspect they don't actually have one, given what recently happened with the engineer. So, it is easier to give each profession enough DPS, and let the players sort out their interpersonal problems personally.

    I think this post is key to understand why some classes are balanced this way in PvE.

    There HAS to be a lowest and highest damage class. However class balance is not pure damage, this poster breaks it down a bit but I generally just categorize them into defense and utility. Power reaper for example has one of the best passive defense in PvE. It has strong utility with very good CC, remember utility is not just boons. CC is an incredibly important aspect of raiding since many different fights has it in spades. Hell when my group did Qadim 2.0 CM, I was the solo breaker for the spawning adds.

    So with the two categories being high, the damage has to be lower. The closest comparison to power reaper at this moment is power holo, they have decent defense and very strong CC. So their damage is on the lower range but still higher than reaper because their defense is weaker.

    The real discussion is not that "omg anet hates necros I'm gonna kms". The real discussion is how big the damage gap should be and how important the other factors such as defense, utility and difficulty to play should be. For example right now Power reaper benches around 31.5k. The highest is around 39k as condi weaver. The current gap is a bit too big although that's more condi weaver benching too high. So ideally where do you want it to be? If is up me, probably around 32k-35kish. Where the lowest should be necros and highest for eles and thieves. The difference between the lowest and highest dps by about 10%. Of course burst damage starts to muddle things a bit as well due to phasing and mechanic skipping but that's another can of worms.

    I'd happily allow every class to be 16k health baseline if the damage of each profession was closer together (difficulty and how much support it gives taken into account). On that note I just looked at condi weaver rotation and I'm not surprised it can do so much. It's condi engi levels of rotation there.

    This is the price we pay to have variation in theme. There ARE games out there where the differences are in name only ... and you know, they are boring as hell. Sure, everyone is balanced because the difference in name doesn't affect function. It's a real trade off and at this point, I don't see how Anet could fix that if their path it to continually offer more and more variation.

    I agree that you don't want a perfect balance that way (or at least, I don't) ... but I've also seen games that put the factor time into their balancing equation, where the best DPS is (completely) different every 3 months or so, as well as the worst DPS of course (and support, healing, etc.). Diablo 3 was an example of that, I really liked that philosophy. And because it would change regularly anyway, PUGs weren't to snappy too try new builds and accept a lot more diversity in their teams, etc. Or at least, that was my experience. Now it looks like their game is in an automatic support state orso (not much difference with GW2, btw), I think Diablo 4 might be in the making ... ?!??? (also similarities with GW there, maybe???)

    Sure, there is lots of flavour out there. If GW2 isn't a flavour people like because of 'balance', it's pretty silly for them to complain about it. It would be hard to make this a selling point of the game but ...

    ... the fact is that lack of traditional balance in this game is an attractive feature for the philosophy this game is designed around. Basically, people can play like a scrub and still succeed and have fun. That doesn't require balance. Therein is the trade off ANY player that commits to playing this game makes.

    But that's exactly why I like the ever changing balance philosophy even better, it really accommodates to the casual AND veteran players. Casuals get a free ride on the uncertainty that's always there (and they won't care or even know about it). Veterans can theorycraft and try/experience different flavours on regular intervals.

    Right and we get that all time ... Anet is always flipping things over. Almost every balance patch is a random set of changes that give people the ability to try and experience different things. The introduction of more especs as well. This game is well suited to anyone that DOESN'T like repetitive and stale play. The class changes we get are ACTUALLY causing people to rethink how they play all the time.

    Wellll ...... NOT merely enough though.
    Here have a look at this patch of Diablo 3: https://us.diablo3.com/en/blog/22863534
    As you can see, you see a lot of changes of double, triple or even quadruple the impact on what it did before. And they're not on meaningless objects/skills/mechanics/etc. either, we're talking about set bonus changes for example, which are one of the most important aspects in that game. Look it doesn't have to be THAT crazy, but the 5% axe dmg bonus :) pales in comparison of course! The changes ANet normally is pushing through are not really changing anything in the grand scheme of things, really.

  • Nephalem.8921Nephalem.8921 Member ✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    Well. Faster kill= less mechanics to do = less likelier to fail the encounter

    Not really. The mechanics are set at fixed health intervals for most bosses, and at the rates we're discussing are about 10%-30% per person. This isn't including durability or ease of use, or other factors. If you look at snowcrow's list of recommendations for each boss, for everything other than Chrono + Druid there is a wide swath of green and red squares for each build on every profession. So overall, it is a little more complicated than just more DPS = Easier.

    Most mechanics are on a timer. The only mechanics on a health interval is the frozen orb statue event in w5 or orbs at qadim 2.0. Phases are mostly gated behind health but thats something different. Fewer mechanics lead to fewer chances to screw up and easier kills. Thats why fractals with decent players are easier with 5 good dps than with a healer and some roleplaying scourges. You wont even see most mechanics that way.
    Having dps that are 30% below is not massive? It's essentially low manning a raid with 8 players if all 6 dps players are playing weaker builds compared to the stronger ones. That's not a problem for good players but it can become a problem for a lot of players and pugs really fast.

    Shroud counting as healthbar is not helping, it's a handicap most of the time. Can't be healed in it -> no way to get scholar back. Unavoidable damage which got added A LOT in recent content cuts the uptime really hard. Reaper is comepletely useless on Vale guardian for example.
    A pug bombed you on Sabetha? Rest of the group gets healed to full in 1 sec but reaper just lost most of his damage. Most of the utilities are useless in pve. Wells need a pve rebalance. Stuck with 3 minions because the 300/700 single target dps are still better than every utility if boon corrupt is not needed which is 99% of the time. Shouts are garbage in every game mode.
    I even completely gut my damage if i try to use poison cloud and there isn't a support perma cleansing condis for me.
    It would already help if reaper could use utilities in shroud so he doesn't need to leave it to strip protection and has the 180power from signet baseline. Maybe even rework the minions into something less passive. That would also fix the afk farm problem. They could be strong summons lasting for a short period of time and scaling with player stats instead of being permanent. Reaper being able to buff fury would also make it a lot stronger.

  • Blood Red Arachnid.2493Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 18, 2019

    @Nephalem.8921 said:
    Most mechanics are on a timer. The only mechanics on a health interval is the frozen orb statue event in w5 or orbs at qadim 2.0. Phases are mostly gated behind health but thats something different. Fewer mechanics lead to fewer chances to screw up and easier kills. Thats why fractals with decent players are easier with 5 good dps than with a healer and some roleplaying scourges. You wont even see most mechanics that way.

    That's not a meaningful distinction. The things you have to do at each phasing are as mechanical as anything in between.

    @Nephalem.8921 said:
    Having dps that are 30% below is not massive? It's essentially low manning a raid with 8 players if all 6 dps players are playing weaker builds compared to the stronger ones. That's not a problem for good players but it can become a problem for a lot of players and pugs really fast.

    It's not massive at all. Incompetent pugs aren't carried by high DPS. They're carried by good heals and support players. Doing slightly more damage isn't going to stop players from flubbing the mechanics. Likewise, if we presume pugs are incompetent, then they'd just die while playing Weaver and Deadeye. The baseline DPS of Greatsword Reaper is on par with every other class in the game, so the worse players do the smaller the difference between dps gets.

    In fractals, if I am on a pug group, I would much rather play a Necromancer than a Warrior, Mesmer, or Elementalist. On those teams, necromancers are great. I can disable enemy groups with for extended periods of time with Nightfall and Well of Darkness, I can gather enemies up to damage them down with Grasping Darkness, I can rip all of their boons with Well of Corruption, absorb unholy amounts of damage with "Rise!", self buff to 25 might, solo break bars with the Flesh Golem, heal myself greatly and rez well with the Blood Magic traits, block orbs/projectiles with Corrosive Poison Cloud, and cleanse conditions with Well of Power. This is no exaggeration, either. I've been on teams where I've needed almost all of this. But if I am on a Warrior, the most I can do is pop Endure Pain and hope they aggro on me. With Elementalist, I use Sand Storm and hope I don't get clobbered by attacks that do more than my entire health bar. On mesmer, all of my boons are multipliers, so 1.5 times nothing is nothing.

    @Nephalem.8921 said:
    Shroud counting as healthbar is not helping, it's a handicap most of the time. Can't be healed in it -> no way to get scholar back. Unavoidable damage which got added A LOT in recent content cuts the uptime really hard. Reaper is comepletely useless on Vale guardian for example.
    A pug bombed you on Sabetha? Rest of the group gets healed to full in 1 sec but reaper just lost most of his damage. Most of the utilities are useless in pve. Wells need a pve rebalance. Stuck with 3 minions because the 300/700 single target dps are still better than every utility if boon corrupt is not needed which is 99% of the time. Shouts are garbage in every game mode.

    The thing about having a laser focus on raids is that raids isn't all of GW2. It's not even "most of the time" in GW2. However I digress: having laser focus on just necromancer will make it so you lose sight of all of the little problems that other classes have. Losing DPS due to shroud damage is on par with what other classes have to deal with:

    Revenant: Loses massive amounts of damage if the 10 energy threshold is missed, which is going to happen any time anything other than "nothing" happens. The timing is literally split second and has little to no leeway.
    Warrior: Berserk mode is on a timer, and losing out due to enemy movement, enemy CC, poorly timed mechanics or phasing. They have almost no range, and if the rage skills miss everything goes wrong.
    Engineer: The condi rotation is objectively the hardest in the game, and it fails terribly if the enemy moves slightly in one direction. Also, engineers blow themselves up if you're off slightly with photon forge.
    Thief: It can't move and only hurts one target at a time. The rotation screeches to a halt every time you get the quickness stolen skill, and if malice or initiative gets messed up the DPS flatlines. Suffers from prone-to-death syndrome.
    Elementalist: All of its defensive skills and utilities require swapping out of the DPS rotation to use them. It has no ranged abilities and frequently suffers from a slight case of death.
    Mesmer: Chrono has its DPS drops to Necromancer levels if the enemy doesn't have permanent slow. Has no way to apply permanent slow. Depends wholly on illusions for damage, whether it is continuum split or infinite horizon.
    Ranger: Don't play much ranger.

    Guardian is the only profession I know that doesn't have any big linchpins in its rotation. Spear of Justice is quite reliable, and the tomes don't require split second timing or expire if something goes wrong. The DPS rotations in GW2 are some of the most difficult and chaotic I've ever played, to the point where I'd argue it is needlessly so. Every profession specific mechanic is a handicap in some way, because the professions aren't balanced around not having them.

    @Nephalem.8921 said:
    It would already help if reaper could use utilities in shroud so he doesn't need to leave it to strip protection and has the 180power from signet baseline. Maybe even rework the minions into something less passive. That would also fix the afk farm problem. They could be strong summons lasting for a short period of time and scaling with player stats instead of being permanent. Reaper being able to buff fury would also make it a lot stronger.

    What I would like to see is the baseline damage under full buffs for all melee weapons be raised to about 23k while reducing some of the burst, normalizing DPS for most professions at around 35k for perfect rotations. Less for ranged weapons, maybe more for conditions. Class identity shouldn't be tied around one being the DPS, or another not being the DPS. The global melee weapon buff is to make mistakes less punishing and bad players more tolerable. For necromancers, this would have the additional benefit of making shroud loss less punishing.

    As it stands currently, the average base melee DPS is at 17k for most weapons most professions, and less for all the rest. Of the 7 professions I tested, the only one significantly higher than that was Thief, which sits at 25k.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 18, 2019

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    People only look at the damage potential of the different profession and count on the support to provide all boons. Unfortunately, despite all those advantage you listed the reaper is still pretty close to be bottom of the barrel in term of damage potential.

    Reaper sure have it's pros but those are not advantages that the average simple minded player will take into consideration willingly. Those players only seek to be able to do the maximum damage possible in the shortest amount of time because that's the best way to disregard bothersome bosses mechanisms in this game. The encounter design only really reward maximum dps, this is a flaw in itself but it tend to satisfy the point of view of the raiding crew.

    Encounter design always has and will be the problem. Especially for necro which has its strengths clearly based around soft control and boom denial which do nothing for current PvE.

    I'd love to see a raid where the encounter is just NPC 15 scourges and 5 firebrands playing somewhat organized lol.

    Can you imagine how the community would react to every single benchmark being thrown out the window, and where gasp PvP builds would need to be considered, with play being more than just spamming rotations?

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • Blood Red Arachnid.2493Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 18, 2019

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    The necromancer's defense is just an illusion in PvE. The necromancer defense is based around health point which is pointless when bosses strike as a %age of health point. This is mainly why the necromancer's community feel that it's unfair to have their damage reduced in PvE due to having "more" survivability. Especially when there is a double damage cost to this surviability (Yes soaking damage with the shroud drop the dps).

    Your arguments about profession's role are all good but don't fit GW2's PvE. GW2's PvE is ruled by 2 roles, DPS and support. The game however also include "tanking" abilities and debuffing but those have effects reduced to an insignificant level in PvE. And that's where the issue lie because in term of design and thematic this is where the necromancer's niche is.

    Ultimately the developpers balance things by assuming that dps, support, debuffing and "survivability" are on equal ground but reality show that the design of the environment in gw2 make half of these points of balance weaker or infinitely less relevant than the other 2. This allow players to narrow builds options and build the meta around the 2 most relevant and rewarding aspects: damage and support. And indirectly this also push the necromancer whose thematic and design favor the 2 least relevant aspects in an unattractive state.

    Ultimately, the necromancer and it's specialization mainly need ANet to balance the PvE environment in such a way that survivability and debuffing matter. What GW2's end game encounter lack ultimately to make the necromancer and it's focus relevant are:

    • Bosses phases/mechanisms that make survivability a must, allowing players to outlast their foes (Yes enrage timer destroy this possibility which is why I don't like GW2's raids design)
    • A simple way to make boon corruption always valuable in bosses encounter (when the breakbar can't be broken and there is no boon to corrupt, count boon corruption effect as if they were corrupting vigor. When the breackbar can be broken and there is no boon to corrupt, count boon corruption effect as if it were corrupting stability)

    Ultimately it boil down to this 2 points to make the necromancer "viable" in PvE end game: rethink the design philosophy of the raid encounters and minor change to the interaction of boon corruption and the breakbar system.

    When ANet choose to "buff" power reaper's damages at the cost of it's survivability and it's condi potential, they already turned their back to the true way to fix the necromancer's "imbalanced" state in PvE end game. They added more and more powercreep to try to fix the necromancer/reaper in PvE and only ended up breaking it in PvP when the issue was the environment in PvE. ANet will never balance the professions as long as PvE have an imbalance in what players need to prioritize.

    Without providing a specific quotation, I'm not sure exactly which post you're responding to. I've said quite a bit here, so "my argument" can be many things.

    If you're talking about how players will complain about imbalance if necromancers matched ele and thief damage, that isn't an argument of what to do something insomuch as it is a possible explanation for why Anet balances this way. From an emotional standpoint, it makes sense to make it so complicated, high risk professions should do more damage. It feels right. However, players pick their classes for thematic reasons more than operational ones. I.E. why so many people complain that elementalists don't feel like a true spellcaster. For any practical sense, the complicated, high risk professions are just user-unfriendly and put undue standards on players to perform. I hate having to fight an interface to function on a basic level.

    EDIT: Well, some pick for thematic reasons. I mentioned it before, but players who pick their classes for functional reasons generally don't take much issue with switching to another class for performance reasons. /EDIT

    If you're talking about that idealized class system in a fictional game with normalized damage... I'm aware. A game has to be built from the ground up like that. Guild Wars 2 has 27 specializations, but does not have 27 meaningful axis of strength scattered through these professions. At least, not ones that are specific enough to each profession that they require build specialization in just that one role. I don't the issue isn't the lack of roles, though. In a trinity debate thread a year ago, I came up with 16 different roles that GW2 has, with each fitting into 5 broad categories (buffer, debuffer, environmental effects, controller, miscellaneous). Each profession has multiple tidbits from each role, creating a series of well-rounded but different classes to play.

    While you are correct that necromancer's strengths don't play well to raids, I don't think your solution is the best. Giving more bosses boons is fine, but requiring high health isn't. The biggest problem with making higher health and defenses mandatory is that it is mechanical discrimination. That is, factors present in game that prevent you from playing. This... is a whole new beast. See, what Necromancers face currently is social discrimination. It isn't that necromancers can't beat fractals or raid bosses, but that they aren't necessarily the best at it. If you have an accepting, tolerant, casual, or apathetic commander, you can take a necromancer into the vast majority of raid bosses and still do fine. The problem comes from particularly intolerant and elitist commanders, who aren't happy with necromancers because they don't win hard enough. That issue exists between keyboard and chair.

    Anet can help with this by bringing the classes closer together in terms of peak benchmarks. Anet isn't completely free of responsibility here. I can't help but think that our current high damage is unintended. The last time we had a bunch of professions sitting at 38k was when PoF launched, and they were all nerfed heavily.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    People only look at the damage potential of the different profession and count on the support to provide all boons. Unfortunately, despite all those advantage you listed the reaper is still pretty close to be bottom of the barrel in term of damage potential.

    Reaper sure have it's pros but those are not advantages that the average simple minded player will take into consideration willingly. Those players only seek to be able to do the maximum damage possible in the shortest amount of time because that's the best way to disregard bothersome bosses mechanisms in this game. The encounter design only really reward maximum dps, this is a flaw in itself but it tend to satisfy the point of view of the raiding crew.

    Encounter design always has and will be the problem. Especially for necro which has its strengths clearly based around soft control and boom denial which do nothing for current PvE.

    I'd love to see a raid where the encounter is just NPC 15 scourges and 5 firebrands playing somewhat organized lol.

    Can you imagine how the community would react to every single benchmark being thrown out the window, and where gasp PvP builds would need to be considered, with play being more than just spamming rotations?

    Well there is 2 paths out of that:

    • Either the scourge/FB NPCs have a boss breakbar system and the raid party will still focus on dps.
    • or the scourge/FB NPCs don't have the breakbar system and the raid will focus on dps and CCs.

    It will just be a contest of strength, which ultimately don't change much how they behave at the moment. This is due to the fact that ultimately NPCs will reveal a patern of behavior that will allow the raid party to focus on strategy and chase after the quickest way to slay the group of ennemy.

    No, like I said a bit above is that the encounter design need to make survivability more relevant (probably with boss phases where they are totally immun to damage until the group resolve a random puzzle while sustaining bothersome loss of health. It could also be a boss that is near undamageable for a few minutes and lose some defense as time pass, favorising the ability to outlast your foe more than the ability to destroy it... etc.) and boon corruption as reliable as it is in PvP environment by making it interact with the breakbar system.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    While you are correct that necromancer's strengths don't play well to raids, I don't think your solution is the best. Giving more bosses boons is fine, but requiring high health isn't. The biggest problem with making higher health and defenses mandatory is that it is mechanical discrimination. That is, factors present in game that prevent you from playing. This... is a whole new beast. See, what Necromancers face currently is social discrimination. It isn't that necromancers can't beat fractals or raid bosses, but that they aren't necessarily the best at it. If you have an accepting, tolerant, casual, or apathetic commander, you can take a necromancer into the vast majority of raid bosses and still do fine. The problem comes from particularly intolerant and elitist commanders, who aren't happy with necromancers because they don't win hard enough. That issue exists between keyboard and chair.

    I disagree, having raid focused on dps like they are right now is already mechanical discrimination since it rule out low damage parties. You just can't defend the current system with it's enrage timer and at the same time say that encounters focused on survivability would be mechanical discrimination, This very timer is already a mechanical discrimination. Why would it be more acceptable than another mechanical discrimination?

    What I argue for is more variety in the encounter design. Having encounters that favor survivability should be as valid as the very common encounter that only favor damage. GW2's devs already proved with guild missions that they are able to create encounter that aren't purely based on dps why should raids be so single minded?

    The issue isn't the commanders/raid community alone, the issue is also in the encounters design which are all unimaginatively singlemindely focused toward dealing the most damage possible in the shortest time possible. If you give room for inate survivability to become a strength then the professions that can exploit it the best will become meta in these encounters. The issue is that no encounter leave room for this.

    Anet can help with this by bringing the classes closer together in terms of peak benchmarks. Anet isn't completely free of responsibility here. I can't help but think that our current high damage is unintended. The last time we had a bunch of professions sitting at 38k was when PoF launched, and they were all nerfed heavily.

    No, like I said, ANet continue to assume that all 4 aspects equal, which isn't wrong in PvP environment but totally wrong in PvE environment. Buffing/nerfing numbers create an illusion of balance that can only satisfy players for a short time. There will always be a highest dps and there will always be a lowest dps. If you don't vary encounters focus like it's the case right now, only the highest dps will be favored while the lowest dps will always cry.

    You can try to balance number for years, rotate between profession for the highest numbers, yet you'll never achieve balance and will always be at risk of creating a powercreep cycle. It's a matter of priority, fixing encounter design and mechanic "hole" should have priority over fixing numbers in PvE. For numbers value, PvP should be where numbers are the priority.

  • @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I disagree, having raid focused on dps like they are right now is already mechanical discrimination since it rule out low damage parties. You just can't defend the current system with it's enrage timer and at the same time say that encounters focused on survivability would be mechanical discrimination, This very timer is already a mechanical discrimination. Why would it be more acceptable than another mechanical discrimination?

    What I argue for is more variety in the encounter design. Having encounters that favor survivability should be as valid as the very common encounter that only favor damage. GW2's devs already proved with guild missions that they are able to create encounter that aren't purely based on dps why should raids be so single minded?

    The issue isn't the commanders/raid community alone, the issue is also in the encounters design which are all unimaginatively singlemindely focused toward dealing the most damage possible in the shortest time possible. If you give room for inate survivability to become a strength then the professions that can exploit it the best will become meta in these encounters. The issue is that no encounter leave room for this.

    Enrage timers are there to punish bad play more than they are to punish particular professions or builds. There is a lot of leeway with those timers, and raids are far more accessible than the community gives them credit for. There isn't a low damage profession to speak of. Though the relative gap between the highest benchmark and Necro seems large at 26.9%, in an absolute sense the 31k DPS that reaper outputs is solid. Enemies haven't been adjusted to be stronger with the recent power creep, so from a Reaper to next balance patch Reaper perspective, they're doing good. Most of the time, when an encounter fails, it is because of failed mechanics and not due to enrage.

    Creating an effective health check would be harder, for many reasons. For one, you can't be nearly as lax with a health check as you would the enrage timer. Otherwise... it's just ambient damage that will get healed away. That's already in fractals and raids. Second, creating a soft health check won't encourage bringing a more durable profession or build. It will encourage bringing more healers instead. We already have this kind of health check in the game. They're called Hand Kiters. Third, the difference in effective health between professions is much more massive than the differences between DPS. While power weaver and power necromancer differ by 14.7% in DPS, they differ by 65.0% in effective health. If you include shroud with it's damage reduction and assume no degen, it is 338%. If you assume half of shroud degens away during the health check and none gets recovered, it is 201%. Those differences are huge. For a hard health check to at least threaten a necromancer, it would have to kill the low HP professions multiple times over. Fourth, durability is managed by changing gear, which is expensive to buy and occupy inventory space. Having to purchase a full soldier set just for that one part isn't something that players would look forward to.

    I'm not even sure how it would be done. We already have raid bosses with different varieties of pressure. If it is any consolation, Mighty Teapot remarked in his raid videos that it is good to bring durable classes to raids for newcomers, because their high health alleviates the pressure of the mistakes they make. He said this while on a heal scourge. It isn't that higher health has no effect, it is that it has less effect the better you are at the game. I don't think that raids are as single-minded as you portray them, since most guides I see involve several people running around to handle all of the various mechanics.

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    No, like I said, ANet continue to assume that all 4 aspects equal, which isn't wrong in PvP environment but totally wrong in PvE environment. Buffing/nerfing numbers create an illusion of balance that can only satisfy players for a short time. There will always be a highest dps and there will always be a lowest dps. If you don't vary encounters focus like it's the case right now, only the highest dps will be favored while the lowest dps will always cry.

    You can try to balance number for years, rotate between profession for the highest numbers, yet you'll never achieve balance and will always be at risk of creating a powercreep cycle. It's a matter of priority, fixing encounter design and mechanic "hole" should have priority over fixing numbers in PvE. For numbers value, PvP should be where numbers are the priority.

    Bridging the gap would still ease discrimination. Think of it this way: If the gap was between 100k vs. 30k, discrimination would be ubiquitous. If it was 50k vs. 30k, you'd face a lot, but you could still get into parties. If it was 33k vs. 30k, you'd face almost none at all. If it was 30k vs. 30k, then there wouldn't be any discrimination. It's a very simple relationship, and since you can beat all of these raids with 10k DPS, the only real problems you'll face are community enforced. I'm not saying that you can't have a variety of encounters. Hell, I encourage it. But, adjusting numbers down is a quick and easy way to solve a lot of community problems without having any sort of negative repercussions. Any tactical hole you fill with encounter design would be to compensate for disparities in DPS that need not exist in the first place.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    While you are correct that necromancer's strengths don't play well to raids, I don't think your solution is the best. Giving more bosses boons is fine, but requiring high health isn't. The biggest problem with making higher health and defenses mandatory is that it is mechanical discrimination. That is, factors present in game that prevent you from playing. This... is a whole new beast. See, what Necromancers face currently is social discrimination. It isn't that necromancers can't beat fractals or raid bosses, but that they aren't necessarily the best at it. If you have an accepting, tolerant, casual, or apathetic commander, you can take a necromancer into the vast majority of raid bosses and still do fine. The problem comes from particularly intolerant and elitist commanders, who aren't happy with necromancers because they don't win hard enough. That issue exists between keyboard and chair.

    I disagree, having raid focused on dps like they are right now is already mechanical discrimination since it rule out low damage parties. You just can't defend the current system with it's enrage timer and at the same time say that encounters focused on survivability would be mechanical discrimination, This very timer is already a mechanical discrimination. Why would it be more acceptable than another mechanical discrimination?

    What I argue for is more variety in the encounter design. Having encounters that favor survivability should be as valid as the very common encounter that only favor damage. GW2's devs already proved with guild missions that they are able to create encounter that aren't purely based on dps why should raids be so single minded?

    The issue isn't the commanders/raid community alone, the issue is also in the encounters design which are all unimaginatively singlemindely focused toward dealing the most damage possible in the shortest time possible. If you give room for inate survivability to become a strength then the professions that can exploit it the best will become meta in these encounters. The issue is that no encounter leave room for this.

    Anet can help with this by bringing the classes closer together in terms of peak benchmarks. Anet isn't completely free of responsibility here. I can't help but think that our current high damage is unintended. The last time we had a bunch of professions sitting at 38k was when PoF launched, and they were all nerfed heavily.

    No, like I said, ANet continue to assume that all 4 aspects equal, which isn't wrong in PvP environment but totally wrong in PvE environment. Buffing/nerfing numbers create an illusion of balance that can only satisfy players for a short time. There will always be a highest dps and there will always be a lowest dps. If you don't vary encounters focus like it's the case right now, only the highest dps will be favored while the lowest dps will always cry.

    You can try to balance number for years, rotate between profession for the highest numbers, yet you'll never achieve balance and will always be at risk of creating a powercreep cycle. It's a matter of priority, fixing encounter design and mechanic "hole" should have priority over fixing numbers in PvE. For numbers value, PvP should be where numbers are the priority.

    Your argumentation is absolutely spot on, although there are more solutions to this issue imo:
    I mentioned it before, but a far more dynamic approach to balancing would definitely help imo. At the very moment, balance patches are:

    • rare: at best every 3 months, but sometimes not even
    • insignificant: it doesn't change anything if you look at the bigger picture
    • (subjectively) not fun/engaging at all: all the patches come across as that dreadful quarterly meeting that the devs must attend to while they were much rather doing something else.

    Make the patches more fun and wild, more engaging, more dynamic and hit more often: every 2 months orso. Stir up the playing field and community, cause it's been quite static for years now. Always the same complaints on the forums and reddit: (let me get my glass sphere) I can tell that next patch, the Mesmer mains are going to complain about another nerf to their profession, can't they just leave Chrono alone .... While all other mains (mostly Guardian and Revenant) complain about how Chrono is still the most optimal support out there ... Necro mains will always complain (me including :) ) because they're still the lowest DPS out there, Engies will complain because their rotation is o so hard, but they're not the highest DPS out there ... how is that even fair, right? ... And I could go on like that ... it's always the same old song.

    I believe that significantly changing numbers, but also the functionality of skills/traits/etc. in far lesser time-frames than what we're used to right now, really helps in changing the community as well. Any wild composition/build might well be the next optimal comp, right?! And if I see speedclearing guilds like SnowCrows taking already quite a lot of time to benchmark and theorycraft optimal comps after a patch hits, imagine how much longer it takes if patches really changes things significantly. People are going to try new AND old builds again, instead of always going for that same old familiar comp. every single time. It's boring as hell!

    Big disclaimer: I'm talking about PvE only here. I haven't really given it much thought how such an approach would impact WvW and PvP, although shaking up the pirate ship (WvW) and the Scourge-FB-babysit-comp (PvP) a little bit (read: significantly :) ) wouldn't hurt imo!

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    People only look at the damage potential of the different profession and count on the support to provide all boons. Unfortunately, despite all those advantage you listed the reaper is still pretty close to be bottom of the barrel in term of damage potential.

    Reaper sure have it's pros but those are not advantages that the average simple minded player will take into consideration willingly. Those players only seek to be able to do the maximum damage possible in the shortest amount of time because that's the best way to disregard bothersome bosses mechanisms in this game. The encounter design only really reward maximum dps, this is a flaw in itself but it tend to satisfy the point of view of the raiding crew.

    Encounter design always has and will be the problem. Especially for necro which has its strengths clearly based around soft control and boom denial which do nothing for current PvE.

    I'd love to see a raid where the encounter is just NPC 15 scourges and 5 firebrands playing somewhat organized lol.

    Can you imagine how the community would react to every single benchmark being thrown out the window, and where gasp PvP builds would need to be considered, with play being more than just spamming rotations?

    Well there is 2 paths out of that:

    • Either the scourge/FB NPCs have a boss breakbar system and the raid party will still focus on dps.
    • or the scourge/FB NPCs don't have the breakbar system and the raid will focus on dps and CCs.

    It will just be a contest of strength, which ultimately don't change much how they behave at the moment. This is due to the fact that ultimately NPCs will reveal a patern of behavior that will allow the raid party to focus on strategy and chase after the quickest way to slay the group of ennemy.

    No, like I said a bit above is that the encounter design need to make survivability more relevant (probably with boss phases where they are totally immun to damage until the group resolve a random puzzle while sustaining bothersome loss of health. It could also be a boss that is near undamageable for a few minutes and lose some defense as time pass, favorising the ability to outlast your foe more than the ability to destroy it... etc.) and boon corruption as reliable as it is in PvP environment by making it interact with the breakbar system.

    I still agree with you, but I don't even mean adding PvE mechanics like break bars. Break Bars still give too much of an advantage to the party. I mean literally do spammed stability/outright immunity to CC, massive block uptime, huge AoE cleave and boon corruption towards the party, etc. One person goes in alone as a DPS build, they straight up die through downed state in sub-two second windows. Scourge demands sustain-based builds, flanks, and ranged cleave away from a frontliner setup in WvW, and if designing an encounter to feature that is desired, mimicking WvW is how its easily-achieved.

    Most of the actions in WvW are pretty scripted and predictable. That's easy to automate and create some logic for, and then put behind some randomization for timings as to when they'll engage, etc. You also don't want it to be perfect in execution as being outnumbered is pretty much unwinnable into real players.

    They can do plenty to improve the necro's relevance in raids, and I've suggested almost all of what you said in the past, but most of the current fundamental approach to PvE (optimization for damage ruling certain classes out) don't change by adding timers onto things.

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • Nephalem.8921Nephalem.8921 Member ✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Nephalem.8921 said:
    Having dps that are 30% below is not massive? It's essentially low manning a raid with 8 players if all 6 dps players are playing weaker builds compared to the stronger ones. That's not a problem for good players but it can become a problem for a lot of players and pugs really fast.

    It's not massive at all. Incompetent pugs aren't carried by high DPS. They're carried by good heals and support players. Doing slightly more damage isn't going to stop players from flubbing the mechanics. Likewise, if we presume pugs are incompetent, then they'd just die while playing Weaver and Deadeye. The baseline DPS of Greatsword Reaper is on par with every other class in the game, so the worse players do the smaller the difference between dps gets.

    You can phase xera mid with high dps and dont have to clear any orbs. You don't need to to anything on gorseval except for dps and fast cc. Cairn dies in like 80sec and fewer.

    In fractals, if I am on a pug group, I would much rather play a Necromancer than a Warrior, Mesmer, or Elementalist. On those teams, necromancers are great. I can disable enemy groups with for extended periods of time with Nightfall and Well of Darkness, I can gather enemies up to damage them down with Grasping Darkness, I can rip all of their boons with Well of Corruption, absorb unholy amounts of damage with "Rise!", self buff to 25 might, solo break bars with the Flesh Golem, heal myself greatly and rez well with the Blood Magic traits, block orbs/projectiles with Corrosive Poison Cloud, and cleanse conditions with Well of Power. This is no exaggeration, either. I've been on teams where I've needed almost all of this. But if I am on a Warrior, the most I can do is pop Endure Pain and hope they aggro on me. With Elementalist, I use Sand Storm and hope I don't get clobbered by attacks that do more than my entire health bar. On mesmer, all of my boons are multipliers, so 1.5 times nothing is nothing.

    What you do on warrior is pressing gs burst 2 times with heal for the same area damage soul spiral has while you provide banners. Where do you even fight so much trash? Molten duo maybe but that's a non issue anyways since you can just run to boss and burst it down in 30sec. Half of the stuff you mentioned isn't worth anything as soon as you get a team that isn't completely useless. Running blood magic lowers the damage even further.

    The thing about having a laser focus on raids is that raids isn't all of GW2. It's not even "most of the time" in GW2. However I digress: having laser focus on just necromancer will make it so you lose sight of all of the little problems that other classes have. Losing DPS due to shroud damage is on par with what other classes have to deal with:

    Revenant: Loses massive amounts of damage if the 10 energy threshold is missed, which is going to happen any time anything other than "nothing" happens. The timing is literally split second and has little to no leeway.

    This may happen to braindead revs but you can always press f1 for 10 energy or f4 for 20 to reduce energy before a swap. It isn't even close to split second timing.

    Warrior: Berserk mode is on a timer, and losing out due to enemy movement, enemy CC, poorly timed mechanics or phasing. They have almost no range, and if the rage skills miss everything goes wrong.

    They have the same range reaper has which is melee. Wasting berserk while close to a phase is entirely on the warr side to handle. Range skill goes on a 4sec cooldown if it misses. Thats not the end of the world.

    Engineer: The condi rotation is objectively the hardest in the game, and it fails terribly if the enemy moves slightly in one direction. Also, engineers blow themselves up if you're off slightly with photon forge.

    Nobody even plays this anymore. Engineer is another "dont play this garbage in pve" profession anyways.

    Thief: It can't move and only hurts one target at a time. The rotation screeches to a halt every time you get the quickness stolen skill, and if malice or initiative gets messed up the DPS flatlines. Suffers from prone-to-death syndrome.

    What? You don't play the rifle build except for very few occassions. Staff DD is still very strong with an unfailable rotation. You can't screw up malice if there is no malice.

    Mesmer: Chrono has its DPS drops to Necromancer levels if the enemy doesn't have permanent slow. Has no way to apply permanent slow. Depends wholly on illusions for damage, whether it is continuum split or infinite horizon.

    Mirage exists. It can reach 40k+ dps an actual bosses being the highest dps spec in the game. It's just not in the benchmark list because confusion doesn't work on the golem.

    What I would like to see is the baseline damage under full buffs for all melee weapons be raised to about 23k while reducing some of the burst, normalizing DPS for most professions at around 35k for perfect rotations. Less for ranged weapons, maybe more for conditions. Class identity shouldn't be tied around one being the DPS, or another not being the DPS. The global melee weapon buff is to make mistakes less punishing and bad players more tolerable. For necromancers, this would have the additional benefit of making shroud loss less punishing.

    This would destroy pvp balance. This isn't wow where you have a super op healer outhealing 2+ people. You are supposed to avoid big hits. High auto attack pressure would have close to no counterplay if it isn't kiteable. Buffing auto attacks would destroy some of the action game aspects. Release holo had strong auto attacks in forge. That got nerfed almost immediately.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.