Dealing damage is not a raid mechanic - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Dealing damage is not a raid mechanic

13>

Comments

  • Hot Boy.7138Hot Boy.7138 Member ✭✭✭

    gw2 doesn't have an official dps meter. So people who are not hardcore are not gonna go out of their way to download a 3rd party meter. They probably don't even know one exists. So they have no way of knowing their dps is bad in comparison to other people in raid during an encounter.

  • @maddoctor.2738 said:
    Funny thing talking about "maxing DPS" is that very few players actually reach that max dps. On average, across all raid bosses, the lowest possible squad dps recorded on gw2raidar is 55k. What's the "max DPS"? 118k, which is more than double the lowest, so I don't get this argument about players needing to play "optimally" to get into Raids. You do not need to do "max DPS" to play Raids, they are perfectly doable with much lower numbers. The only time DPS becomes a problem is if a player using only auto-attacks does more dps than a player that supposedly uses all their skills, or a purely support build dealing more damage than a full dps build

    The fastest gors this patch has squad DPS of 172k.
    https://dps.report/VeZb-20191004-211700_gors

    More towards the current discussion, raid training in its essence focuses on the mechanics of the fights. Whether or not the group meets the dps requirement for the fight or for the kill does not change that fact that they can still learn all of the mechanics in fights where these checks exist. The point of training is to learn the encounter.

    And people should learn how to do their rotation properly on golem on their own time, not on others times. In Raid Academy, an NA training discord, most people think its reasonable to hit 70-80% of a golem benchmark with some practice. If you dont hit that, you're lacking fundamental understanding of the class, and you should practice and read until you understand it.

    And by no means is requiring DPS in a raid encounter flawed. That's like expecting "If you did mechanics properly, the boss will kill itself regardless of what buttons you press". Nor is it difficult, as most "meta" builds have been made so incomplex to play in the most recent patches that there's only 2 or 3 specs that actually have a "difficult" to understand rotation.

  • @ZDragon.3046 said:
    Raids have a catch 22
    Most groups want people to present kill proof
    New players wont have kill proof

    How can a new player present kill proof if they never get to play the content.
    Overall unless you know some one who is going to lead and organize the raid itself you dont get to go. Every once in a while a kind stranger will offer trainings but still thats not enough.

    People cant learn to get better if others wont help them
    Even if some one is pulling bad dps numbers there are raids were one if not several players can be slacking and the raid still be cleared with relative ease.
    Suggest them to practice their builds and give them resources but dont just insta kick them. Most players if they really want to learn and get better will do so very quickly if you give them a hand.

    The issue is that people dont give that hand.

    Thats why strikes are going to become a thing. Hopefully without generating kill proof as thats one of the biggest things that splits raid vets, average players who just want to enjoy end game, and new players looking to experience end game. ITs hard to join a raid when the squad leader wants 50+ or 80 kp and you are pretty new to raiding as a whole.

    on the flip side im a pretty casual player ive had 250 kp players go down on and or cause wipes in groups making mistakes i didnt or rarely make. But they present themselves like they are gods. overall the kp system the raid community has made has a fair share of problems.

    I'll say this, FFXIV does a good job of encouraging new players to new content to them by giving bonuses to the whole group if new players are present. This significantly increases their cohesiveness and softens the stance towards newcomers. In that game, it's an XP bonus, but I could see having 2-3 more chances at getting some of the rarer drops per new raid encounter finished.

    It's a general flaw throughout the rest of GW2 - the lack of motivating new players and the dearth of ways to get them mixed up with others. GW2 plays like a singleplayer game that happens to have other people nearby, at least I experience it that way more frequently than I would like to admit.

    Potential requires action in order to be realized.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:
    Why does players asume that its ok to pull bad dps numbers and still be accepted into groups without any proplem? When i say bad i dont mean a bit lower numbers than some1 who has killed boss multiple times already but just simply really low amount of dps.

    Same thing with training raids, players asume that they dont need to know their class or rotation because its a training. However they will make said training alot harder for others to train when they simply cant pull their own weight. I always hear that damage is low because players are new to encounter, and that makes me think.. does that really matter? Lets take gorseval for example, it has a minor dps check. Is there really any mechanics that could hold your damage back, other than not knowing your own class.

    Eggs? Maybe the slam also?

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:
    Why does players asume that its ok to pull bad dps numbers and still be accepted into groups without any proplem? When i say bad i dont mean a bit lower numbers than some1 who has killed boss multiple times already but just simply really low amount of dps.

    Same thing with training raids, players asume that they dont need to know their class or rotation because its a training. However they will make said training alot harder for others to train when they simply cant pull their own weight. I always hear that damage is low because players are new to encounter, and that makes me think.. does that really matter? Lets take gorseval for example, it has a minor dps check. Is there really any mechanics that could hold your damage back, other than not knowing your own class.

    Eggs? Maybe the slam also?

    Yeah ill agree with eggs, but nothing else should not be a proplem as long as you have meta dps classes with good enough rotation

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Hot Boy.7138 said:
    gw2 doesn't have an official dps meter. So people who are not hardcore are not gonna go out of their way to download a 3rd party meter. They probably don't even know one exists. So they have no way of knowing their dps is bad in comparison to other people in raid during an encounter.

    There is an dps meter at golem.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • narcx.3570narcx.3570 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:

    @narcx.3570 said:

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:
    Lets take gorseval for example, it has a minor dps check. Is there really any mechanics that could hold your damage back, other than not knowing your own class.

    You could down yourself to retaliation, or get important casts interrupted by the knockdown, or get egged, or get the debuff and not know how to get rid of it.

    Play meta class, know ur rotation and stand on the tag. Solves everything.

    Just saying... Those are mechanics that can hold back people's damage if they don't know the fight, irregardless of how well they know their class and golem rotations. It was your example, not mine.

    I would say that especially if you're playing a meta gorse class (DH or weaver), and don't know about retaliation (or don't know that your group is going to be slow af with cc) you will definitely down yourself and ruin your dps--in fact you'll get punished harder if you actually do know your rotation well, since you'll have tons of layered damage up when the retal pops.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 14, 2019

    @narcx.3570 said:

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:

    @narcx.3570 said:

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:
    Lets take gorseval for example, it has a minor dps check. Is there really any mechanics that could hold your damage back, other than not knowing your own class.

    You could down yourself to retaliation, or get important casts interrupted by the knockdown, or get egged, or get the debuff and not know how to get rid of it.

    Play meta class, know ur rotation and stand on the tag. Solves everything.

    Just saying... Those are mechanics that can hold back people's damage if they don't know the fight, irregardless of how well they know their class and golem rotations. It was your example, not mine.

    I would say that especially if you're playing a meta gorse class (DH or weaver), and don't know about retaliation (or don't know that your group is going to be slow af with cc) you will definitely down yourself and ruin your dps--in fact you'll get punished harder if you actually do know your rotation well, since you'll have tons of layered damage up when the retal pops.

    DH is meta at gorse for many reasons, one of them is the healing skill that allows you to face tank the damage from retaliation while dealing damage. Duration is so long that CC doesn't even need to be instant.
    For the slams, stacking DHs makes sure that there is enough aegis for slams (tho ur supports should be enough to grant blocks for slams).
    DHs have also ranged weapon which makes it easy to cleave orbs (if needed) and also immob spirits if needed.
    And as its a training, commander should explain these mechanics to the group, and also tell them when to use healing skill, when to aegies and so on.

    Edit: about CC, ofc its going to be fast CC because players know how to deal damage, fast CC if damage is ok makes fight a lot easier. Also weaver is not meta at gorseval.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

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

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    However you try to put it, with such a wide difference in potential, professions matter. Whether they are poorly played or not.

    In a raid, based on the specificity of GW2, DPS shouldn't be a factor. Because when ANet released the game the idea was to play what you want without having to take a specific character for a specific content based on the specific need of your party. The spirit of the game was that Any profession could fill any role. The issue is that if those professions don't have the same potential in all area (like it's the case in GW2) it lead to discrimination based on the efficiency on specific content.

    And since GW2 encounter are obviously badly designed and favor heavily DPS, whether you're a good player or not, there will be (and there is) a race toward reaching max dps. It's healthy for the game that professions are different and don't have the same potential, however, it's not healthy for the game to push players to try and max out numbers in order to break the content. Which is what happen already, with players maxing out dps in order to "cheat" the game and avoid doing mechanisms.

    Because of this "DPS" mentality, the line between "safe" builds and "risky" builds have been blured. It's a fact, in raid it's safer to play a glassy build than a tanky build, because it's harder to cheat mechanisms with a tanky build than it is with a glassy build.

    I'm not against the idea of speed runs, but the fact is that the "experienced players" that speed run define how the game is played. And when those that define how the game is played only follow blindly a single thought, DPS, the game break for less experienced players and for professions that are "less" DPS effective.

    The mechanisms of the encounters need to be harder in order to open diversity in the meta, the DPS check don't need to be tighter in fact for the sake of diversity the dps check shouldn't even exist. In my opinion, the encounters should even have mechanisms that punish to much dps.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    However you try to put it, with such a wide difference in potential, professions matter. Whether they are poorly played or not.

    In a raid, based on the specificity of GW2, DPS shouldn't be a factor. Because when ANet released the game the idea was to play what you want without having to take a specific character for a specific content based on the specific need of your party. The spirit of the game was that Any profession could fill any role. The issue is that if those professions don't have the same potential in all area (like it's the case in GW2) it lead to discrimination based on the efficiency on specific content.

    And since GW2 encounter are obviously badly designed and favor heavily DPS, whether you're a good player or not, there will be (and there is) a race toward reaching max dps. It's healthy for the game that professions are different and don't have the same potential, however, it's not healthy for the game to push players to try and max out numbers in order to break the content. Which is what happen already, with players maxing out dps in order to "cheat" the game and avoid doing mechanisms.

    Because of this "DPS" mentality, the line between "safe" builds and "risky" builds have been blured. It's a fact, in raid it's safer to play a glassy build than a tanky build, because it's harder to cheat mechanisms with a tanky build than it is with a glassy build.

    I'm not against the idea of speed runs, but the fact is that the "experienced players" that speed run define how the game is played. And when those that define how the game is played only follow blindly a single thought, DPS, the game break for less experienced players and for professions that are "less" DPS effective.

    The mechanisms of the encounters need to be harder in order to open diversity in the meta, the DPS check don't need to be tighter in fact for the sake of diversity the dps check shouldn't even exist. In my opinion, the encounters should even have mechanisms that punish to much dps.

    There is a boss that punish the group if dps is too high.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 14, 2019

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best. That is when those professions are played at absolute top tier level, on a golem and not factoring for ease of use. Best example: thief and guardian, which both are rather simple and will net way higher actual damage than most other professions. I guarantee that most new players would perform better on either of those classes on a meta condi mirage boss, over an actual condi mirage (thus going off meta).

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    However you try to put it, with such a wide difference in potential, professions matter. Whether they are poorly played or not.

    No, they do not. They do so even less for trainings.

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    In a raid, based on the specificity of GW2, DPS shouldn't be a factor. Because when ANet released the game the idea was to play what you want without having to take a specific character for a specific content based on the specific need of your party. The spirit of the game was that Any profession could fill any role. The issue is that if those professions don't have the same potential in all area (like it's the case in GW2) it lead to discrimination based on the efficiency on specific content.

    If you are going to use that favorite misquote, I'm going to stop right here. Not going to waste my time on people who refuse to use 7 year old quotes in context but rather to fit their own agenda. Play how you want was never meant as all rewards will be handed out for free, nor as all rewards will be available via any method.

    Again, for the context of this thread and trainings or beginner raiders, class is of NO issue. I could out dps any non raider on a meta class with any class in this game by simple better understanding of classes and game mechanics. ANY class can provide a comfortable and sufficient damage for each boss for success far within enrage timers. The main limitation is mechanical knowledge and class understanding for new players.

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    And since GW2 encounter are obviously badly designed and favor heavily DPS, whether you're a good player or not, there will be (and there is) a race toward reaching max dps. It's healthy for the game that professions are different and don't have the same potential, however, it's not healthy for the game to push players to try and max out numbers in order to break the content. Which is what happen already, with players maxing out dps in order to "cheat" the game and avoid doing mechanisms.

    The reason there is a race towards max dps is based on the combat design first and foremost (which makes defensive stats nearly unnecessary). The encounter design, which has already very lenient timers, simply prevents full tank builds (and even that is not correct). Also 90% of all raid fight fails happen way before any timer has run out, often with a lot of time to spare.

    As far as breaking content with high dps, you pretend as though exprienced players entered raids and simply started at skipping most content. Most if not all high performance players mastered the encouters first, then developed methods to increase their chance of success. All fights are absolutely doable with all mechanics present.

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because of this "DPS" mentality, the line between "safe" builds and "risky" builds have been blured. It's a fact, in raid it's safer to play a glassy build than a tanky build, because it's harder to cheat mechanisms with a tanky build than it is with a glassy build.

    Not really, many groups run safe builds. Those are safe group compositions though, which are vastly more effective than safe personal builds because in those, once again, classes specialize at the task at hand. The issues in this thread are not with how safe a raid group proceeds but rather with players so bad, they would not even know what the safest composition for each boss would be.

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I'm not against the idea of speed runs, but the fact is that the "experienced players" that speed run define how the game is played. And when those that define how the game is played only follow blindly a single thought, DPS, the game break for less experienced players and for professions that are "less" DPS effective.

    The "experienced players" define the game because they are the ones who provide guides, builds, tactics, etc.

    No one is forced to follow those guides or builds.

    Here is the thing though:
    Any player who successfully entered raids and started raiding starts to emulate certain tactics, because they make life and the content easier.

    Take the latest wing 7 release, which LN cleared in 4.5 hours or so. They went in blind, figured things out, cleared the raid. Any group following them had an easier time, since they were better prepared and could emulate what they did (I should know, I was in a day 1 full clear group myself). No one is or was forced to emulate them though (and it was nice to see two different builds for pylon management develope on the first day).

  • Last patch, support chrono was at 14500dps. Lets say dps is at 34k. Speedclearing support chronomancers are between around 12k in actual raid with exeptions. I can do those 14500 on golem but in raids I am usualy between 7 and 8. On some bosses higher and on some lower.
    That means I do half of the potential. But requireing half of potential (17k) in actual raid from dps players is toxic?
    You dont need 34k on dps, in theory you need 15k minimum on gorseval if I remember correctly. Yet many players are around 12 or even lower. 1/3 of potential is nowhere near good.

  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @FrigginPaco.4178 said:

    @ZDragon.3046 said:
    Raids have a catch 22
    Most groups want people to present kill proof
    New players wont have kill proof

    How can a new player present kill proof if they never get to play the content.
    Overall unless you know some one who is going to lead and organize the raid itself you dont get to go. Every once in a while a kind stranger will offer trainings but still thats not enough.

    People cant learn to get better if others wont help them
    Even if some one is pulling bad dps numbers there are raids were one if not several players can be slacking and the raid still be cleared with relative ease.
    Suggest them to practice their builds and give them resources but dont just insta kick them. Most players if they really want to learn and get better will do so very quickly if you give them a hand.

    The issue is that people dont give that hand.

    Thats why strikes are going to become a thing. Hopefully without generating kill proof as thats one of the biggest things that splits raid vets, average players who just want to enjoy end game, and new players looking to experience end game. ITs hard to join a raid when the squad leader wants 50+ or 80 kp and you are pretty new to raiding as a whole.

    on the flip side im a pretty casual player ive had 250 kp players go down on and or cause wipes in groups making mistakes i didnt or rarely make. But they present themselves like they are gods. overall the kp system the raid community has made has a fair share of problems.

    I'll say this, FFXIV does a good job of encouraging new players to new content to them by giving bonuses to the whole group if new players are present. This significantly increases their cohesiveness and softens the stance towards newcomers. In that game, it's an XP bonus, but I could see having 2-3 more chances at getting some of the rarer drops per new raid encounter finished.

    It's a general flaw throughout the rest of GW2 - the lack of motivating new players and the dearth of ways to get them mixed up with others. GW2 plays like a singleplayer game that happens to have other people nearby, at least I experience it that way more frequently than I would like to admit.

    Something like this would be nice but it would have to be something worth wild.
    Then again raids were not a part of the core games design so i can see why something like this is not included. In open world people are well encouraged to help others in fractals and raids not so much things can get frustrating and or toxic pretty quickly sometimes

  • Hot Boy.7138Hot Boy.7138 Member ✭✭✭

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:

    @Hot Boy.7138 said:
    gw2 doesn't have an official dps meter. So people who are not hardcore are not gonna go out of their way to download a 3rd party meter. They probably don't even know one exists. So they have no way of knowing their dps is bad in comparison to other people in raid during an encounter.

    There is an dps meter at golem.

    That isn't helping anyone during an encounter. A DPS meter during an encounter, or a score screen like at the end of pvp that could show up after that gives you the stats for the fight would be good.

  • @Hot Boy.7138 said:

    @sokeenoppa.5384 said:

    @Hot Boy.7138 said:
    gw2 doesn't have an official dps meter. So people who are not hardcore are not gonna go out of their way to download a 3rd party meter. They probably don't even know one exists. So they have no way of knowing their dps is bad in comparison to other people in raid during an encounter.

    There is an dps meter at golem.

    That isn't helping anyone during an encounter. A DPS meter during an encounter, or a score screen like at the end of pvp that could show up after that gives you the stats for the fight would be good.

    Dps metter is huge help diring the fight. At the end of the fight it is just a scoreboard but during it helps with decisions

  • aymnad.9023aymnad.9023 Member ✭✭
    edited October 15, 2019

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:
    Dps metter is huge help diring the fight. At the end of the fight it is just a scoreboard but during it helps with decisions

    (EDIT : I got the wrong quote for whatever reason X) )
    I think you got it backwards. The logs allow you to see what mistakes you have done or why you are this high/low. The only thing you should ask yourself during a raid boss is “What is the best way to restart the rotation once I missed / had to stop it because of a boss mechanic?”
    I am 3rd best dps. Hurray ! Oh that is because our elementalist died or got hit by more tp than me. Well this guy is higher than me, why is that? Ah he made less mistakes and had less downtime/more X quickness than me.
    During a fight you can vaguely see your position but you do not have time to react or check everything.

  • aymnad.9023aymnad.9023 Member ✭✭
    edited October 15, 2019

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I 100% agree. I did some testing on ranger with exotic armor, rest of the set was full ascenced, full zerker, no food, regular boons/effects and I got >66% of the dmg of snow crow benchmark.
    My guildmates are from an openWorld PvE guild. None of them do high tier fractals, PvP or have berserker gear. So If they have some berserker gear, rest has vitality, toughness or more defensive stats, 66% with boons/effects/foods is the goal to achieve. For them this is something new and they never had to think about it before. We did a few try with everybody having no idea what rotations/builds were. Of course we failed but I know that some of them got into it and changed gear or build after this :)

    Training raids are a place were everybody is/should be welcome. Experienced players coming to help, new to give it a try.

  • @aymnad.9023 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:
    Dps metter is huge help diring the fight. At the end of the fight it is just a scoreboard but during it helps with decisions

    (EDIT : I got the wrong quote for whatever reason X) )
    I think you got it backwards. The logs allow you to see what mistakes you have done or why you are this high/low. The only thing you should ask yourself during a raid boss is “What is the best way to restart the rotation once I missed / had to stop it because of a boss mechanic?”
    I am 3rd best dps. Hurray ! Oh that is because our elementalist died or got hit by more tp than me. Well this guy is higher than me, why is that? Ah he made less mistakes and had less downtime/more X quickness than me.
    During a fight you can vaguely see your position but you do not have time to react or check everything.

    I see that you quoted wrong text but ket me explain anyway. Based on dps and helth percentage, I can decide if we will kill the boss before my next CS or not and so drop timewarp without cs. I can see that we will phase before gorseval slams so I dont have to save signet for distort but I can use it now. I can see that i cannot use clones for damafe since cc phase will come soon so I need clines for f3 and so on.

  • aymnad.9023aymnad.9023 Member ✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:
    I see that you quoted wrong text but ket me explain anyway. Based on dps and helth percentage, I can decide if we will kill the boss before my next CS or not and so drop timewarp without cs. I can see that we will phase before gorseval slams so I dont have to save signet for distort but I can use it now. I can see that i cannot use clones for damafe since cc phase will come soon so I need clines for f3 and so on.

    This is a good way to use it but I think we could also do it with only the %health on mobs even if that is an approximation. I do not use Arc often but so far I liked the logs because they have a lot of details, even allowing a replay of the fight (I am always impressed and scared at the same time by the amount of data^^)

  • Xar.6279Xar.6279 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    Welcome in GW2 :P You won't understand its community sometimes. Even if u try to.

    Just try to avoid them and play with these who agree with approach similar to yours.
    Like for example: organize trainings only for people who already learned their rotations.

    Or just don't train people. Let them buy raids.

  • @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple reason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

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

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    Now consider that this is from successful boss kills, which means that players performing on these classes fininshed the fight successfuly. Now factor for ease of use of some classes versus others, or personal preference. On that level, if you want to, you can play ANY class you want because the amount you can improve is huge.

    You are of far greater value on a class you enjoy and practiced on than a class you are unfamiliar with. All classes work on this level of skill.

  • @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

    I did, maybe go to the site and actually remove the top percentile so the classes get sorted new. You'll see that most are within no more than 10% with maybe an outlier here or there for a very underperforming class.

    All you did was look at the top and bottom performing 99th percentile without resorting the classes according to 50% percentile.

    EDIT: and as to my point. That outlier, if he wanted to, could simply practice a little to get better at his class and perform above his group members. Hence, it makes no difference which class you play at that low a level since any one who actually puts in some work will rocket past all his buddies. Ergo: play which ever class you feel like.

  • @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

    I did, maybe go to the site and actually remove the top percentile so the classes get sorted new. You'll see that most are within no more than 10% with maybe an outlier here or there for a very underperforming class.

    All you did was look at the top and bottom performing 99th percentile without resorting the classes according to 50% percentile.

    You accusing me of something that I don't do! Again: the examples I gave are on the 50th percentile, only! Just do the math, and you'll see it for yourself as well. But let me give you another example and spell it out for you, cause math is hard, I know.
    Sloth: Dragonhunter, Firebrand and Weaver all do about 12.5k DPS (Weaver even 13,3k, but that's a low 'n' so I won't take that as an example!) on the 50th percentile. Your worst damage dealing profession is in this example the Necro: with its best dps build: Reaper, doing about 9.5K dps on the 50th percentile. So, in this case, the Guardian profession is doing 28,5% more DPS than the Necro's best DPS build in the 50th percentile!!! (And the Weaver is doing 40% more DPS, but like I said, the confidence level is too low on that one!)
    (And if you read REALLY carefully, you see the mistake I made on purpose here, cause the Mesmer (Chrono) is actually the worst damage dealer on this boss, I hope you can understand why I left that one out!)

    And if you want more examples, just go through them all, I don't think you can find one boss (or maybe just one), where ALL professions are between 10% of each others DPS in the 50th percentile!!! I'd like to challenge you on that one!

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 16, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

    I did, maybe go to the site and actually remove the top percentile so the classes get sorted new. You'll see that most are within no more than 10% with maybe an outlier here or there for a very underperforming class.

    All you did was look at the top and bottom performing 99th percentile without resorting the classes according to 50% percentile.

    You accusing me of something that I don't do! Again: the examples I gave are on the 50th percentile, only! Just do the math, and you'll see it for yourself as well. But let me give you another example and spell it out for you, cause math is hard, I know.
    Sloth: Dragonhunter, Firebrand and Weaver all do about 12.5k DPS (Weaver even 13,3k, but that's a low 'n' so I won't take that as an example!) on the 50th percentile. Your worst damage dealing profession is in this example the Necro: with its best dps build: Reaper, doing about 9.5K dps on the 50th percentile. So, in this case, the Guardian profession is doing 28,5% more DPS than the Necro's best DPS build in the 50th percentile!!! (And the Weaver is doing 40% more DPS, but like I said, the confidence level is too low on that one!)
    (And if you read REALLY carefully, you see the mistake I made on purpose here, cause the Mesmer (Chrono) is actually the worst damage dealer on this boss, I hope you can understand why I left that one out!)

    And if you want more examples, just go through them all, I don't think you can find one boss (or maybe just one), where ALL professions are between 10% of each others DPS in the 50th percentile!!! I'd like to challenge you on that one!

    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/area-16123

    Sorted for 50th percentile and power dps. Reaper does 12.6k on my graph. Compared to 15.2k DH as top dps. That's 18% less.

    So not sure where you are getting those 28%.

    Even with an outlier of 20% between top performing and bottom performing class (which would be the biggest extrem). If that Reaper improved to 60th percentile, he'd be doing 15k damage. Pretty much on par with his DH buddy. Ergo, better to bring players who enjoy their class and improve on it. That is not factoring for ease of use classes or simple builds like shortbow condi ranger, power daredevil or dragon hunter.

    So I remain with my statement. On this level, it makes no difference which class you chose to play. The main component for success is willigness to improve. Once you reach the top end, the performance difference drops to 10% maximum between classes.

  • @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

    I did, maybe go to the site and actually remove the top percentile so the classes get sorted new. You'll see that most are within no more than 10% with maybe an outlier here or there for a very underperforming class.

    All you did was look at the top and bottom performing 99th percentile without resorting the classes according to 50% percentile.

    You accusing me of something that I don't do! Again: the examples I gave are on the 50th percentile, only! Just do the math, and you'll see it for yourself as well. But let me give you another example and spell it out for you, cause math is hard, I know.
    Sloth: Dragonhunter, Firebrand and Weaver all do about 12.5k DPS (Weaver even 13,3k, but that's a low 'n' so I won't take that as an example!) on the 50th percentile. Your worst damage dealing profession is in this example the Necro: with its best dps build: Reaper, doing about 9.5K dps on the 50th percentile. So, in this case, the Guardian profession is doing 28,5% more DPS than the Necro's best DPS build in the 50th percentile!!! (And the Weaver is doing 40% more DPS, but like I said, the confidence level is too low on that one!)
    (And if you read REALLY carefully, you see the mistake I made on purpose here, cause the Mesmer (Chrono) is actually the worst damage dealer on this boss, I hope you can understand why I left that one out!)

    And if you want more examples, just go through them all, I don't think you can find one boss (or maybe just one), where ALL professions are between 10% of each others DPS in the 50th percentile!!! I'd like to challenge you on that one!

    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/area-16123

    Sorted for 50th percentile and power dps. Reaper does 12.6k on my graph. Compared to 15.2k DH as top dps. That's 18% less.

    So not sure where you are getting those 28%.

    Even with an outlier of 20% between top performing and bottom performing class (which would be the biggest extrem). If that Reaper improved to 60th percentile, he'd be doing 15k damage. Pretty much on par with his DH buddy. Ergo, better to bring players who enjoy their class and improve on it. That is not factoring for ease of use classes or simple builds like shortbow condi ranger, power daredevil or dragon hunter.

    So I remain with my statement. On this level, it makes no difference which class you chose to play. The main component for success is willigness to improve. Once you reach the top end, the performance difference drops to 10% maximum between classes.

    Ah, I see what you do there, you look at overall DPS instead of boss DPS! You have to look at the number between brackets. After all, killing the boss is your main objective, which in the end gives you your raid reward, not the adds or critters, for instance :)
    So, when you look at the DPS that really counts (boss DPS), the Reaper has to improve by 28% to get to the same level as a Dragonhunter on the 50th percentile (mediocre players!). I think that's a lot, and it shouldn't be that much either!
    Also, if you look at the difference between a 50th percentile mediocre reaper and a 99th percentile veteran/pro Reaper, there's an improvement of 85% !!! Whereas with a Dragonhunter this is only 69%. So, you could conclude that DH is easier to play (even as a mediocre player) than a Reaper as well: which is quite a shocking conclusion, cause the Necro (Reaper) normally has quite a different stigma stuck on its head, but hey, it's difficult to steer from ones age-old believes, right?! Ow, fun side fact: the always so difficult famed power Weaver has a difference of 78%, which is still lower than the Power Reaper!!!!!!

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 17, 2019

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    .... you do understand how those all raid boss averages are calculated or? Go think about that a bit.

    Here's a hint: consider where mirage is seeing play and on how many bosses. Now consider where and on how many bosses other classes see play. Now consider what the top dps on some power bosses is.

    For example, all bosses mirage sees play on he can perform near golem level damage levels. Consider say a power soulbeast at quadim1, who no matter how good he is, will not break 15-16k damage by simple design of the fight. Or worse yet, Xera with her huge break mid fight.

    Your argument is faulty by simple reason that you decided to not take into account which values go into the all raid boss damage calculations. It would be of far more use if you actually had raid experience on each boss to draw your conclusions, or at least compared per boss values. All raid boss average damage is absolutely useless in this case as comparison, by simple rason that distribution of classes and possible damage per boss is completely out of wack.

    You DO know, you can click on bosses individually right?
    Where differences go up to 100% even (including your own example Qadim ...). I was just giving an example with a big 'n', but if you want, you can do a whole rundown on every single boss, and the differences will probably surprise you. Take the difference between a Mirage and a Scourge on Cairn for instance: 50% more DPS!!! Or between Daredevil and Reaper on Vale Guardian: 36%. Or Gorseval where Weaver is doing about 45% more DPS than Soulbeast and Reaper ... etc. etc.! All significantly more than your claimed 10 to 15%

    Go to the top right, remove 99, 90, 80 and 70th percentile. Add 30% percentile so you can see 60,50 and 30. Now take a look how much closer those values are on pretty much all bosses.

    That's exactly what I did! All the examples I just gave were on the 50th percentile!
    Please read!

    I did, maybe go to the site and actually remove the top percentile so the classes get sorted new. You'll see that most are within no more than 10% with maybe an outlier here or there for a very underperforming class.

    All you did was look at the top and bottom performing 99th percentile without resorting the classes according to 50% percentile.

    You accusing me of something that I don't do! Again: the examples I gave are on the 50th percentile, only! Just do the math, and you'll see it for yourself as well. But let me give you another example and spell it out for you, cause math is hard, I know.
    Sloth: Dragonhunter, Firebrand and Weaver all do about 12.5k DPS (Weaver even 13,3k, but that's a low 'n' so I won't take that as an example!) on the 50th percentile. Your worst damage dealing profession is in this example the Necro: with its best dps build: Reaper, doing about 9.5K dps on the 50th percentile. So, in this case, the Guardian profession is doing 28,5% more DPS than the Necro's best DPS build in the 50th percentile!!! (And the Weaver is doing 40% more DPS, but like I said, the confidence level is too low on that one!)
    (And if you read REALLY carefully, you see the mistake I made on purpose here, cause the Mesmer (Chrono) is actually the worst damage dealer on this boss, I hope you can understand why I left that one out!)

    And if you want more examples, just go through them all, I don't think you can find one boss (or maybe just one), where ALL professions are between 10% of each others DPS in the 50th percentile!!! I'd like to challenge you on that one!

    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/area-16123

    Sorted for 50th percentile and power dps. Reaper does 12.6k on my graph. Compared to 15.2k DH as top dps. That's 18% less.

    So not sure where you are getting those 28%.

    Even with an outlier of 20% between top performing and bottom performing class (which would be the biggest extrem). If that Reaper improved to 60th percentile, he'd be doing 15k damage. Pretty much on par with his DH buddy. Ergo, better to bring players who enjoy their class and improve on it. That is not factoring for ease of use classes or simple builds like shortbow condi ranger, power daredevil or dragon hunter.

    So I remain with my statement. On this level, it makes no difference which class you chose to play. The main component for success is willigness to improve. Once you reach the top end, the performance difference drops to 10% maximum between classes.

    Ah, I see what you do there, you look at overall DPS instead of boss DPS! You have to look at the number between brackets. After all, killing the boss is your main objective, which in the end gives you your raid reward, not the adds or critters, for instance :)
    So, when you look at the DPS that really counts (boss DPS), the Reaper has to improve by 28% to get to the same level as a Dragonhunter on the 50th percentile (mediocre players!). I think that's a lot, and it shouldn't be that much either!
    Also, if you look at the difference between a 50th percentile mediocre reaper and a 99th percentile veteran/pro Reaper, there's an improvement of 85% !!! Whereas with a Dragonhunter this is only 69%. So, you could conclude that DH is easier to play (even as a mediocre player) than a Reaper as well: which is quite a shocking conclusion, cause the Necro (Reaper) normally has quite a different stigma stuck on its head, but hey, it's difficult to steer from ones age-old believes, right?! Ow, fun side fact: the always so difficult famed power Weaver has a difference of 78%, which is still lower than the Power Reaper!!!!!!

    Actually, Reaper is one of the most difficult classes to reach top performance since they have a few animation skips which they need to do in order to optimize their damage. Which in turn means the rotation is even more important. I am surprised at the Reapers overall low performance though, spin to win guarantees a good low intro damage. The class is easy to play but hard to master.

    As far as DH being probably easy, that's not a probably. That's a given considering DH and thief count as some of the easiest classes to play.

    So okay, you have shown that between the highest and lowest there is occasionally a performance gap as far as maybe 30%, on values which we have no knowledge of how reliable they are with how many players data was used and the skill level of those players (EDIT: also using your values for boss damage, I get 9.5/12.5= 0.76, ergo the Reaper is producing 76% of the DH damage, which is 24% less, not 28.5%) . At the top end, where skill is identical and mostly a non issue, the gap is not more than 10%. That's still not applicable for all classes and in general not the correct overall statement and it certainly does not invalidate the statement that most classes do not suffer such a high disparity.

    So once again, for the 4th time: on that level of play, any player could pick up any class and practice a little and outperform ANY of his raid members. Anything sub 60th percentile is not dictated by class but by basic player involvement and competence.

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    That statement can still hold true, even with the current data present.

    Reaper damage is highly susceptible to taking damage, while other classes would die. The data is of only successful kills. You have no knowledge of how players on reaper would have performed on other classes when they are performing this poorly on damage, suggesting that they are taking a ton of damage too. Chances are very high that they would have been dead and the raid not a success, which would again not appear in this data.

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

  • @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

  • @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

    Maybe I don't understand you correct, cause first of all, in the matter of statistics, the Reaper and condi Soulbeast are each other opposites almost: Reaper has a big difference between 99th and 50th percentile, where the condi Soulbeast has quite a small one. In other words: beginner Soulbeast players are not that far away with their DPS output compared to veterans (99th percentile). Whereas for the Reaper this is completely different, there's quite a big gap there. It's actually even bigger than a Condi Weaver which has quite a forgiving rotation, but people tend to forget that.
    As an example, VG: The difference in DPS from a 99th percentile player compared to a 50th percentile player is:

    • for a Condi Soulbeast: 32%
    • for a Condi Weaver: 36%
    • for a Power Reaper: 41%

    Or Gorseval:

    • Condi Weaver: 24%
    • Condi Soulbeast: 25%
    • Reaper: 34%
    • or other classes like Daredevil and Dragonhunter: both 28%

    Knowing this, I still don't know why you still would recommend Reaper (I kinda understand the Soulbeast) to be beginner friendly. Because as you can see, it's quite hard to get to the full potential of that of a Reaper. It will take you a while to get into that 99th percentile.
    Your better off with a Daredevil, Condi weaver, Dragonhunter, for instance! And the good thing with classes like that, is that you can also stay on them as well, cause they are META!

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

    Maybe I don't understand you correct, cause first of all, in the matter of statistics, the Reaper and condi Soulbeast are each other opposites almost: Reaper has a big difference between 99th and 50th percentile, where the condi Soulbeast has quite a small one. In other words: beginner Soulbeast players are not that far away with their DPS output compared to veterans (99th percentile). Whereas for the Reaper this is completely different, there's quite a big gap there. It's actually even bigger than a Condi Weaver which has quite a forgiving rotation, but people tend to forget that.
    As an example, VG: The difference in DPS from a 99th percentile player compared to a 50th percentile player is:

    • for a Condi Soulbeast: 32%
    • for a Condi Weaver: 36%
    • for a Power Reaper: 41%

    Or Gorseval:

    • Condi Weaver: 24%
    • Condi Soulbeast: 25%
    • Reaper: 34%
    • or other classes like Daredevil and Dragonhunter: both 28%

    Knowing this, I still don't know why you still would recommend Reaper (I kinda understand the Soulbeast) to be beginner friendly. Because as you can see, it's quite hard to get to the full potential of that of a Reaper. It will take you a while to get into that 99th percentile.
    Your better off with a Daredevil, Condi weaver, Dragonhunter, for instance! And the good thing with classes like that, is that you can also stay on them as well, cause they are META!

    Because It has quite an easy rotation for a power dps. I totaly forgot about daredevil so I woukd recomend that.
    I think that most reaper players know that reaper is easy from many sources and so they dont even look that up. Not that many players know about double shortbow soulbeast and so they need to look that up first and then they start higher then reapers.

  • @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

    Maybe I don't understand you correct, cause first of all, in the matter of statistics, the Reaper and condi Soulbeast are each other opposites almost: Reaper has a big difference between 99th and 50th percentile, where the condi Soulbeast has quite a small one. In other words: beginner Soulbeast players are not that far away with their DPS output compared to veterans (99th percentile). Whereas for the Reaper this is completely different, there's quite a big gap there. It's actually even bigger than a Condi Weaver which has quite a forgiving rotation, but people tend to forget that.
    As an example, VG: The difference in DPS from a 99th percentile player compared to a 50th percentile player is:

    • for a Condi Soulbeast: 32%
    • for a Condi Weaver: 36%
    • for a Power Reaper: 41%

    Or Gorseval:

    • Condi Weaver: 24%
    • Condi Soulbeast: 25%
    • Reaper: 34%
    • or other classes like Daredevil and Dragonhunter: both 28%

    Knowing this, I still don't know why you still would recommend Reaper (I kinda understand the Soulbeast) to be beginner friendly. Because as you can see, it's quite hard to get to the full potential of that of a Reaper. It will take you a while to get into that 99th percentile.
    Your better off with a Daredevil, Condi weaver, Dragonhunter, for instance! And the good thing with classes like that, is that you can also stay on them as well, cause they are META!

    Because It has quite an easy rotation for a power dps. I totaly forgot about daredevil so I woukd recomend that.
    I think that most reaper players know that reaper is easy from many sources and so they dont even look that up. Not that many players know about double shortbow soulbeast and so they need to look that up first and then they start higher then reapers.

    Yea, and easiness is a really subjective thing. I assume (from what you write) that factors like not many different buttons to press and animation skips are things that you find easy in a rotation?! Whereas, I find it easy if a rotation is forgiving: in other words easy to pick up once you make a mistake without getting too big of a hit in your DPS. I mean, I don't know if you've tried to use Shroud to soak up damage (a real beginner's mistake) or have to camp in Axe, after you made a mistake in your rotation for the Reaper, but the DPS loss is huge! Whereas like I said, the Condi Weaver, you can pick up pretty much anywhere without a big DPS loss. Sure, it has more different buttons to press, but is far more forgiving!

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

    Maybe I don't understand you correct, cause first of all, in the matter of statistics, the Reaper and condi Soulbeast are each other opposites almost: Reaper has a big difference between 99th and 50th percentile, where the condi Soulbeast has quite a small one. In other words: beginner Soulbeast players are not that far away with their DPS output compared to veterans (99th percentile). Whereas for the Reaper this is completely different, there's quite a big gap there. It's actually even bigger than a Condi Weaver which has quite a forgiving rotation, but people tend to forget that.
    As an example, VG: The difference in DPS from a 99th percentile player compared to a 50th percentile player is:

    • for a Condi Soulbeast: 32%
    • for a Condi Weaver: 36%
    • for a Power Reaper: 41%

    Or Gorseval:

    • Condi Weaver: 24%
    • Condi Soulbeast: 25%
    • Reaper: 34%
    • or other classes like Daredevil and Dragonhunter: both 28%

    Knowing this, I still don't know why you still would recommend Reaper (I kinda understand the Soulbeast) to be beginner friendly. Because as you can see, it's quite hard to get to the full potential of that of a Reaper. It will take you a while to get into that 99th percentile.
    Your better off with a Daredevil, Condi weaver, Dragonhunter, for instance! And the good thing with classes like that, is that you can also stay on them as well, cause they are META!

    Because It has quite an easy rotation for a power dps. I totaly forgot about daredevil so I woukd recomend that.
    I think that most reaper players know that reaper is easy from many sources and so they dont even look that up. Not that many players know about double shortbow soulbeast and so they need to look that up first and then they start higher then reapers.

    Yea, and easiness is a really subjective thing. I assume (from what you write) that factors like not many different buttons to press and animation skips are things that you find easy in a rotation?! Whereas, I find it easy if a rotation is forgiving: in other words easy to pick up once you make a mistake without getting too big of a hit in your DPS. I mean, I don't know if you've tried to use Shroud to soak up damage (a real beginner's mistake) or have to camp in Axe, after you made a mistake in your rotation for the Reaper, but the DPS loss is huge! Whereas like I said, the Condi Weaver, you can pick up pretty much anywhere without a big DPS loss. Sure, it has more different buttons to press, but is far more forgiving!

    Yeah, and even daredevil "rotation" is not that easy. It might be hard for new ppl to play witjout endurance with a build where your most used skill is an animation lock

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    Because, if maxing out dps is necessary then it mean it is a raid mechanism. And ultimately it is a flawed path which can only lead to seeking more and more dps, making players discriminate professions which have inately less dps than other. It's a vicious circle that enforce a pure dps meta, brushing off other options.

    It's ok in the case of other traditionnal mmo that follow the old trinity standard, but ANet chose to give it's professions the ability to fullfill all roles with less opening for traditionnal support and tanks, making PvE encounters oriented toward dps a design opening holes for profession/build's discrimination. It was the main reason players complained in the vanilla game and it's still for this reason that players continue to complain.

    The main flaw here is in your point though is:
    People are not talking about performing in the top 1% bracket, or even the top 20%. It's about decent dps to complete encounters. EVERY class on nearly EVERY specialization is capable of doing sufficient and decent dps to make any raid boss easy.

    The problem is: many poor performing players are no where near the bare minimum of what their class could do.

    Which leads me again to the recurring point and continous missunderstanding on the forums:
    When experienced raiders talk about meta classes, top performance dps or optimization of meta setups, then that is something completely different than when the argument is about required or necessary dps. 95% of all GW2 players can only dream about getting near snowcrows benchmarks, even if they are active raiders and practice. Those meta and performance setups are basically a different galaxy for most players.

    When we talk about required dps or good dps for raids (or on the flip side, bad dps), then this is in general aimed at the 60-70% benchmark or absolute bottom tier dps players (which do 2-4k or so). It makes literally NO difference which class you play if you are so bad that you do 2-4k dps. In that situation the player could roll any other class and underperform because with those values, it's not a class issue, it's a player issue. So any class argument is null and void at that level. People with this performance NEED to get a basic understanding of the game first, and that's somethign which requires work. Work some are not willing to put in or do not require they have to put in.

    TL;DR:
    There is a vast difference between underperforming in an experienced raid group which demands a top tier performance (and might want meta classes) and a training group which demands bare minimum for success. Unfortunately both complaints (bad dps) get mixed up way to often.

    I would gladly accept your arguments if we were looking at the very close environment of the so called "experienced raiders". The point is that we are not. We've got someone that come onto the forum and basically say that people should do max dps because otherwise it hurt the group. In a game where there can be up to 30% difference between the maximum dps of 2 professions, this is just like saying that the profession with the lowest potential dps is trash for the content. Something that shouldn't happen.

    The gap between most professions is not 30% (which would be around 10k or more at 30k benchmarks), but more like 10-15% at best.

    I hear this a lot from people, but it's just not true. There are actually huge differences between classes dps in real raid scenarios if you look at real statistics:
    https://gw2raidar.com/global_stats/All raid bosses
    Don't look at the 90th and 99th percentile which cover the speedclearers, etc. Just look at the 50th percentile (or 30th if you want to) which covers the more casual raider, and you see that the differences between the different professions are quite high! I.e.: your best performing dps classes: Ele (Condi Weaver), Guardian (Firebrand) and Mesmer (Mirage) score about 16K dps across all raid bosses, whereas your worst dps professions: Ranger (Soulbeast as their best option) and Necro (Reaper as their best option) puts out about 11K dps. So the best performing DPS classes do about 45% more damage than your worst classes in the hands of mediocre raiders across all raid bosses (so not the golem)!

    Obviously. Clases are balanced vased on top performance. If you look at bad players then there will be huge diferences. Most of those players would improve alot by just switching to shortbow soulbeast or power reaper. But players that are bad would probably never have even idea about this diference...

    And there we have it again that age-old stigma: "if you are a bad player, you should play Power Reaper", which is now proven to be a faulty statement, as you can easily conclude from my above post's example.
    And you know what, I would be VERY surprised if you would now say: "Sorry, I stand corrected".
    I actually got a feeling you're still going to think this statement is true, right?

    I will be thinking that. If a inexpirianced player wants to improve his/her performance they can do that by switching to easier class. Your above percentil example doesnt count with one factor. Players thatvwould benefit from this change usualy dont swáp because they want to play tgeir character or they do but think that if it is easy thes dont have to learn to get to those numbers.

    But getting to those numbers is the most important thing to do as a DPS role! So why would you recommend the hardest class to be able to fulfil this role to an inexperienced player???

    I said I would recommend shortbow soulbeast and reaper to not that experianced players. The fact stays that if I do that they either dont listen or insult me instead of taking adivice. Players that actualy take this adivice are those that quickly swap from them back because they are actualy trying to improve and so these clases limit their potential quite soon.

    Maybe I don't understand you correct, cause first of all, in the matter of statistics, the Reaper and condi Soulbeast are each other opposites almost: Reaper has a big difference between 99th and 50th percentile, where the condi Soulbeast has quite a small one. In other words: beginner Soulbeast players are not that far away with their DPS output compared to veterans (99th percentile). Whereas for the Reaper this is completely different, there's quite a big gap there. It's actually even bigger than a Condi Weaver which has quite a forgiving rotation, but people tend to forget that.
    As an example, VG: The difference in DPS from a 99th percentile player compared to a 50th percentile player is:

    • for a Condi Soulbeast: 32%
    • for a Condi Weaver: 36%
    • for a Power Reaper: 41%

    Or Gorseval:

    • Condi Weaver: 24%
    • Condi Soulbeast: 25%
    • Reaper: 34%
    • or other classes like Daredevil and Dragonhunter: both 28%

    Knowing this, I still don't know why you still would recommend Reaper (I kinda understand the Soulbeast) to be beginner friendly. Because as you can see, it's quite hard to get to the full potential of that of a Reaper. It will take you a while to get into that 99th percentile.
    Your better off with a Daredevil, Condi weaver, Dragonhunter, for instance! And the good thing with classes like that, is that you can also stay on them as well, cause they are META!

    Because It has quite an easy rotation for a power dps. I totaly forgot about daredevil so I woukd recomend that.
    I think that most reaper players know that reaper is easy from many sources and so they dont even look that up. Not that many players know about double shortbow soulbeast and so they need to look that up first and then they start higher then reapers.

    Yea, and easiness is a really subjective thing. I assume (from what you write) that factors like not many different buttons to press and animation skips are things that you find easy in a rotation?! Whereas, I find it easy if a rotation is forgiving: in other words easy to pick up once you make a mistake without getting too big of a hit in your DPS. I mean, I don't know if you've tried to use Shroud to soak up damage (a real beginner's mistake) or have to camp in Axe, after you made a mistake in your rotation for the Reaper, but the DPS loss is huge! Whereas like I said, the Condi Weaver, you can pick up pretty much anywhere without a big DPS loss. Sure, it has more different buttons to press, but is far more forgiving!

    Btw, if you really want an easy rotation that's both easy in forgiveness and different buttons to press: try Axe/Axe Berserker!!! (And you're even META as well)

  • @sokeenoppa.5384 said:
    Why does players asume that its ok to pull bad dps numbers and still be accepted into groups without any proplem? When i say bad i dont mean a bit lower numbers than some1 who has killed boss multiple times already but just simply really low amount of dps.

    BECAUSE ITS THEIR OWN GAME THEY PAID FOR AND HOW YOU DARE FORCING THEM TO ACTUALLY PLAY THE GAME ON A SEMI ACCEPTABLE LEVEL AND PULL THEIR OWN WEIGHT IN GROUP CONTENT!!!!111oneone /s

  • Hex.2579Hex.2579 Member ✭✭✭

    Lol.
    We do Gors train and our new DHs deal about 6-8k, not knowing mechanics of the fight, nor have time to perfect their rotation. That's what trainings are for.
    And that's the fun of a raid training. As a trainer, you should know how to deal with every situation may come up including low dps squads, instead of complaining about new players doing low dps.

    I find it even more ironic when people say training run, but ask for 25-100LI. Lol.
    We did Gors train, with 8 peeps have 0 LI, use 3 updrafts, below average low dps, yet still complete it the same time as a high exp squad try to slow cc and reset the fight 4-5 times at 2-3% boss health.

    I agree with someone above. Post like this really does wonder to new raid players. #feelbadman.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 28, 2019

    When it comes to training runs, it’s mostly expected that players to have taken the initiative to do preparations that could be done on their end such as looking over the mechanics (most YouTube guides do this in 5 min) as well as practice proper DPS rotation. Not doing this shows you’re unlikely to be willing to put in the effort and the trainer is better off finding someone else to train who is willing to put in the effort.

    I suggest that those looking to join training groups to see what it expected of them. Most of the ones I see require you to at least have practiced proper DPS rotations. It’s not really enjoyable to do raid trainings and make no progress because people don’t know their rotations. You’re also less likely to learn the rotations from doing the training as you’re having to also focus on learning the mechanics.

    As for the above poster, a high exp group wouldn’t slow CC unless their DPS was low. Nor would they generally reset the fight 4-5 times. I do gors 1-2 times a week and we generally beat it the first time. This isn’t a boss a highly experienced group struggles with. The boss is highly scripted with little RNG.

©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.