Post EoD Class Content

[Infusion.7149]

10 hours ago, anbujackson.9564 said:

Sorry but I dont get your point. These are dps numbers (benchmark), the absolute difference is literally the same to your numbers,  the % difference is even higher then (30-40k = 33%, 25-35k = 40 %) which doesnt matter that much because those dps are benchmark dps numbers. Why should it matter how much of a dps increase quickness is then since its included anyway? By that logic you wouldnt run a 34k reaper when a QFB does like 30k. 

But sure lower the hybrid dps further then if the gap seems not high enough for you.

When diviner gear was new pQB was 24K DPS, cQB with allies was 28K DPS, alac ren was ~23K DPS at a time when power dominated such that the 4K difference between conditions and power was far less relevant. That's what I mean by 25-30K.
Plaguedoctor scourge is now 27K DPS, when full cDPS scourge used to be 28K DPS. That's massive DPS inflation.

In the context of PVE you would run reaper over a QFB in KC/VG/CA and maybe Adina or other places due to having a StM chrono/power quickness scrapper. There's a 35% power bonus on KC/VG so realistically due to self boons and vuln (something firebrand lacks) and fast phasing it would perform better. Just like you would run a scourge over reaper in most places. A specific DPS doesn't have to be an optimal choice over a quickness or alacrity provider in every case just in the vast majority of cases.

The DPS increase of quickness should be factored into the non-quickness versus quickness build for solo play. For context, currently chrono does ~36.6K on IA and not dT, ~27K on the StM variant using min boon duration, ~18K on inspi chrono which has higher levels of support on par with FB ; quick scrapper does ~34K on DPS variant (versus ~37-38K on holo) and ~27-28K DPS on quickness scrapper using min boon duration. Meanwhile currently cFB does 40K / 35K solo , cQB does 32K / 28K solo , cele/seraph FB does 20-24K and in any case those variants run 40%+ boon duration and only require 25% which makes it even more of a discrepancy in fractals. If you were to use other quickness providers as a baseline, cQB should do sub 26K with allies more akin to a inspi chrono especially since boon duration is far more lenient and it provides more boons in general (fury, might mainly but also aegis). In fact I would go as far as to say even full cDPS firebrand could be 30-32K solo , such that Ashes of the Just is reduced enough that it doesn't make it 37-40K in a group and overshadowing just about every cDPS in terms of utility.

Arguing "but it's benchmark DPS numbers" is meaningless, are they going to balance on autoattacks or something? 80% of benchmark is a realistic goal unless people are auto-ing , although for boon reliant specs such as weaver it is going to be worse off. If balancing off autoattacks then supports would be nerfed even more heavily as renegade does something akin to 15K with full boons and cQB does a similar number. If you balance off actual encounters then cQB way overperforms when there are tome resets due to adds or any time permeating wrath triggers due to more than one target. If you look on wingman for example on MO which is more or less a DPS golem, the top DPS class is not a DPS-only class but renegade on both normal and challenge mode, with a high number of those players being on Condi RR:
https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/raid/mo

The same holds true on Cairn normal mode, which is effectively a DPS golem if you have stability:
https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/raid/cairn

To expect Arenanet to nerf every DPS build and boon support build by 5-10K is extremely unrealistic when it is far easier to lower damage on a few select builds highly impacted by the exposed and torment change . For the longest time the fractal DPS-only classes such as full DPS warrior, soulbeast, and holo were all ~33K so the amount of DPS inflation is around 3-4K DPS at best (~10%) ; even if you go back as far as 2017 dominant DPS specs were doing 33-36K. Reaper used to be ~28K and now is ~34K. In the context of raids, lowering DPS on all DPS classes would just make them arbitrarily more difficult when we know Arenanet has been moving in the opposite direction.

In general it should be risk/reward. A boon reliant soec that doesn't put out boons need to put out the max DPS , a defensive boon providing spec that puts out quickness should be bottom DPS.

Edited January 1, 2022 by Infusion.7149

[Obtena.7952]

On 12/31/2021 at 9:20 PM, DeceiverX.8361 said:

Yeah, and MLM's have the "opportunity" to make me rich.  We all know this is a BS statement and your literary pedantry which is usually at least somewhat based on reality is just bad faith here.

 

They've had nine years of "opportunity" to develop them doing what the OP is suggesting, and failed to do so in any meaningful way.

There isn't any BS ... if Anet wanted to change those traits ... they have 9 years to do it so the idea from the OP that another balance patch immediately after EoD is released because of 'untouched traits' doesn't make sense. 

[DeceiverX.8361]

4 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

There isn't any BS ... if Anet wanted to change those traits ... they have 9 years to do it so the idea from the OP that another balance patch immediately after EoD is released because of 'untouched traits' doesn't make sense. 

So care to explain why they downright stated they were going to change all passive defense traits to 300s ones and then rework them later on, and never did?

They've had the "opportunity" to do the things they said they were going to do which were temporary, and never even did that much.

[Obtena.7952]

11 hours ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

So care to explain why they downright stated they were going to change all passive defense traits to 300s ones and then rework them later on, and never did?

They've had the "opportunity" to do the things they said they were going to do which were temporary, and never even did that much.

What makes you think I can explain it? I don't work there. That example certainly doesn't show Anet hasn't had the opportunity in 9 years to change things they want. 

What I do know is that Anet changes things they want to change when they want to change them. The fact that Anet hasn't changed something is certainly not a reason to push for a core trait rework when EoD is released.

Edited January 3, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[DeceiverX.8361]

On 1/3/2022 at 2:10 AM, Obtena.7952 said:

What makes you think I can explain it? I don't work there. That example certainly doesn't show Anet hasn't had the opportunity in 9 years to change things they want. 

What I do know is that Anet changes things they want to change when they want to change them. The fact that Anet hasn't changed something is certainly not a reason to push for a core trait rework when EoD is released.

I was never arguing they didn't have the opportunity, lol.  The basis of my posts was they always had the opportunity to develop them but didn't from neglect.  In fact, you were the only person in this thread talking about opportunity.

Recall your initial statement:

On 12/23/2021 at 10:01 AM, Obtena.7952 said:

ALL of the core traits have 9 years of development opportunity (even if they haven't been changed) except Rev with 7. No one has forgotten about core classes ... Anet has been changing them for 9 years. You see that Anet hasn't touched traits as a problem that somehow they are overlooked. That's not necessarily the correct interpretation. The reality is that Anet probably doesn't think they need change or that changes they need aren't that important. 

Still, the focus will not be core traits when EoD is released, unless those core traits create situations where interactions with EoD Especs are OPed, just like it wasn't for HoT and PoF, so set your expectations accordingly. 

Now reflect on what you just said:

"That example certainly doesn't show Anet hasn't had the opportunity in 9 years to change things they want. "

So we agree they've had the opportunity to perform work that they stated they were going to do, with a big announcement about how it was a priority going forward.

If you have the opportunity to do something, say you're going to do it, and then proceed to not do it, that's called neglect.

Me not doing my homework as a kid and playing a game instead was me *neglecting* to do my homework.

If I showed up to class the next day and said "Sorry, I didn't have the opportunity to do my homework" to my teacher, they'd call kitten and give me the 0.  If I knew it was neglect, like I did, I shut up and took the 0.  If I had an extenuating circumstance, I sure as hell wanted to prove it.

On 12/23/2021 at 10:01 AM, Obtena.7952 said:

"What makes you think I can explain it? I don't work there."

Then you cannot argue they even had "9 years of development opportunity" in the first place, nor that they weren't neglectful.  See, you can't make any proclamations about ANet's intentions about anything at all.
 

Fact is, even if ANet is happy not doing their figurative homework, as I did was when I was young, they're neglecting to do it.

And they're reaping the consequences of their YoY sales dropping massively in-line with their expansions, just like I saw with my grades overall, because they aren't fixing their core game, as many people who quit or stopped buying gems and even the expansions themselves - myself in that list included - have expressed, for this reason.

So per the OP, if they're going to break the game anyways (as we come to expect with expansion content launches), they should just throw the rest in the mix and work it out after in one big grand-scheme rework, because if this "9 years of development opportunity" is what they're giving us as an idealized product from their POV for the baseline:  They're doing a terrible job, the betas show it's not going to get any better, and they might as well make the game and imbalanced mess all at once rather than stringing along terrible design for 9 more years, because a lot of people are starting to really be done with these antics.

[Obtena.7952]

13 hours ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

I was never arguing they didn't have the opportunity, lol. 

Then you shouldn't have jumped into a discussion about it and I see little reason for your disagreement here ... the fact that Anet can decide to change traits whenever they want is the premise for my point. So if you aren't discussing they didn't have the opportunity ... I have no idea why you are trying to bombard me with walls of texts that I'm just going to ignore since they have nothing to do with my point. Maybe you have a problem with my choice of words? Get over it. 

If Anet wanted to change traits, they have had 9 years to do it. Nothing would stop them if they wanted to. The reason they haven't is actually completely irrelevant. Therefore, the fact there are unchanged traits leading to a conclusion that we should get core trait rebalance immediately after EoD release is absurd.

Edited January 5, 2022 by Obtena.7952