Mech haters - Do you really want harder builds to be stronger?

[Sunchaser.9854]

There's actually some high demand for like heal mechs and alacity mechs and heal alacity mechs. And as everyone who raids know, you practically need to dedicate just like 2-3/5 slots of every 5 man into someone or a group providing 100% alacity ( 1 alacity mechanist or 2x viper alac renegades without boon duration runes and ritualists/celestial +- boon duration runes to hit 100%), or you could just take 1 mechanist.

Then you take a quickbrand or healquickbrand or some other class for the quickness, then they self provide some might as well as personal quickness so in some really terrible pugs the quickness and might are really spotty because they might assume some classes are auto providing it.

The content still clears, just in both pugs and first challenge mode clears, there's often only one class that's used in what seems to average to about 50-70% of all use in all raid groups, challenge or otherwise. It's just a incredibly favorited class that often is highly rewarded for fractions of effort put in, while providing extremely valuable boons and practical front loaded raid dps vs static no movement mechanics.

Right off the top of my head, i remember a boss fight where 30-50% of the time was spent in a raid running away from instant kill pillars that would mean a class with 1200 range could have 20-40% more uptime in a fight than the melee, who weren't always able to have golem dps apply into practical dps.

Torment by design loses 40% of dps for condition based classes if a target moves, and bosses often have mechanics where they become invulnerable, while simultaneously featuring one shots ability, deleted platforms, or mechanics that will kill you for tunnel visioning a rotation or crash your dps for tunnel visioning the bosses. It's just a lot of risk for very minimal potential reward. Do any rotation mistake to stay alive or take space to do a mechanic and now none of your mallyx torment pulses are applying and if the bosses move, there's -40% of your torment dps gone.

If the boss isn't the size of a skyscraper, there's 4k of your citadel combardment or vindicator dps gone from just small vs large hitbox issues the building sized 20x20 golem vs 2x2 raid boss might have for cheesed golem hitboxes benches vs raid boss dps gaps. Of course they can be avoided, but i think the reason snowcrows removed their 'large hitbox' section was they realized how  misleading it really was for golem results vs practical and reliable results.

But nearly everything mechanist does applies directly into raid dps. it's not movement dependent, it bursts through 5 sec invulnerabilty phases, it has very front loaded damage, 1200 range, doesn't really have any mechanics punish it past reflects, it also has a +25% movement speed/teleport and doesn't need to even use healing ability keybinds to heal since it's a mass signet build. It just have everything, without costs. While every other class has 1 thing, with 2-5 downsides. 

But Gw2 itself has a very hyper fixated gap for a arguably, very casual focused game. People will argue that gw2 isn't meant to be intensive, but specs or classes that the average overworlder is only using to deal 5-20% of their potential spec's dps in open world just seems insane even coming from other mmorpgs. You often had like 60% bad rotation vs 80% average rotation vs 100% dps rotation gaps. Some of the optimizing was for as little as 10% dps.

In Wow that'd look like a bad player doing 20k-25k dps to a good player doing 35k-40k dps. In guild wars 2, you have Soo Won metas where 40 people are under 4k dps and the top 10 dps are all 10 afk dps or support mechanists in the 20k-35k range and the first non mechanist is a 13k-25k dps player, at best. I'm not actually saying overly making it accessible against the masses is fine, it's just like a huge bummer to hear 8/9 of the classes you play, especially for a 10 year old game that limits you to 5 character slots without 10$ purchases that aren't currently on sale, that it really feels like a bummer to know you're putting in effort to compete with people who may not even be at the screen or pass 5-20k dps on others.

And i did like 0.1% dps parse WoW raiding with a spec that bursted 600% haste at times, you didn't have to worry about attack abilities clipping each other, timing pulses or not having dps clip, abilities that did different amounts of damage based off if the boss moved or not. Hitbox issues, weapon swaps.

To say that gw2 system doesn't feel like a orphaned system that wanted to be more skill intensive and rewarding. Yet decided to take away the reward. Just seems like a paradox.

The players will play what's in front of them, but it really feels jarring having more effort for 0% more reward and watching videos where other classes are one shot just to play elementalists and mesmers as the top non mech dps, only doing 40-50% of the mech's dps while losing 100% of hp and dying to mechanics the mechanists soak with their barriers and survive with 20% hp through. It just make it feel like 8/9 classes, skill isn't rewarded. But then why did they pick a 0.5 gcd vs 1.6 gcd system in a game with 100-250+ ms ping megaservers(?). It's the fastest gcd system by far on one of the highest ping mmorpgs. While Wow has 1.6 sec gcds with ability quing on 30-70 ms ping and gw2 has 0.5 on 100-250+ ms, it feels like a strange design. There's all these design choices designed to make rotations punishing for other classes and each other spec provide only 1 boon or heal to provide many. Yet one of the most dominant classes isn't the one that dominates a dps golem on snowcrows with a warning label it might work on most bosses.

But one that performs well at many roles while not really being punished outside of some pvp, while the eles get to explode to 0% hp while the mechanists yawn with 20% hp not even noticing the ele one shot mechanics as they barrier and autoregen health through it. It's not that mechanist is a sin to exist it's just like the other 8/9 classes, potentially 10 years old, in a game with only 5/9 character slots and birthday gifts go. People kinda forget the 7-9 mechanist meta kinda came after the "class diversity patch" which.. aimed at improving comp variation by taking away unique boons like banners and nerfing catalyst.

But i've been hearing lots of warrior mains who used to have a 1/10 slot in every raid lament they made their mains, likely with 300-400G and 1000s of hours invested, and were just left with nothing to do and nothing unique. And while bladesworn rips through a immobile golem, for 10% more dps, i've heard it gets lot more 10-40% raid dps penalties for mobility, boss movement, extremely demanding rotations with raid mechanics that could easily lead to either failing. (A. tunnel rotation, die to instakill boss mechanic, or B. tunnel on boss mechanics, do no dps. etc. ) 

Honestly, to me, it just really feels like gw2 really isn't sure what it wants to be. Is it a skill based mmorpg with 0.5 s gcds that need to be executed perfectly with 100-250 ms ping vs it's 1.6-2.5s gcg 30-70 ms ping competitors? Okay. Is it nerfing the ele 20% again, okay.

Is it all about boons to have class diversity, but only 1-2 classes bring them all, and often better uptimes as well with better dps. Okay. 

Is it all about making a accessible game, and opening up accessibility to the content, but only making it available to 1/9 class in a game that doesn't give enough slots to build all 5/9 characters without 10$ character slots or deleting birthday gifts?

Okay, but like.. are they going to like.. bring it to all the other 8/9 classes, or do stuff like standardize skill cap vs skill floor. (narrow 10%-100% dps ranges down to like, 60%->100% dps floors vs ceilings, 2k -> 20k dps auto attacks, adjust damage loaded abilities but keep the dps the same so people still bench 30-40k, etc.)  

It's just really unclear what they want. Like they said they wanted more class diversity in the patch that made class diversity go a warrior, some eles, some mechanists and a bit of every class into 7-9 rifle mechs and benched the warriors or made eles quit. I'm not even sure what thiefs provide because i haven't seen a deadeye or spectre in content ever. Necros have open world afk farming and champion soloing specs and healscourge on boneskinner so that's fine. But there's so much class flavor and so much of class balance seems designed into making one class as stacked as possible and then +20% buffing it or nerfing it with patches that change it from.. 35k dps to 35k dps... And changing the high end 37k to 38k-40k somehow, based on the video which doesn't seem explained. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Sunchaser.9854

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

9 hours ago, Sunchaser.9854 said:

It's just really unclear what they want. Like they said they wanted more class diversity in the patch that made class diversity go a warrior, some eles, some mechanists and a bit of every class into 7-9 rifle mechs and benched the warriors or made eles quit. I'm not even sure what thiefs provide because i haven't seen a deadeye or spectre in content ever. Necros have open world afk farming and champion soloing specs and healscourge on boneskinner so that's fine. But there's so much class flavor and so much of class balance seems designed into making one class as stacked as possible and then +20% buffing it or nerfing it with patches that change it from.. 35k dps to 35k dps... And changing the high end 37k to 38k-40k somehow, based on the video which doesn't seem explained. 

I can explain what went down here.  The short version is that the June balance patch, among others, was balanced solely around the whims of a few individuals whom did not communicate with each other or their boss.  There was no singular "want" that "they" all shared.  If you can get ahold of some of their inside talks, their reasons for nerfing or changing something was as flimsy as "I didn't like it," and their preemptive response to criticisms for their changes were "the players will figure something out."  Which, as anyone with a brain can recognize, isn't an explanation at all.  Thus, the changes were inexplicable.

The June change was poorly thought out.  Anet thought that removing the unique buffs and niches from each profession would let anyone play with anybody.  Turns out, it just made everyone inferior to Firebrand and Mechanist, because now nobody has anything to offer over those two, and they do it all better.

The August changes, sadly, weren't a step in the right direction.  It was just doubling down with a whole lot of words.  The increases each profession received was compensation for the loss of all the unique buffs, most of which favored strike builds.  Anet is still marching further with boon homogenization, as can be seen by giving everyone just a bit (roughly 5 stacks) of AoE might on all of their builds, just like they did with fury.  This is all to remove the purposes of might and fury uptime from consideration.  The fact that the mirage nerfs almost went out is proof that Anet still doesn't have a cohesive and complete balance strategy.

[Sunchaser.9854]

Yeah that's a good take on it. The almost reverse of the thread's title. "Do you really want harder builds to be stronger", could just be as easily pov flipped do. "Do you really want there to be no reward for a harder and punishing build? What's even the point of the other 8 classes existing while mechanist outperforms for free while also often afk?", etc.

It's not that mechanist is like some heavily skilled build, it just makes it really discouraging to know with a dps tracker installed to know that so many players are working hard to compete in a raid group with 10 players, 3 elementalist and warriors trying to improve their build, going "Did i get 40k dps? i tried really hard for that fight! I bet i did great! My fingers hurt, i thought i did really well", and the answer is. "Uh.. Actually you were only 3-15k dps. You were outdpsed 4-5x by the mechanist who did 28k dps" "Oh, well, mechanist, do you have any tips to improve my rotation? " "Aww nah man, i was only doing 5k dps as a ele, so i switched over to a mechanist. I was actually afk, it feels really bad leaving my main but it almost feels like a joke, it's so much easier, it's sad. I don't know why the other classes are so neglected" "HEY, don't insult mechanist, it's my main! i love how easy the dps is". Etc.

It just seems a paradox of design. Anet clearly designed their systems to have a higher skillcap in mind with auto attack chains clearing, not saving, and even engineer had multiple sets to switch between. It's a game that locks you to 5 base character slots that's never enough to unlock all 9 without paying 10$ a slot, and has birthday presents so you'd be encouraged to fill up the roster. I can't switch to a mechanist unless i deleted a 10 year old character, but it feels a major bum down since what made me join 0.5 sec gcd gw2 over the sluggish 2.5 sec gcd ff14 was the fast and fluid combat. Which seems to be underperforming next to afk specs, and while people will call 35k as a mechanist as skill, it seems discouraging to know post nerf it still seems like most classes are in the same boat as before and haven't changed as much as we hoped. 

[Scolix.4879]

Yes this kind of spec should never do as much damage as it does to me its just ridiculous how easy and effective the spec is at the same time its like playing Wows beastmaster hunter but 200% more simpler way.

[Mauti.3520]

EDIT:
hey, i would like to really say sorry for my rude words posted in here.
I can and should voice my criticism better and less harsh.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Mauti.3520
edit for a reason

[AliamRationem.5172]

21 hours ago, Mauti.3520 said:

Yep

Every game, especially competetive, hands your kitten rb to you if you'are not good at it. That's how it works friendos, no excuse for special gw2 snowflakes that can't be bothered to learn and execute a rotation.

some reasonable easy builds like shortbow soulbeast: Yes.

This blatant automated cheating: Just get hammered by the nerf bat left and right.

Can't wait seeing you guys who are straight up killing yourself during 4 seconds magnet aura reflect with your own bullets in WvW being smashed out of completely scourging and cheating PvE.

There's no need to be so antagonistic.  The fact is at least one lead dev who has been making major decisions about the direction of the game since EoD disagrees with you.  We can only hope that the team is rethinking that direction, but it seems clear there is some disagreement on what many players once considered common sense.

In any event, there's no reasonable disagreement that mechanist is currently overperforming.  Hopefully ANet will do the right thing and balance it rather than allowing this to drag on any further.

[LKEY.9567]

Yes, of course. It should be nerfed by at least 15-20% of it's dps. Not because I am envy, because this build is overperforming contrary to it's complexity. The game should promote more difficult to approach.

No only auto-attack build should have dps on par with the top. 

 

[Kuma.1503]

3 minutes ago, LKEY.9567 said:

Yes, of course. It should be nerfed by at least 15-20% of it's dps. Not because I am envy, because this build is overperforming contrary to it's complexity. The game should promote more difficult to approach.

No only auto-attack build should have dps on par with the top. 

 

At least?  -20% dps puts it at roughly 29k dps. For context, that's what Quickbrand benches atm.

 

 

[Cyninja.2954]

9 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

At least?  -20% dps puts it at roughly 29k dps. For context, that's what Quickbrand benches atm.

 

 

The key take away being "benches". Yes, a perfectly played QFB on a golem does get there.

Now I personally disagree that pmech should have it's damage reduced by 15-20%. What I do agree with is that it's skill floor needs to get increased, aka the passive damage it does needs to get reduced ideally while not changing the skill ceiling performance. If that is not possible, then yes, it's overall performance needs to get reduced.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Yellow Rainbow.6142]

1 minute ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

The key take away being "benches". Yes a perfectly played QFB on a golem does get there.

I remember People used to get kicked all the time, If you didn't hit 80% of snowcrow benches. Now Anet give us mech and everyone complain that we hit benchmark.

Can't have it both ways people.

[Cyninja.2954]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Rainbow.6142 said:

I remember People used to get kicked all the time, If you didn't hit 80% of snowcrow benches. Now Anet give us mech and everyone complain that we hit benchmark.

Can't have it both ways people.

While your claim is not true, even if a forum favorite "fantasy" among players who never actually raided. You aren't actually hitting the benchmark, the automation of the class is. Which leaves only 2 possible design decisions: bring all other classes to the automation level of pmech, or change/nerf pmech.

As for your claim: it is dis-proven by millions and millions of logs on GW2wingman which clearly show that 80% SC benchmark is not required and never was for a majority of groups. Feel free to comb or sort through them, even by different patch cycles.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Kuma.1503]

4 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Now personally disagree that pmech should have it's damage reduced by 15-20%. What I do agree with is that it's skill floor needs to get increased, aka the passive damage it does needs to get reduced ideally while not changing the skill ceiling performance.

If there's one thing I want for Mech, it is this. More skill expression and less passive gameplay. They can start by giving it toolbelt skills when you stow the mech. Engi mains have been asking for that since it was revealed that toolbelts were going away as a trade-off. 

Unfortunately, not all trade-offs are created equal, and this one forced them to super buff the mech to make the loss of 29 unique skills (including our heal skill in med kit) worthwhile. 

A better trade-off would have been no toolbelts when mech is out. You either get your robot or you get your toolbelt skills, not both. Plus the obvious loss of core engi f5. Plus the fact then mech is stowed, you still devoted an entire traitline to buff a mech that isn't there. Even if you have your toolbelt skills, you're still core engi with 2 traitlines anytime the Mech is stowed. That would have been enough of a trade-off. 

Going for the harsher trade-off in this instance ended up making Mechanist MORE simple/easy. 

Then obviously balance around that  and you have a build with a higher skill floor because you have 4 toolbelts and 3 mech skills to juggle. 

4 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

If that is not possible, then yes, it's overall performance needs to get reduced.

It's possible, but knowing ANet, they'll take the "We don't know how to balance this so we reduced it's effectiveness by 50% so no one plays it" approach. 

[Cyninja.2954]

7 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

If there's one thing I want for Mech, it is this. More skill expression and less passive gameplay. They can start by giving it toolbelt skills when you stow the mech. Engi mains have been asking for that since it was revealed that toolbelts were going away as a trade-off. 

That is actually a pretty cool idea. I like it. Would even "band-aid fix" the underwater issues.

7 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Unfortunately, not all trade-offs are created equal, and this one forced them to super buff the mech to make the loss of 29 unique skills (including our heal skill in med kit) worthwhile. 

A better trade-off would have been no toolbelts when mech is out. You either get your robot or you get your toolbelt skills, not both. Plus the obvious loss of core engi f5. Plus the fact then mech is stowed, you still devoted an entire traitline to buff a mech that isn't there. Even if you have your toolbelt skills, you're still core engi with 2 traitlines anytime the Mech is stowed. That would have been enough of a trade-off. 

Going for the harsher trade-off in this instance ended up making Mechanist MORE simple/easy. 

Then obviously balance around that  and you have a build with a higher skill floor because you have 4 toolbelts and 3 mech skills to juggle. 

Another approach could be to rework the traits so that mech specializes in support or condition damage with some variety (instead of just this trait power damage, this trait condi damage, this trait support). Potentially splitting some of the current stacked synergies apart in the traits/signet area.

Engi has Holo, which was/is a very fun and popular elite specialization with a good power focus as well as scrapper. There is no reason for power mech to be a thing. Specialize the mech elite a bit more and rework traits.

7 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

It's possible, but knowing ANet, they'll take the "We don't know how to balance this so we reduced it's effectiveness by 50% so no one plays it" approach. 

Probably, I don't think they have the capacity to do full reworks any more. Who knows though, they might, given that the entire approach of automation (for pets) might be here to stay (and that isn't necessarily a bad thing IF designed properly) it might be worth revisiting mech and doing a proper rework with certain goal posts in mind.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Jitters.9401]

My Engineer is Glass as heck. All assassin armors and as close to assassin as I can get with trinks and such. 

 

I have only once been killed by a mechanist but he got the killing blow only as he had 4 friends. 

 

Mechanists are 1 trick wonders.

[Cyninja.2954]

Just now, Jitters.9401 said:

My Engineer is Glass as heck. All assassin armors and as close to assassin as I can get with trinks and such. 

 

I have only once been killed by a mechanist but he got the killing blow only as he had 4 friends. 

 

Mechanists are 1 trick wonders.

 

Which is a pvp issue and yes, mech is lacking in that department a lot. A trait rework and redesign could address this issue somewhat but being realistic: having an over-performing pet class is usually not very popular and very hard to pull off.

[Kuma.1503]

19 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Another approach could be to rework the traits so that mech specializes in support or condition damage with some variety (instead of just this trait power damage, this trait condi damage, this trait support). Potentially splitting some of the current stacked synergies apart in the traits/signet area.

Engi has Holo, which was/is a very fun and popular elite specialization with a good power focus as well as scrapper. There is no reason for power mech to be a thing. Specialize the mech elite a bit more and rework traits.

Probably, I don't think they have the capacity to do full reworks any more. Who knows though, they might, given that the entire approach of automation (for pets) might be here to stay (and that isn't necessarily a bad thing IF designed properly) it might be worth revisiting mech and doing a proper rework with certain goal posts in mind.

Another thing we agree on!

The thing is, this wouldn't even be that hard to accomplish for them. Power Mech does a lot of random burning  on the Mech skills. They'd just have to lean more into that and replace the power modifiers with effects to enhance condition builds instead. 

Just one example of a trait they could add "Mace skills have increased condition duration. Energizing slam no longer gives regen and instead applies burning."

I know some people get upset when I suggest turning Mech into a pure condi elite, but removing the power synergy from mech means Anet can better flesh out the condition side of mechanist. We already have scrapper as a power-only profession, Holo which can go either way (but still favors power). Why not make Mech lean into condi?

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[LKEY.9567]

5 hours ago, Kuma.1503 said:

At least?  -20% dps puts it at roughly 29k dps. For context, that's what Quickbrand benches atm.

 

 

And it sounds about right for LI, completely range build where your immortal pet does 1/3 of total damage.

[Jerus.4350]

4 hours ago, LKEY.9567 said:

And it sounds about right for LI, completely range build where your immortal pet does 1/3 of total damage.

LI? What LI?  a 20% nerf would mean the full 90+ APM rotation would be doing about 30k.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Jerus.4350

[Carnifex.3275]

GW2 is quite a casual game already when it comes to combat. It's really not that complicated. So yes - mech being able to pull out so much while doing so little is too much. What i heard from most decent players though.. that it's just too boring. They still play it but they don't even enjoy it cuz it's that easy. You can't really sustain playing a game in such a boring way. How long will u last? 1-2months? But some people will still keep using it just cuz it's so effective and semi-afk..

[Arewn.2368]

It's a game. Performance should reflect skill.

 

That performance does need to be kept within reasonable bounds. But within those bounds you should see more difficult play having higher damage.

They need to establish a proper floor and ceiling, with a gradient of performance expectations along it.

If you literally only auto attack, that will obviously be the lowest damage. But it should still do reasonable damage even then. That's our floor.

On the other hand the highest damage should result from, typically, the more complex or difficult builds/rotations. 

That's our ceiling.

 

If there was something like a %50 gap I think that would be good. Taking golem numbers as a loose example: Just auto attacking lands you at 20k dps. While perfecting your rotation will have you outputting close to 40k avg dps.

 

And sure, you can have easier and harder builds even within that. That's a good thing for player inclusion and onboarding.

You want some easier to play builds that still perform relatively high in order to ease new players in. And as accessible options to the impaired.

But having an inverse relationship of one of the easiest builds also being one of the best performing throws a wrench in player motivation and making the game feel rewarding to play long term.

[Yellow Rainbow.6142]

12 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

While your claim is not true, even if a forum favorite "fantasy" among players who never actually raided. You aren't actually hitting the benchmark, the automation of the class is. Which leaves only 2 possible design decisions: bring all other classes to the automation level of pmech, or change/nerf pmech.

As for your claim: it is dis-proven by millions and millions of logs on GW2wingman which clearly show that 80% SC benchmark is not required and never was for a majority of groups. Feel free to comb or sort through them, even by different patch cycles.

It was definitely the case used to be before we had all easy access to boons and higher benchmark for dps. I was one of the victim of it and I have seen people getting roasted and kicked for doing low dps. It had happened to me several times where I went ahead and bought my own Tag, so these elite commander couldn't kick me.

May be 80% was little exaggeration on my part but 70& was pretty standard. Btw, I am not sure who or what is wingman. Definitely not interested to look through it. You rely on your data while I rely on my experience.

Btw, You are right on not needing 80% of bench. I don't think, you even need 50% of bench for regular raid. But, not needing and getting kicked for not hitting the mark is different?

Edited September 1, 2022 by Yellow Rainbow.6142

[thorrand.6548]

itt: people build spec to boost damage output and gear glass cannon zerker ascended then complain about it being too much damage 😂🤣😂

[Cyninja.2954]

7 hours ago, Yellow Rainbow.6142 said:

It was definitely the case used to be before we had all easy access to boons and higher benchmark for dps. I was one of the victim of it and I have seen people getting roasted and kicked for doing low dps. It had happened to me several times where I went ahead and bought my own Tag, so these elite commander couldn't kick me.

May be 80% was little exaggeration on my part but 70& was pretty standard. Btw, I am not sure who or what is wingman. Definitely not interested to look through it. You rely on your data while I rely on my experience.

Wingman is a collection of millions of logs from raids, fractals and strikes. It goes back years and gives a very nice resource to compare and actually have measurable data in regards to what is and has been needed to complete raids.

Suffice to say, the vast majority, I'll repeat this for good measure: VAST MAJORITY, of players are far below the top end players performance wise and are still successful (and this is not a recent phenomenon, again this site goes back years in data).

It's a great way to finally clear up some of those misconceptions which get constantly spread by some players especially on the forums.

Experience wise, I've been raiding almost consistently ever since raids got added, now at 5.5k LI (not counting the double or triple kills in weeks of the same boss), and I can confidently state that the entire "you need to be able to do the SC benchmark" meme (remember when it wasn't 70% of SC benchmark but actually "you need 90% of SC benchmark" and above?) was most often spread by players who had 0 clue of what to do while being totally unprepared and inexperienced with their class.

7 hours ago, Yellow Rainbow.6142 said:

Btw, You are right on not needing 80% of bench. I don't think, you even need 50% of bench for regular raid. But, not needing and getting kicked for not hitting the mark is different?

It is when people make claims like this which lump both together.

As far as getting kicked: there are a majority of groups which don't use the LFG especially guild groups. Certain groups are more competitive or selective, which again are still the minority if one looks at millions worth of logs.

Players might have gotten kicked because they were at 10% of 20% of the benchmark or below, which is where most players who go in completely unprepared are at.

As far as "needed dps", given we have 3 man raid clears, I think it's safe to say that what is actually needed is even sub 30% of the benchmark.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Yellow Rainbow.6142]

14 hours ago, Arewn.2368 said:

On the other hand the highest damage should result from, typically, the more complex or difficult builds/rotations. 

No, it shouldn't. Who told you this has to be your way? I completely disagree with your opinion.

everyone has opinion. PVE should be balance between fun and activity while I agree pmech is too easy to play but this highest damage with more APM bs needs to go.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Yellow Rainbow.6142

[Arewn.2368]

5 hours ago, Yellow Rainbow.6142 said:

No, it shouldn't. Who told you this has to be your way? I completely disagree with your opinion.

everyone has opinion. PVE should be balance between fun and activity while I agree pmech is too easy to play but this highest damage with more APM bs needs to go.

I'm providing an opinion. Not dictating reality.

No one "told me it has to be my way". I'm just contributing to the discussion with my point of view. That's kind of the point of a forum.

 

I'm following a very basic premise. In a game, proper inputs should results in good outcomes. It is a game after all. You're playing it, not watching it. 

And I'm not saying dps should scale linearly with APM. That would be dumb. Just that generally, playing better results in better performance. And that they should clamp minimum and maximum performance so that the desparity isn't too big.