Assassin Vs Wizard - Page 5

Azleya · 01-28-2008, 03:07 AM

Predators should do the most dps

Clearly a convincing argument.

Catseyes · 01-28-2008, 03:12 AM

i blame SoE for their lack of specificity on encounter defenses.
They package all the resists in mitig and here we goes.

Encounters should have weakness/resists on different kind of damage. Making a class or another more efficient,and both as needed.

Ie : a kind of dragon who has incredible high magic defenses but more vulnerable to physical attacks. Another one with very hard skin , but that can be burnt by spells more easily ...etc etc..

Variety in defenses and mobs, not only on boss, and in same zone, could address the Mage vs Scout actual contest.

Azleya · 01-28-2008, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catseyes

i blame SoE for their lack of specificity on encounter defenses.
They package all the resists in mitig and here we goes.

Encounters should have weakness/resists on different kind of damage. Making a class or another more efficient,and both as needed.

Ie : a kind of dragon who has incredible high magic defenses but more vulnerable to physical attacks. Another one with very hard skin , but that can be burnt by spells more easily ...etc etc..

Variety in defenses and mobs, not only on boss, and in same zone, could address the Mage vs Scout actual contest.

Hi, welcome to T5, where certain classes are useless on certain encounters. Sounds like fun to me!

Orochan · 01-28-2008, 03:15 AM

There is no contest, Preds > mages in terms of dps. It's that simple.

I do find it funny how you never see preds complaining about not having utility though...

Catseyes · 01-28-2008, 03:19 AM

no i dont say "immune to" . You would dps at same rate than actual (ie : low rate melee on oranges) but each class would see dps higher depending on encounter.

That always been the case in history . Archers > Cavalry > infantry > Archers ... each kind of class has strongness and weakness.

But i suppose that would require to much work to get that so intelligent zones.

@oro : there are some complaints, as soon we see brigs and swashy parsing as high as us. As rogues bring a lot of utility and preds arent (minus 19% xfer and poison proc for assys) . So yes, as we re top DPS, it's fine coz it's our only "utility" we bring.

Slippery · 01-28-2008, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

Free damage without using mana is irrelevant unless mages are actually running out of mana on any kind of regular basis, and this is almost never an issue these days due to the massive amount of mana management shit available to mages (Crystal Gift, Girdle of Di'Zok Spirit on your priest, troub, illu, etc.). In fact, I would venture that the reason there's so much of this shit available for mages is to address that issue. Personally, as a ranger, I run out of mana far more often than any mage. Also, the effects of mana management are really just indirect personal dps, and are thus reflected in the individual's parses, as running out of mana depresses the individual's dps.

Even including the 4 things you mention I can still run out of power unless there is a proc increase in the group. Not to mention that it is relying on 3 other classes, when you don't have to rely on any. Imagine that, relying on other classes for things you need, Wizards excel at that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

Poisons are first of all consumables that must be regularly paid for, and their 'varied effects' only qualify as utility for the debuff poisons, which are not that great, but do offer some small utility, but which are optimally used by rogues due to their superior AA's for them. Mana tap poison is a last resort mana management ability, for which damage poison must be foregone. De-aggro poison is needed in some situations due to the lack of a troubador in many scout groups and the relatively poor quality of some scout classes' personal de-aggro abilities. Both mana tap and de-aggro poisons' effects are again just indirect personal dps that can't be separated into some other 'utility' category. If you die or run out of mana, that is reflected in your parse.

Relatively poor de-agro abilities, kinda like your own personal dehate buff? Man, I wish I had one of those, or the ability to apply a consumable that could proc a deagro with a limited number of triggers. Instead I just have to rely on a troubador and coercer or else pull agro every fight. You don't want to call it utility, well it sure as fuck is a dependency for me. You not having that dependency is personal utility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

Getting one-shot by heroic mobs and kiting ability are issues separate from raid balance. On raids, scouts get one-shot the same as mages. If you want better solo balance, argue for that, but don't argue for scouts to be inferior on raids because they are superior solo, as that is essentially an argument for making certain classes 'solo classes' that have no place on a raid.

You are not inferior on raids, nor are you arguing to be equal on raids. You are arguing for a permanent number one dps position, which you will never get. Rangers can easily top a parse on yellow content, and are still not far off on orange, which will be remedied when hit rate gets fixed.

You can say you want more dps because you don't have utility, but you will never just out dps other classes because you are a Ranger. You can say the solo doesn't matter and all that matters is raid, but this is not a raiding game. Since this is not just a raiding game increasing your dps has a direct impact to solo and group content, as much as you want to argue otherwise any dps game would change that balance. You are not a fighter that never gets to raid because you bring nothing to the raid. When all the Rangers cease getting brought on raids because their dps is not up to par you might have an arguement, however that day is far off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

The core relevant question is, "if predators and sorcerors do equal dps, which class is more valuable on a raid?" The answer is clearly sorcerors, as they bring a lot more utility (Propagation, Frigid Gift, Rays of Disintegration, etc.). 3k dps + Frigid Gift > 3k dps (3k is an arbitrary number) - it's really quite simple. In order to make up for their utility deficiency, predators have to be able to do superior dps. What you've essentially argued for is for predators to be inferior raid classes. If you want predators to be brought up to par in the utility department rather than be given a dps advantage, argue for that, but don't argue for predators to have equal dps but deficient utility.

That Sorcerer also is a lot more dependent on what needs to be in its group then the Ranger. You can bring a Ranger and give it a not so great group and it will still parse well, you can't say the same for a sorcerer.

Illuminator · 01-28-2008, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orochan

Like I said this is t8 not t5, things change get with the program please.

Armor type is still the overbearing presumption of the game in determining potential dps. If you're still talking about group buffs and this nebulous "utility" then you're barking up the wrong tree. You wear chain, most of the argument is settled in that. You can do shit with chain that I cannot do with cloth. The difference has diminished over time but it is still there.

And it isn't my fault some nitwit decided to add a bullshit "double attack" stat to melee (where is the rationale for this one, anybody?). I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for a "double spell damage" stat. Oh, the fun I could have with that one, until mobs do it right back to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

The counterbalance to scout chain armor is mage range.

Then comparatively, rangers should be doing basement shit dps, and the rest of you can leave your expensive bows at the door.

What's the difference whether you receive a melee AE or the direct autoattack? The counterbalance to scout chain armor is mage dps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calbiyum

Mages should do the most dps

tru

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azleya

Hi, welcome to T5, where certain classes are useless on certain encounters. Sounds like fun to me!

I suppose enchanters are useful in the current endgame, just as long as they unlearn that "crowd control" schtuff they rolled the class for in the first place. Oh wait, they're fast casters now! Sure sure, wink wink.

Orochan · 01-28-2008, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Armor type is still the overbearing presumption of the game in determining potential dps. If you're still talking about group buffs and this nebulous "utility" then you're barking up the wrong tree. You wear chain, most of the argument is settled in that. You can do shit with chain that I cannot do with cloth. The difference has diminished over time but it is still there.

And it isn't my fault some nitwit decided to add a bullshit "double attack" stat to melee (where is the rationale for this one, anybody?). I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for a "double spell damage" stat. Oh, the fun I could have with that one, until mobs do it right back to me.

First off I don't care if wizards get a group buff that adds 100000 int, or .5 int. The point is Mages get it, predators do not.

In order to balance this predators do more dps then mages.

Keep in mind this entire argument involves only 4 classes. Rangers, Sins, locks, and wizzies.

And in this case preds should always out dps mages, barring the occasional exception of course ( like if a mob has a nasty melee damage shield or w/e ).

So whether your group utilty is actually good or not I could give a fuck less about, if it's so bad then complain to your local dev, but don't try to alter entire class balance just because you think mages should be higher.

The fact is, good mages actually do top parses, it's only the bitches ( like yourself ) that come here and complain all day on how YOU can't beat scouts.

Azleya · 01-28-2008, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery

Even including the 4 things you mention I can still run out of power unless there is a proc increase in the group. Not to mention that it is relying on 3 other classes, when you don't have to rely on any. Imagine that, relying on other classes for things you need, Wizards excel at that.

Relatively poor de-agro abilities, kinda like your own personal dehate buff? Man, I wish I had one of those, or the ability to apply a consumable that could proc a deagro with a limited number of triggers. Instead I just have to rely on a troubador and coercer or else pull agro every fight. You don't want to call it utility, well it sure as fuck is a dependency for me. You not having that dependency is personal utility.

You are not inferior on raids, nor are you arguing to be equal on raids. You are arguing for a permanent number one dps position, which you will never get. Rangers can easily top a parse on yellow content, and are still not far off on orange, which will be remedied when hit rate gets fixed.

You can say you want more dps because you don't have utility, but you will never just out dps other classes because you are a Ranger. You can say the solo doesn't matter and all that matters is raid, but this is not a raiding game. Since this is not just a raiding game increasing your dps has a direct impact to solo and group content, as much as you want to argue otherwise any dps game would change that balance. You are not a fighter that never gets to raid because you bring nothing to the raid. When all the Rangers cease getting brought on raids because their dps is not up to par you might have an arguement, however that day is far off.

That Sorcerer also is a lot more dependent on what needs to be in its group then the Ranger. You can bring a Ranger and give it a not so great group and it will still parse well, you can't say the same for a sorcerer.

Actually, I rely on other classes a shit ton for mana management. Without bard, illu, and the belt on my priest, I can easily run out, as rangers have zero viable mana proc options for gear. I also rely on other classes a shit ton for dps buffs. Try grouping a ranger with no support or just a bard (for example) and his performance drop will be similar to a mage given a similarly shitty group.

I also rely on 3'rd party de-aggro buffs, not to the extent a sorc does, but in my good setup I need something more than my personal buff to not pull aggro and die. Personal de-aggro is not personal utility. It's personal dps. It does reduce buff dependency in that department, but again, considering buff dependency as a whole, rangers are just as buff dependent as sorcs.

You say that I'm not arguing to be equal, but rather arguing for perma #1 dps, but in fact those 2 arguments are one and the same given the current utilities of the classes. How is equal dps and inferior utility overall equality? Given the inferior utility of predators, #1 dps makes them equal because it makes up for less utility. How can I state this any more clearly? If your preference is to give predators equal dps AND equal utility rather than superior dps and inferior utility, fine, I have no problem with that. Your proposed states of classes, however, make predators irrelevant on raids, as 3k dps + more utility > 3k dps + less utility.

Also, rangers are being phased out of raid guilds as we speak. No one is recruiting them and many of the ones left out there are betraying, switching mains, or quitting.

Crychtonn - Bylar · 01-28-2008, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery

/snip other stuff

Edit: The ability to effectively kite would be nice as well

The ability to root and nuke mobs and never get hit would be nice for me!

Come on Arabel you should know better then make a statement that stupid. You know I play a ranger, illusionist and conj and the ability to root and nuke is far far superior in the solo game then kiting. Sure there are some root immune mobs that'll make kiting better but over all: root and nuke > kiting.

Now back to your normal bickering.

Edit: My ranger getting some type of raid utility to make him wanted more for a raid would be nice. It'd probably get rid of alot of the bickering thats going on in this thread also.