Warlocks and Wizards got thier DPS upgrade what about us?

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Dont get me wrong its good that warlocks now can hit target with "Rain" type of spells (veteran of Eq1 know what it is rain attack) for well over 3200 damage over 18 second and can relaibly nuke on ~1700 damage a pop every 18 second.. But what about us?</DIV> <DIV>Our best DD at Adept 3 at lvl 49 hit on 529-632 (at lvl 48 it was 505-60<img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> so I can safely assume that at lvl 50 it be around 553-656 </DIV> <DIV>Our best DoT Torment at Adept 3 at lvl 49 do upon impact 107 damage and 79 every 4 second for 6 more tic which is total 581 damage (at lvl 50 if spell will follow previous progression it will be 110 upon impact and 81 every 4 second for 6 tics for total 596 damage)</DIV> <DIV>Our second best DoT Despair at Adept 3 at lvl 49 do upong impact 90-103 damage and 62-76/4.8 s for 24 second (aka do 5 tics) netting .... haha maximum 483 damage</DIV> <DIV>Our secondary nuke Seizure at Adept 1 at lvl 50 will do 190-233 damage</DIV> <DIV>So compare this</DIV> <DIV>Warlock 1 rain spell 3200+ /18 second and 1 DD 1700+ /18 second + what ever secondary attack they got</DIV> <DIV>Coercer  1 DD 650/9s 1 Dot 596/24second 1Dot 483/24 second 1DD 233/2</DIV> <DIV>I dont want to be able match or step close to warlock no - but ppl 4900 relaible damage in 18 second vs. 2575 in 18 second for same Archtype (Mage) its kinda low.</DIV> <DIV>DPS shows this calculation is correct warlocks relaibly score around 200-250DPS vs. Coercer 90-110DPS. Personally I think we should score around 140-175DPS at very least not counting Beguile which mean our DoTs and DD need at least 150% damage boost</DIV>

[Ghouli]

<DIV><FONT size=2> <P>I agree that out DPS now is dismal compared to wizards and always thought that after patch we were going to be around 35%-45% of wizards DPS. Wizards are closer to where they should be DPS wise and good on them for getting there. </P> <P>I personally did not play a coercer to deal out heaps of damage but I still expected to be a bit closer to the DPS of Wizards with useful "Coercer" type spells to make up for lack of DPS we deal from spells. Something like a useful "Charm" spell that could charm an enemy mob for several minutes. I haven't really put a lot of thought into it and I do not have answers but I would prefer "Coercer" abilities. </P> <P>In my ideal Coercer world I think we should be about approx 60% DPS of Wizards/Warlocks with some defining "Coercer" type spells to make up for the difference.</P></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Blub]

<b>but ppl 4900 relaible damage in 18 second vs. 2575 in 18 second for same Archtype (Mage) its kinda low.</b>Can't agree here. You know that you cannot compare a Coercer with a Warlock. Maybe our final DDs and Dots should be encreased a bit (~20%) so that they make a difference to the earlier ones, but other than this I think we are ok DPS wise.<p>Message Edited by Blubby on <span class=date_text>02-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:52 AM</span>

[Gnus]

moorgard has said that the rest of the mages (enchanters and summoners) would be getting an upgrade... it didn't sound like we'd be getting the drastic upgrade the sorcerers got...

[naczeln]

/MAGE/SCOUT/FIGHTER/PRIESTThis is the right order. Mage is the most vulnerable class and therefore deals the highest damage. While other mage subclasses shouldnt have wiz/war dps /due to utility spells they have/, we should still outdamage scouts/fighter/priests.

[ericb1]

As stated above Moorgard said they would be working on enchanters and summoners next to up their damage. He has stated the every single mage class will be able to do more damage than any other class.

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Look as it stands now with Devastration + what ever thier primary nuke is + BSS (class trait) warlocks realibaly scoring over 200DPS (at Adept 1 lvl) - which IS good (still kinda low compare to monks imo but oh well). Warlock have very good power regenration (self mostly needless to say) because their spells much like coercers spell drain power and give it back to warlock</DIV> <DIV>Coercer who be definition is offensive enchanter (otherwise we wound not given beguile in first hand as a class defining ability) at Adept 1 lvl will score around 70-90DPS and at Adept 3-Master 1 around 90-110</DIV> <DIV>My point remain - warlocks need more power boost since they STILL falling behind bruisers and monk and coercer need A LOT power boost (DPS wise)</DIV> <DIV>After all we mage archtype and as such have to do more damage then priests (haha fury nuking for 600 too btw), fighters (ya right lets try match monk with 230DPS) and scouts (those who we still able outdamage and they need a lot lub from SOE too)</DIV>

[Gnus]

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=5736#M5736Where is the quote specifically saying they are evaluating our damage...<blockquote>Mages are intended to to do a lot of damage at the price of being frail defensively. With this major update, wizards and warlocks will see a damage output increase of up to 300% in the case of many key spells. These changes, affecting the classes from 20 to 50, should put them at the top of the heap when it comes to damage output. We are still in the process of evaluating changes to summoners and enchanters, but recent DoT stacking changes, bug fixes in this update, and buff timer changes (see below) should help the other mage professions feel more useful and powerful until their damage output can be thoroughly assessed.</blockquote><p>Message Edited by Gnusha on <span class=date_text>02-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:39 AM</span>

[Karde Shar]

<DIV><FONT face=Century><FONT size=4>Anyone ever figure out the DOT-stacking issue? </FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Century><FONT size=4></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Century><FONT size=4>Never had a problem, didn't seen an "improvement".</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Century><FONT size=4></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Century><FONT size=4>Just wondering...</DIV></FONT></FONT>

[Blub]

<b>This is the right order. Mage is the most vulnerable class and therefore deals the highest damage. While other mage subclasses shouldnt have wiz/war dps /due to utility spells they have/, we should still outdamage scouts/fighter/priests.</b>This isnt going to happen for enchanters, it would overpower them way too much. We get invited into groups already for our utitlity spells (power, mezz, haste, debuffs, etc). If we would also do more damage then scouts, it would be out of balance (and scouts would have a reason to complain about this).

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Scouts already have most untilities in game what are you talking about?</DIV> <DIV>Evac, Group Invis, Disarm, Tracking what esle you want to ask? and oh ya bards boost your agi and haste and mana</DIV>

[Blub]

Group invis and tracking a rarely used in groups, disarm is not needed just ok to have. But anyway, demand what you want, I just say it is not going to happen and to me that seems fine.

[Nerj]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Blubby wrote:<BR><B>This is the right order. Mage is the most vulnerable class and therefore deals the highest damage. While other mage subclasses shouldnt have wiz/war dps /due to utility spells they have/, we should still outdamage scouts/fighter/priests.</B><BR><BR>This isnt going to happen for enchanters, it would overpower them way too much. We get invited into groups already for our utitlity spells (power, mezz, haste, debuffs, etc). If we would also do more damage then scouts, it would be out of balance (and scouts would have a reason to complain about this).<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Please explain why an Enchanter (part of the MAGE class) should not have a higher DPS then the scout class. Do you think that the DEVs should go back on their word? Why would someone choose a class where ALL mages only where very light armor? By you statement we should be able to where Medium armor, since  the scout class should do DPS then us. Granted we should not nuke but, our DOTs should do equal levels of damage over the same time period.<BR>

[naczeln]

<blockquote><hr>Blubby wrote:<b>This is the right order. Mage is the most vulnerable class and therefore deals the highest damage. While other mage subclasses shouldnt have wiz/war dps /due to utility spells they have/, we should still outdamage scouts/fighter/priests.</b>This isnt going to happen for enchanters, it would overpower them way too much. We get invited into groups already for our utitlity spells (power, mezz, haste, debuffs, etc). If we would also do more damage then scouts, it would be out of balance (and scouts would have a reason to complain about this).<hr></blockquote>--------------Currently clerics have far the best (always useful regardless of situation, group composition and enemies) group utility (healing + buffs/debuffs that put chanters in shame, inquisitor also haste and stiffle) and are the best soloers at the same time (and wear heavy armor-nice).Anyone sees that as out of balance? Enchanters' utilities help others not themselves.Consider also that increasing enchanters' dps would not change their current supportive role in groups since they are mostly preocuppied with stuff you have listed. It would impact however chanters' playability in solo situations as well as those where chanter cant use his supportive abilities. Not to mention that even the strongest dps group (sorcerers) have also some useful utilities.Man, look around how many enchanters are out there..Have you ever wondered why people avoid this class? Making chanters comparable to other classes you call "overpowering"? Maybe being a mana battery and add mezzeris the top of your game satisfaction, but for me chanters are mages first, and then group utility next.You think that priests' dps is so low cause they cant deal damage? Wrong, often when they dont heal they could put you in shame. Why cant a mage deal damage then while not supporting from any reason? (bad mob composition, 2 chanters, chanter and AoE/necro).<p>Message Edited by naczelnyk on <span class=date_text>02-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:24 AM</span><p>Message Edited by naczelnyk on <span class=date_text>02-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:32 AM</span><p>Message Edited by naczelnyk on <span class=date_text>02-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:39 AM</span><p>Message Edited by naczelnyk on <span class=date_text>02-24-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:43 AM</span>

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Blubby mind if I ask you a question? You arent yet lvl 30 are you? and never been in RE let along LS or Solusek Eye?</DIV> <DIV>Bt far margine group invis most usefull outside of combat untility</DIV> <DIV>Tacking .... have you been at least once in your career on dangeon crawling? ever tried knock as many named as you can? Well here there tracking comes extremely handy</DIV> <DIV>Toss here that duralubity of scout far superior over duralubity of mages and you got my point - either enchanter need same damage avoidance and mitingation as scout or more DPS</DIV>

[erdam]

It should be noted that only rogues get group invis, not scouts in general. The other two branches get self only invis, which is slightly less useful then mage single instance invis.I think enchanters need a damage buff (maybe more for 40-50, cant really comment there). But I would rather see alot of our utility spells fixed or just made useful. One of my major issues with the game is leveling out of a spell into a worse or exact same spell. It doesnt feel like a reward, more like treading water.

[Ma]

I really cant see them adding much dps to Enchanters. Maybe they will do some more tweeking/fixing to our current spells that dont work or dont work as the discription states.

[Blub]

<b>Blubby mind if I ask you a question? You arent yet lvl 30 are you?</b>I'm level 42. So except if the game completly changes in the next few levels, i know what i'm talking about.<b>Tacking .... have you been at least once in your career on dangeon crawling? ever tried knock as many named as you can? Well here there tracking comes extremely handy</b>Well lets answer it this way: I was never in a group which said "Oh wait, we don't have a tracker, lets look for one". Argueing that tracking is important for all day groups is kinda ridiculous.<b>Toss here that duralubity of scout far superior over duralubity of mages and you got my point - either enchanter need same damage avoidance and mitingation as scout or more DPS</b>Sure. Are you willing to give up powerregen, mezz, stiffle, stun then too?But again. I don't mind if you demand such stuff. If it makes you feel better you can post all day how much more DPS than scouts we need.But if you stop whining for a moment and try to see it realistic in terms of game balance you will know that it is useless, because we will never outdamage the complete scout archtype.

[Nerj]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Blubby wrote:<BR><B>Blubby mind if I ask you a question? You arent yet lvl 30 are you?</B><BR><BR>I'm level 42. So except if the game completly changes in the next few levels, i know what i'm talking about.<BR><BR><B>Tacking .... have you been at least once in your career on dangeon crawling? ever tried knock as many named as you can? Well here there tracking comes extremely handy</B><BR><BR>Well lets answer it this way: I was never in a group which said "Oh wait, we don't have a tracker, lets look for one". Argueing that tracking is important for all day groups is kinda ridiculous.<BR><BR><B>Toss here that duralubity of scout far superior over duralubity of mages and you got my point - either enchanter need same damage avoidance and mitingation as scout or more DPS</B><BR><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Sure. Are you willing to give up powerregen, mezz, stiffle, stun then too?<BR><BR>But again. I don't mind if you demand such stuff. If it makes you feel better you can post all day how much more DPS than scouts we need.<BR>But if you stop whining for a moment and try to see it realistic in terms of game balance you will know that it is useless, because we will never outdamage the complete scout archtype.<BR></FONT> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This is from Moorgarad's post on the last set of changes of particular note are these:</P> <P><EM><FONT color=#ffff00>" There has been a lot of discussion on the forums since launch regarding the relative power of each class when it comes to dealing damage. The intended order of damage output by archetype <STRONG>is (and always has been)</STRONG>: <FONT size=4><STRONG>mage, scout, fighter, priest.</STRONG></FONT></FONT></EM></P> <P><EM><FONT color=#ffff00><STRONG>Mages are intended to to do a lot of damage at the price of being frail defensively</STRONG>. With this major update, wizards and warlocks will see a damage output increase of up to 300% in the case of many key spells. These changes, affecting the classes from 20 to 50, should put them at the top of the heap when it comes to damage output. <STRONG>We are still in the process of evaluating changes to summoners and enchanters, but recent DoT stacking changes, bug fixes in this update, and buff timer changes (see below) should help the other mage professions feel more useful and powerful until their damage output can be thoroughly assessed</STRONG>. "</FONT></EM></P> <P>Being that we are a subset of the Mage class can you point out to me where it states that scouts should do more DPS then an Enchanter? or do you think that Moorgard is lying?<BR></P>

[Klat]

<DIV>I would like to be equal with scout in DPS. Both of us have usefull abilities and thats enough for me.</DIV> <DIV>As a side note Iam playing in stable group with Bruiser, Assassin and Guardian sometimes with Wizard. For 3 weeks I still see the same picture...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bruiser</DIV> <DIV>Asssssin (20-25% less dam)</DIV> <DIV>Wizard (2lvl less then Bruiser/Assassin) but holding his position after last live update</DIV> <DIV>Guardian (half dam of bruiser)</DIV> <DIV>Me (Iam lucky if equal to guardian usually less)</DIV> <DIV>Our Healer</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We all use adept 1 spells/abilities and are lvl 37-38. So .... somethings wrong here... hehe.</DIV>

[Akam]

Like a few others have said, I have no huge problem with our damage output, but would like to see our broken spells fixed before anything else is done. After that maybe we could look at damage.

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Blubby and who said that have crack, mez and stifle - mandatory for grouping either? - its simply nice to have that's all. Btw heh I learn a way to beat SOF w/o mez ... well let say almost (except Fright fight)</DIV> <DIV>Do really never asked scout to check if any named around (if you have scout in group?) - because I always do - save hell a lot of time for farming</DIV> <DIV>I am repeating that Scouts utility as much usefull as Mage one we even here - Scouts duralublity allow em tank named ++ mob at lvl 50 for farming purpose (brigands to it) - Try tank just regular green ++ mob (let along named green ++) - so DPS of mages should be proportionally higher what so hard to comprehend here?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[naczeln]

<blockquote><hr>Mayo wrote:I really cant see them adding much dps to Enchanters. Maybe they will do some more tweeking/fixing to our current spells that dont work or dont work as the discription states.<hr></blockquote>--------------Yes, they did "tweaking and fixing". They nerfed coercers on a test server because of YOUR threads and posts you %$# troll. Now what do you think, what coercers will do in return.?<p>Message Edited by naczelnyk on <span class=date_text>02-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:13 AM</span>

[Signal9]

<DIV>Hate to say it, but you're right.  The nerf-gauntlet has been cast down, and it WILL get picked up.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yes, Moorgard's post makes it clear that the balancing is not done, and that conjurors, and enchanters are being looked at.  I'm not holding my breath for any good changes, though.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>From my point of view, Mayo has started the whole thing going [Removed for Content] the incessant screaming about the uber Coercer power regen.  He conveniently glossed over all the other catagories that Illusionists blow Coercers away, but hey....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now we're all going to pay the price of his actions.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Remember, the road to Hell is paved with nerf.  It's going to be a bouncy ride.</DIV>

[VericSauvari]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tanatus wrote:<BR> <DIV>Dont get me wrong its good that warlocks now can hit target with "Rain" type of spells (veteran of Eq1 know what it is rain attack) for well over 3200 damage over 18 second and can relaibly nuke on ~1700 damage a pop every 18 second.. But what about us?</DIV> <DIV>Our best DD at Adept 3 at lvl 49 hit on 529-632 (at lvl 48 it was 505-60<img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> so I can safely assume that at lvl 50 it be around 553-656 </DIV> <DIV>Our best DoT Torment at Adept 3 at lvl 49 do upon impact 107 damage and 79 every 4 second for 6 more tic which is total 581 damage (at lvl 50 if spell will follow previous progression it will be 110 upon impact and 81 every 4 second for 6 tics for total 596 damage)</DIV> <DIV>Our second best DoT Despair at Adept 3 at lvl 49 do upong impact 90-103 damage and 62-76/4.8 s for 24 second (aka do 5 tics) netting .... haha maximum 483 damage</DIV> <DIV>Our secondary nuke Seizure at Adept 1 at lvl 50 will do 190-233 damage</DIV> <DIV>So compare this</DIV> <DIV>Warlock 1 rain spell 3200+ /18 second and 1 DD 1700+ /18 second + what ever secondary attack they got</DIV> <DIV>Coercer  1 DD 650/9s 1 Dot 596/24second 1Dot 483/24 second 1DD 233/2</DIV> <DIV>I dont want to be able match or step close to warlock no - but ppl 4900 relaible damage in 18 second vs. 2575 in 18 second for same Archtype (Mage) its kinda low.</DIV> <DIV>DPS shows this calculation is correct warlocks relaibly score around 200-250DPS vs. Coercer 90-110DPS. Personally I think we should score around 140-175DPS at very least not counting Beguile which mean our DoTs and DD need at least 150% damage boost</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>so what..are you going to get warlocks and wizards nerfed now?  quit complaining about other classes already.<BR>

[Nerj]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> VericSauvari wrote:<BR><BR>so what..are you going to get warlocks and wizards nerfed now?  quit complaining about other classes already.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>lol, What you probably don't know is that ALL Mage classes are suppose to be the Highest DPS dealers. Ours are suppose to be better then  scouts not as good as Wizards and Warlocks nukes though.</DIV>

[Tanatus]

<DIV>Each mage class should shine in its own area of DPS</DIV> <DIV>Warlock - Rain Spells</DIV> <DIV>Wizard - DD</DIV> <DIV>Summoners - obviously pets</DIV> <DIV>Illusionist - AE</DIV> <DIV>Coercer - Charm</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You know what is funny part?</DIV> <DIV>I have lvl 20 twink warlock and he can stack within like 10 second</DIV> <DIV>4X spells that do 200 damage each on target (Ice Spike ~220, Blaze ~190, Freeze ~202, Neg Absolution ~160) toss here freezing worl (35 per tic for total around 165 damage)</DIV> <DIV>You know what is funny part about it? - that's about as much my lvl coercer can load via DD at lvl 50 ....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I dont want to harm damage of sorc class by any mean - but having DD power of lvl 50 coercer on a level of lvl 20 warlock .... dont you think kinda low?</DIV>

[mino]

<DIV>well obviously the devs could care less because instead of fixing our damage they are planning a nerf  which is probably the last straw for me when it goes live =(</DIV>