Single-Target Hate Imbalance [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

aislynn00

02-15-2009, 10:22 AM

I really think you ought to take a good, long look at single-target hate generation on the test server right now. Vs an instance boss mob, shadowknights are way ahead of guardians in terms of single-target hate generation and DPS. In fact, guardians are behind berserkers, monks, and paladins, too (no idea about bruisers). Is that intended? If so, I beg to differ with the notion of dividing tanks into "single-target" and "AE" varieties. As an example of the problems that currently exist, please consider the impact of Shadowknight's Furor. Please ask your QA department to test how much hate that one single supposedly mainly survivability-enhancing buff is able to generate vs one named. It is nothing short of ridiculous.Have you had a look at the unparseable but massive hate components on abilities like Death March and the berserker berserk procs? What do guardians have that adds equivalent massive hate bursts?Have you considered the impact of the paladin (short term) and monk (permanent) hate transfers when DPS (group and tank alike) scales upwards? What do guardians have that scales equivalently vs single targets?I don't see shadowknights having trouble holding aggro on the test server vs single mobs, even vs mythicaled damage dealers pushing hard. Berserkers aren't doing badly either. That is a problem, considering single-target hate generation is supposed to be their weak point.Meanwhile, I, a guardian with all taunts and hate-boosting CA's at Master I or II, have to use Reinforcement, Rescue, and the like to recover aggro when an assassin goes all-out and spikes to 10 - 15K vs an instance boss. Not balanced.

CanisLupos

02-15-2009, 10:38 AM

I think you have a valid point of concern, but I think there may be too many factors involved in determining if it's true game wide.My reasoning behind the above statement is that even just simply speaking about berserkers and guardians, there are such different gear choices, and then you have to consider if people are using their DPS gear or tanking gear, as well as adorns, and lastly what skill ups their gear give them to skills such as agression and defense and what gear combinations those skills allow them to pull off. And that's not even considering the vast differences between the crusader classes and brawler classes.I guess what I'm getting at is that the imbalance may be real, but there is really no way for us to be certain if it is, no matter what we may think. Only deep analysis of internal game data is going to show it.I do think the system needs tweaking, but I do actually like the idea of AE vs single target tanking. If they were going to give all tanks the same tools then they might as well make then the same class. Otherwise they may as well merge warlocks and wizards as well and the game would just become 4 classes again. Fighter, scout, mage and priest, all with the same abilities within their archtype. Variety adds flavor and I like that. =-)Anyway, just my thoughts and opinions. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Dasein

02-15-2009, 11:08 AM

There doesn't need to be balance between hate generation, a tank only needs to generate enough hate to hold agro - any hate above that is wasted, so unless guardians cannot hold agro, there's no problem.

aislynn00

02-15-2009, 11:23 AM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>There doesn't need to be balance between hate generation, a tank only needs to generate enough hate to hold agro - any hate above that is wasted, so unless guardians cannot hold agro, there's no problem.</blockquote>A guardian (without avatar gear or the Trakanon shield but with all relevant Masters) with a dirge can't hold aggro vs a good assassin (also without high-end raid gear) when he goes all-out on the test server right now, for instance vs a boss mob in a TSO instance. It doesn't mean the fight isn't doable with that kind of DPS involved--Rescue, Reinforcement, and the like still exist--but it does mean there is a problem with hate generation.Shadowknights and other AE tanks should, on the other hand, be having trouble holding aggro. Otherwise, there is no disadvantage to being an AE tank. Right now, that disadvantage doesn't exist.

aislynn00

02-15-2009, 11:32 AM

<cite>CanisLupos wrote:</cite><blockquote>I do think the system needs tweaking, but I do actually like the idea of AE vs single target tanking. If they were going to give all tanks the same tools then they might as well make then the same class. Otherwise they may as well merge warlocks and wizards as well and the game would just become 4 classes again. Fighter, scout, mage and priest, all with the same abilities within their archtype. Variety adds flavor and I like that. =-)Anyway, just my thoughts and opinions. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I may not have expressed myself clearly. I agree that the new tank categories could work. I also agree that there should be a lot of differences between the tank classes.What I'm saying is, there has to be tangible disadvantages to being an AE tank. Right now, those disadvantages just aren't there, thus leading to AE tanks being almost universally preferable over single-target tanks. Why would you pick a guardian for your, say, Necrotic Asylum group when you could just go with a shadowknight, pull rooms of mobs and AE everything down, and finish the zone faster than with the guardian tank? The answer to that should be, "Because the boss mob fights were a lot more messy with the tank losing aggro whenever the damage dealers pushed hard."

Couching

02-15-2009, 11:34 AM

<cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really think you ought to take a good, long look at single-target hate generation on the test server right now. Vs an instance boss mob, shadowknights are way ahead of guardians in terms of single-target hate generation and DPS. In fact, guardians are behind berserkers, monks, and paladins, too (no idea about bruisers). Is that intended? </blockquote>Ya, SK aggro is really powerful on both single and aoe targets.However, it didn't mean guardian should be best on single target aggro since guardian on aoe aggro is about 1.5-2+ times better than monk.On test server, monk has highest single target taunt and worst aoe aggro.If you want to be best on single target aggro, your aoe aggro needs to be nerfed to the worst of all fighters. I believe most monks will be happy to change our single aggro/aoe aggro with guardian, more balanced on both.

aislynn00

02-15-2009, 11:42 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really think you ought to take a good, long look at single-target hate generation on the test server right now. Vs an instance boss mob, shadowknights are way ahead of guardians in terms of single-target hate generation and DPS. In fact, guardians are behind berserkers, monks, and paladins, too (no idea about bruisers). Is that intended? </blockquote>Ya, SK aggro is really powerful on both single and aoe targets.However, it didn't mean guardian should be best on single target aggro since guardian on aoe aggro is about 1.5-2+ times better than monk.On test server, monk has highest single target taunt and worst aoe aggro.If you want to be best on single target aggro, your aoe aggro needs to be nerfed to the worst of all fighters. I believe most monks will be happy to change our single aggro/aoe aggro with guardian, more balanced on both.</blockquote>I wouldn't mind exchanging hate generation, single-target and AE alike, with monks.That said, I do think monks should be slightly superior in both regards while paladins and guardians should be about equal vs single-target encounters. After all, monks are giving up survivability compared to plate tanks; they should have something to show for it.Now, berserkers, shadowknights, and bruisers, on the other hand, ought to be way, way behind any of those classes, just as we are far inferior on multi-encounter pulls.

Vanderlay

02-15-2009, 11:53 AM

<cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote>There doesn't need to be balance between hate generation, a tank only needs to generate enough hate to hold agro - any hate above that is wasted, so unless guardians cannot hold agro, there's no problem.</blockquote>A guardian (without avatar gear or the Trakanon shield but with all relevant Masters) with a dirge can't hold aggro vs a good assassin (also without high-end raid gear) when he goes all-out on the test server right now, for instance vs a boss mob in a TSO instance. It doesn't mean the fight isn't doable with that kind of DPS involved--Rescue, Reinforcement, and the like still exist--but it does mean there is a problem with hate generation.Shadowknights and other AE tanks should, on the other hand, be having trouble holding aggro. Otherwise, there is no disadvantage to being an AE tank. Right now, that disadvantage doesn't exist.</blockquote>The disadvantage you mention is there, it's called survivability. Berserkers don't have the high mit or avoidance that a guard can attain. There hate generation isn't even close to guardians. Berserkers have 2 taunts, 1 single target and 1 encounter. They do get Insolence which is an AoE taunt. Guardians have how many taunts? 4 or 5 if I remember correctly. Tower of Stone? Berserkers don't get that either.You're comparing apples and oranges too. Any tank will have trouble holding aggro over a top end raid geared assasin every day of the week, no matter the group composition. The assasin needs to learn how to control his own aggro, which is why having that hate meter won't be a bad thing for some people that just think they can go all out, all of the time. It's about time everyone was responsible for their own hate instead of passing it off on the "utility" classes in a group.

Aull

02-15-2009, 12:56 PM

<cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really think you ought to take a good, long look at single-target hate generation on the test server right now. Vs an instance boss mob, shadowknights are way ahead of guardians in terms of single-target hate generation and DPS. In fact, guardians are behind berserkers, monks, and paladins, too (no idea about bruisers). Is that intended? </blockquote>Ya, SK aggro is really powerful on both single and aoe targets.However, it didn't mean guardian should be best on single target aggro since guardian on aoe aggro is about 1.5-2+ times better than monk.On test server, monk has highest single target taunt and worst aoe aggro.If you want to be best on single target aggro, your aoe aggro needs to be nerfed to the worst of all fighters. I believe most monks will be happy to change our single aggro/aoe aggro with guardian, more balanced on both.</blockquote>I wouldn't mind exchanging hate generation, single-target and AE alike, with monks.That said, I do think monks should be slightly superior in both regards while paladins and guardians should be about equal vs single-target encounters. After all, monks are giving up survivability compared to plate tanks; they should have something to show for it.Now, berserkers, shadowknights, and bruisers, on the other hand, ought to be way, way behind any of those classes, just as we are far inferior on multi-encounter pulls.</blockquote>Please educate me but are bruisers now decent aoe?? From what I have been reading bruiser's stances/procs are broken on test atm. Is this true?? Well I shouldn't just say bruisers. There must be something messed up for all fighters because this update 51 has never taken place yet.

Xanrn

02-15-2009, 01:09 PM

They aren't and thats half the problem with this idiotic idea.Aeralik decided to divide Tanks into single and aoe, without apparantly reading what CA the classes actually get.Probably according to that crap about Good being Defensive and Evil being Offensive, he keeps spouting and using for pathetic excuses for unbalanced lazy game content.Apparantly Paladins with 8 AoEs, 40% aoe-autoattack are "single target".While Bruisers with 3 AoEs, 24% aoe-autoattack(more unbalanced lazy game content) are "aoe tanks".I also like how he thinks that Monks are the defensive Brawlers while somehow failing to read all the superior defensive abilties he keeps giving Bruisers.

Dasein

02-15-2009, 01:50 PM

Aull

02-15-2009, 03:27 PM

<cite>Ummudien@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote>They aren't and thats half the problem with this idiotic idea.Aeralik decided to divide Tanks into single and aoe, without apparantly reading what CA the classes actually get.Probably according to that crap about Good being Defensive and Evil being Offensive, he keeps spouting and using for pathetic excuses for unbalanced lazy game content.Apparantly Paladins with 8 AoEs, 40% aoe-autoattack are "single target".While Bruisers with 3 AoEs, 24% aoe-autoattack(more unbalanced lazy game content) are "aoe tanks".I also like how he thinks that Monks are the defensive Brawlers while somehow failing to read all the superior defensive abilties he keeps giving Bruisers.</blockquote>I know I can't speak for everyone on this but monks in ROK seemed very impressive to me in tanking, dps, and being more desired to be in groups and raids than the bruisers. That is totally different in this expansion. I see neither brawler excelling or offering anything better than the plate fighters even more so in dps. Tanking and surviving seems more for the plates and plate dps is equaling and exceeding what brawlers are doing.I never figured why the warriors are getting more ae, criticals, and double attack via aa's than the brawlers are. Couching mentioned that brawlers should be the more dps oriented than the plates (correct me if I am wrong Couching) since brawlers avoidance doesn't work as well on higher lvl mobs and the mit loss do to wearing leather as armor. I definately agree with his thoughts.

circusgirl

02-15-2009, 04:04 PM

And according to that article explaining the upcoming changes that was on the main page, monks are suppossed to be better choices for raid tanks than SKs and Zerkers....I'm fine with the idea of these changes, if they actually go through with it. If I'm gonna suck at AoE aggro, fine, but give me the surviveability against hard-hitting single targets to make up for it.And (while I don't play a bruiser) the idea that bruisers, an AoE tank, have 24% AoE autoattack while paladins and guardians (single-target tanks) have 40% AoE autoattack is bollucks. Give brawlers equal AoE autoattack, crit, and DA for the same number of invested AA points.

jrolla777

02-15-2009, 04:13 PM

MellowBob

02-15-2009, 04:15 PM

I agree on some fighter classes are unbalanced but the assassin taking aggro have no accountability whatsoever? Assassin takes aggro = fighter classes broken? Sounds like the assassin just need to back off. Sounds normal to me that an assassin should take aggro during a dps spike.In fact, I think all scout classes can/should take aggro when they dps spike. That is why we have the new hate meter right?

Obadiah

02-15-2009, 05:14 PM

<cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really think you ought to take a good, long look at single-target hate generation on the test server right now. Vs an instance boss mob, shadowknights are way ahead of guardians in terms of single-target hate generation and DPS. In fact, guardians are behind berserkers, monks, and paladins, too (no idea about bruisers). Is that intended? </blockquote>Just out of curiosity, what is this assertion based on?I mean, using just the plain jane 2 taunts and passive hate Guardians ST threat generation is 67% higher than Berserkers. That seems like a pretty significant ST advantage, and since DPS is similar, there's no edge there.Not only is this the first time I've seen this complaint on Test (not on Live, obviously) but it just seems to contradict the mathematics of the changes as well as what I've seen in person on Test. And as for having to use Rescue and Reinforcement, well, isn't that OK? I mean, that's why Fighters GET those abilities, right?

Gisallo

02-15-2009, 06:39 PM

<cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>A guardian (without avatar gear or the Trakanon shield but with all relevant Masters) with a dirge can't hold aggro vs a good assassin (also without high-end raid gear) when he goes all-out on the test server right now, for instance vs a boss mob in a TSO instance. It doesn't mean the fight isn't doable with that kind of DPS involved--Rescue, Reinforcement, and the like still exist--but it does mean there is a problem with hate generation.Shadowknights and other AE tanks should, on the other hand, be having trouble holding aggro. Otherwise, there is no disadvantage to being an AE tank. Right now, that disadvantage doesn't exist.</blockquote>First let me agree with others. At this point on test, without looking at the gear, AA spec etc. its almost impossible for us to come to any conclusions, even if a class is having aggro ganked from them. The situation is made even more complicated than gear and aa spec by the following. Tanks are NOT the only ones that are going to have to relearn how to play. You note when a GOOD assassin goes all out. Well regretably (and I mean this seriously) under the new system on test some classes will NOT be able to go all out anymore, a GOOD assassain will be one who manages his dps using the threat meter. Basically they want to say "tank dps stops here while tanking". When that happens you are pretty much in a no win scenario because dps can still be buffed exponentially while hate is not. So if you are in a group with decent dps buffs but say only a hate song from a dirge, you are going to lose aggro if dps doesn't do their part, which is watch their hate meter and possibly not go all out and throttle back as they start to get close to ripping it.If this ever goes live progression in raids and instances is going to come to a shrieking halt while people relearn how to play their classes. Fun FUn FUn.

Siatfallen

02-15-2009, 08:42 PM

Monk balance, for those who've said something on it so far:I think the stated idea is that on the down side, we get lower survivability universally and worse AE aggro than anyone else. On the up side, we're supposed to generate insane amounts of ST aggro (which we do on test) and do a great deal of ST damage (which we don't).Right now, the state of the monk class is broken because of that singular mistake in balancing. Feel free to disagree of course, but for the developers to remain true to their design philosophies, I figure they need to:- Design the monk class to be ahead of other fighter's DPS on single targets by a good, solid margin; while in defensive as well as offensive stance (compared to other fighters in the same stance, obviously). Additionally, attain decent AE DPS, if not aggro, to offset DPS discrepansies in zones such as Shard of Hate; if this is to be a major selling point of the class, we absolutely cannot suck as badly as is currently the case on AE damage.- Attain equal or at least comparable survivability to our AE counterpart, the bruiser, something we do not have on live in highish end raid gear at present. The tSO class lines and the mythicals, at present, represent the main problems.After that, we can unite with the bruisers (who, while we do the above, should fight for more AE tools to fit their designated role; y'know, the whole AE tank thing) and demand a recount on common brawler issues, which are:- Avoidance tanking vs. raid-level mobs (Being weaker is fine as long as we've other advantages, being useless on some mobs due to too high hit bonuses on mobs is unacceptable, that kind of stuff).- Lack of group buffs for brawlers. After the consolidation of group buffs, other fighters are catching up to brawlers as far as buffs go; SKs are currently lightyears ahead of us, Zerkers about even depending on the group they land in; guardians remain behind, and I'm clueless on paladins.We should then unite with guardians and say something about ST vs. AE tank balance.And then, we should sit still with four of the other fighter classes listening to the sound of the nerf bat descending on SKs from one side or another, ready to offer condolences afterwards as a matter of course. Don't sit near the SK while this happens, though.When all of this has taken place, I think all will be well in the world of monk balancing. Nothing against SKs, by the way, I don't want to call nerfs on anyone; I just don't see it not happening.

Danelin

02-15-2009, 08:42 PM

Given that I have seen several Paladins and Guardians posting complaining about how boring the upcoming changes will be because of how easily they hold even non-encounter AE aggro with their new abilities, I am guessing the Guard in question was hitting too many damage CA and not enough taunts or something.

aislynn00

02-17-2009, 05:35 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Given that I have seen several Paladins and Guardians posting complaining about how boring the upcoming changes will be because of how easily they hold even non-encounter AE aggro with their new abilities, I am guessing the Guard in question was hitting too many damage CA and not enough taunts or something.</blockquote>I am using an optimized taunt/CA sequence that prioritizes hate generation over every other consideration. That is to say, fast-recast, high-hate taunts and CA's are always used when up instead of much higher damage attacks. The only exception is one single debuff which renders it it very hard to miss with subsequent CA's (like, say, Kick). It is the perfect casting order if you want to maximize hate generation. On the test server, waiting for an auto-attack when you could be using one of our main taunts simply reduces total hate output, so I'm using those abilities whenever they become available. The potential delay is minimal anyhow, given the lack of reuse and very low casting time on our primary taunt anyhow.I have the perfect hate generation AA spec. I have all relevant AA abilities, including the TSO end-line abilities.Here are two test server facts for you, regarding guardians:o Do you generate more hate by yourself, without any support classes, than you do on the live servers under the same condidtions? Yes.o Do you generate more hate fully buffed than you do on the live servers under the same conditions? Not a chance. It isn't even close.

aislynn00

02-17-2009, 10:32 AM

<cite>Gisallo@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Khayne@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>A guardian (without avatar gear or the Trakanon shield but with all relevant Masters) with a dirge can't hold aggro vs a good assassin (also without high-end raid gear) when he goes all-out on the test server right now, for instance vs a boss mob in a TSO instance. It doesn't mean the fight isn't doable with that kind of DPS involved--Rescue, Reinforcement, and the like still exist--but it does mean there is a problem with hate generation.Shadowknights and other AE tanks should, on the other hand, be having trouble holding aggro. Otherwise, there is no disadvantage to being an AE tank. Right now, that disadvantage doesn't exist.</blockquote>First let me agree with others. At this point on test, without looking at the gear, AA spec etc. its almost impossible for us to come to any conclusions, even if a class is having aggro ganked from them. The situation is made even more complicated than gear and aa spec by the following. Tanks are NOT the only ones that are going to have to relearn how to play. You note when a GOOD assassin goes all out. Well regretably (and I mean this seriously) under the new system on test some classes will NOT be able to go all out anymore, a GOOD assassain will be one who manages his dps using the threat meter. Basically they want to say "tank dps stops here while tanking". When that happens you are pretty much in a no win scenario because dps can still be buffed exponentially while hate is not. So if you are in a group with decent dps buffs but say only a hate song from a dirge, you are going to lose aggro if dps doesn't do their part, which is watch their hate meter and possibly not go all out and throttle back as they start to get close to ripping it.</blockquote>You are deluding yourself if you really believe what you just said. If we are talking a pick-up group where nobody knows anybody else, the assassin in question will look for a different tank next time. It is frustrating and downright boring for a damage dealer to artificially cripple DPS just because the tank, from the damage dealer's perspective, sucks.If we are talking a group of friends, then the assassin will probably just deal with it, which means you will carry on to fail vs content that requires maximizing DPS because the tank isn't able to push out high enough hate numbers to hold aggro. I would love to see you take on, for instance, the second-to-last boss in Ravenscale Repository after the hate changes go live, especially if you don't have enough Aggression to render your taunts irresistible (that would just be adding insult to injury.)Now consider raids. There are too many raid targets to mention that require pushing DPS hard. You try doing those after telling the damage dealers that they have to dial back their DPS because you aren't able to hold aggro otherwise. Watch how quickly you will be replaced with a shadowknight as MT.Let me reiterate: fully-buffed damage dealers have to be able to go all-out vs a fully-buffed single-target tank when the single-target tank is all Mastered, is skilled, and is as well-geared as the damage dealer. Period. Full stop.If the above isn't the case, then the single-target tank will be inferior to any other tank type with superior single-target hate generation.Survivability is an issue, but only insofar as the tank has to be able to survive tanking the mobs you are fighting. Additional survivability beyond that point does not excuse inferior hate generation. All the survivability in the world won't help you when the raid boss overwhelms you with adds because you can't burn them down fast enough. It doesn't help either when the named AE's the entire group into the ground because you couldn't hold aggro vs the damage dealers when they tried to kill the named fast.All of the above aside, there is a fundamental game design principle that shouldn't be forgotten:If a damage dealer can't go all-out, then their CA/spell quality, gear, and AA all cease to matter beyond a certain point; namely, when the damage dealer becomes able to generate the same or more hate per second as the tank in question.How great would you feel as a scout if you knew that every time you got a weapon upgrade, you would have to do even less during combat to keep your DPS at the same level? Why would you even bother getting more gear with +DA, +CA Damage, +Melee Crit, and procs when you knew you weren't allowed to increase your DPS due to the tank's hate generation?The above is why many raid guilds are using shadowknights as MT's these days. Not because they have higher survivability than guardians, because they don't--they just have enough. No, in the live game, shadowknights are becoming the MT class of choice because they allow damage dealers to go all-out.

Danelin

02-17-2009, 10:52 AM

Well, I think what was really being asked here was, 'Was the assassin firing deaggros every time they were up during his CA rotation to minimize his aggro'. I do agree though that modified DPS + TPS numbers need to come very close to existing buffed numbers on live to be viable.This is true for all fighter classes, single or group, and I strongly suspect that the buffed vs unbuffed question is going to ping back 'no' on all of the above, which as you stated means SK will be the only tank generating sufficient hate. I misunderstood regarding how much you were hate buffed. On the other hand, I think the 'pure' dps classes are SUPPOSED to be ripping when they uncork their greatest potential damage and we are SUPPOSED to be being forced to use our positionals to maintain aggro when that happens according to Aeralik's vision of the game in the future.

aislynn00

02-17-2009, 11:08 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well, I think what was really being asked here was, 'Was the assassin firing deaggros every time they were up during his CA rotation to minimize his aggro'. I do agree though that modified DPS + TPS numbers need to come very close to existing buffed numbers on live to be viable.This is true for all fighter classes, single or group, and I strongly suspect that the buffed vs unbuffed question is going to ping back 'no' on all of the above, which as you stated means SK will be the only tank generating sufficient hate. I misunderstood regarding how much you were hate buffed. On the other hand, I think the 'pure' dps classes are SUPPOSED to be ripping when they uncork their greatest potential damage and we are SUPPOSED to be being forced to use our positionals to maintain aggro when that happens according to Aeralik's vision of the game in the future.</blockquote>No tank class right now has enough position-modifying abilities to continually retake lost aggro through a non-trivial raid fight. I agree snap-aggro abilities should have their uses, such as when the assassin criticals on Execute right after Dispatch at the beginning of a fight, but during the course of a longer fight, when fluctuations like that become largely irrelevant, a single-target tank has to be able to hold aggro without resorting to Rescue, Reinforcement, and the like. Otherwise, the damage dealers have to artificially reduce their damage output, which effectively breaks gameplay for them. There has to always be effective benefits to increasing potential DPS output; otherwise, there isn't any point to gear upgrades and new damage-boosting AA's.

Danelin

02-17-2009, 11:22 AM

That was just my assumption on why things might still be that broken. I do not endorse it as being a good design. Far, far, far from it.

Bruener

02-17-2009, 11:23 AM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote</cite><blockquote>And then, we should sit still with four of the other fighter classes listening to the sound of the nerf bat descending on SKs from one side or another, ready to offer condolences afterwards as a matter of course. Don't sit near the SK while this happens, though.When all of this has taken place, I think all will be well in the world of monk balancing. Nothing against SKs, by the way, I don't want to call nerfs on anyone; I just don't see it not happening.</blockquote>I am so sick of this stuff being brought up. Suddenly SKs are competing on the raid level again and you have a bunch of jealous people posting they need nerfs. You see one 15k parse from a SK on palace trash and the world is ending, nerf SKs. What you people don't realize is that these changes on test are already a huge nerf. SK dps in defensive gets hit harder than any other fighter, having a triple whammy with .5% auto attack loss, -10% base spell damage, -skills, not to mention the loss of our self proc dps buff. In offensive like other fighters our survivability is going down the tubes, and is not a stance anybody can tank in anymore. That with the fact that they are putting the 5 sec recast on stances means that fighter DPS in offensive should be very good, and a SK being an offensive fighter should be one of the best DPS wise. And I find it extremely funny that nobody seems to mention Pally dps at all. A Paladin wearing the same gear, in the same group only DPS's slightly less than a SK....probably something like 5% less.I feel for brawlers. IMO you guys should be doing extremely good DPS in offensive...which from what I have seen there are those of you out there that do. The stances need to lose that 5 sec recast because some of the best utility of a monk is the pick up if another tank goes down on raids. However, why exactly do you think that SKs need to be brought down again? Is it because we lived with it for 4 years, behind you guys?

aislynn00

02-17-2009, 11:28 AM

<cite>Danelin wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well, I think what was really being asked here was, 'Was the assassin firing deaggros every time they were up during his CA rotation to minimize his aggro'.</blockquote>Fixed-value hate reducers are really ridiculously weak in almost every case. Sure, they are there and should be used whenever up, but when a hate reducer drops your hate by way less than X every 10+ sec while you generate X hate every single second from DPS, then that hate reducer really doesn't change much.What truly matters are percentile hate reducers, particularly the permanent ones. For instance: o Assassins get an 8% hate reducer on test. They used to have a 16% hate transfer/hate reducer. o Guardians used to have a 36% single-target hate reducer. We now have a 13% hate reducer on test. o Troubadors used to have something a 34% group hate reducer. That turns into 8% on the test server.That is one hell of a lot of lost hate reduction (and hate generation, in the case of hate transfers). That, more than anything else, is what is causing the discrepancy between aggro management on the live servers vs the test server.On test, with only self-buffs, I'm able to hold aggro in a group vs people dealing 5K - 6K DPS. However, even fully buffed, I'm not able to hold aggro vs someone dealing 12K - 15K DPS.On live, with only self-buffs, I'm not able to hold aggro vs someone dealing 5K - 6K DPS. However, fully buffed, I'm able to hold aggro vs someone dealing 12K - 15K DPS.Hate generation on test simply doesn't scale with damage dealer DPS.

Glerin

02-17-2009, 12:00 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am so sick of this stuff being brought up. Suddenly SKs are competing on the raid level again and you have a bunch of jealous people posting they need nerfs. You see one 15k parse from a SK on palace trash and the world is ending, nerf SKs. What you people don't realize is that these changes on test are already a huge nerf. SK dps in defensive gets hit harder than any other fighter, having a triple whammy with .5% auto attack loss, -10% base spell damage, -skills, not to mention the loss of our self proc dps buff. In offensive like other fighters our survivability is going down the tubes, and is not a stance anybody can tank in anymore. That with the fact that they are putting the 5 sec recast on stances means that fighter DPS in offensive should be very good, and a SK being an offensive fighter should be one of the best DPS wise. And I find it extremely funny that nobody seems to mention Pally dps at all. A Paladin wearing the same gear, in the same group only DPS's slightly less than a SK....probably something like 5% less.I feel for brawlers. IMO you guys should be doing extremely good DPS in offensive...which from what I have seen there are those of you out there that do. The stances need to lose that 5 sec recast because some of the best utility of a monk is the pick up if another tank goes down on raids. However, why exactly do you think that SKs need to be brought down again? Is it because we lived with it for 4 years, behind you guys?</blockquote>yaknow, i know a SK who is far inferior geared to me, and yet he can parse as high, if not higher as me in pretty much any given instance in the game, the fact that a SK with 1-2pieces of raidgear (trampler boots / random T1 earring from RoK) and fabled epic, is capable of parsing upwards 10-12k in most top end zones without too much trouble, while me with mythical and some VP gear struggle to hit 8-10k in any given zone, just seems somewhat wrong, especially if you count in that their survivability > pally survivability.

Windowlicker

02-17-2009, 01:00 PM

SK's need some hard nerfing on Live currently. They do far too much damage, hold aggro far too well, and tank far too well. There is no seperation or weak points to the class currently.

Goldenpaw

02-17-2009, 01:24 PM

<cite>Zahne@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>SK's need some hard nerfing on Live currently. They do far too much damage, hold aggro far too well, and tank far too well. There is no seperation or weak points to the class currently.</blockquote>Amen to this. Well most of it <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I hate calling for a nerf to any class because it hurts everyone on a whole, but if roughly an equally equipped SK can do 150% the dps of a defensive guardian, holding hate, surviving just as easily and dropping the mob faster because of them, it makes the smarter choice the SK every single time, then something HAS TO BE FIXED.If it is 150% easier for the healers to heal the guardian and 150% more survivability for the group because of the guardian and 150% more hate to the guardian, then it is balanced, as it is the SK is the smart choice, because they survive, they dps, and they hold hate.It is silly not to utilize them in -every singly environment- where a tank is needed if they are an option.That does not equal balance.

RafaelSmith

02-17-2009, 02:53 PM

<cite>Glerin wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am so sick of this stuff being brought up. Suddenly SKs are competing on the raid level again and you have a bunch of jealous people posting they need nerfs. You see one 15k parse from a SK on palace trash and the world is ending, nerf SKs. What you people don't realize is that these changes on test are already a huge nerf. SK dps in defensive gets hit harder than any other fighter, having a triple whammy with .5% auto attack loss, -10% base spell damage, -skills, not to mention the loss of our self proc dps buff. In offensive like other fighters our survivability is going down the tubes, and is not a stance anybody can tank in anymore. That with the fact that they are putting the 5 sec recast on stances means that fighter DPS in offensive should be very good, and a SK being an offensive fighter should be one of the best DPS wise. And I find it extremely funny that nobody seems to mention Pally dps at all. A Paladin wearing the same gear, in the same group only DPS's slightly less than a SK....probably something like 5% less.I feel for brawlers. IMO you guys should be doing extremely good DPS in offensive...which from what I have seen there are those of you out there that do. The stances need to lose that 5 sec recast because some of the best utility of a monk is the pick up if another tank goes down on raids. However, why exactly do you think that SKs need to be brought down again? Is it because we lived with it for 4 years, behind you guys?</blockquote>yaknow, i know a SK who is far inferior geared to me, and yet he can parse as high, if not higher as me in pretty much any given instance in the game, the fact that a SK with 1-2pieces of raidgear (trampler boots / random T1 earring from RoK) and fabled epic, is capable of parsing upwards 10-12k in most top end zones without too much trouble, while me with mythical and some VP gear struggle to hit 8-10k in any given zone, just seems somewhat wrong, especially if you count in that their survivability > pally survivability.</blockquote>LOL complaining about 'only' parsing 8-10k -vs- 10-12k?When I am MT TSO instances I am happy when I top 1.5k.

Glerin

02-17-2009, 03:05 PM

im not complaining, just stating a fact that a nonraidgeared non mythical SK can outparse me, and i have -far- better gear and consider myself a pretty good paladin, and if your doing 1,5k your doing it wrong, go offensive and get some dps gear and better healers etc, in a bad group i won't hit 3k most of the time, in a good group i can push up to 4,5k zonewides

Motzi

02-17-2009, 03:11 PM

We have a monk making the same complaints. He's fully raid geared on his monk, been raiding monk for a long time with the DKP to get every item he wanted. He has an SK alt with some rotting fabled drops and mostly shard gear.What we've found is the undergeared SK slightly out parses his geared monk on single targets, on multiples, all hell breaks loose. Needless to say, he's not too thrilled by this.

RafaelSmith

02-17-2009, 03:23 PM

<cite>Glerin wrote:</cite><blockquote>im not complaining, just stating a fact that a nonraidgeared non mythical SK can outparse me, and i have -far- better gear and consider myself a pretty good paladin, and if your doing 1,5k your doing it wrong, go offensive and get some dps gear and better healers etc, in a bad group i won't hit 3k most of the time, in a good group i can push up to 4,5k zonewides</blockquote>Well Im not a Pally...but yeah in zones where I can afford to use DPS gear, duel wield and O stance im usually around 2.5k.I still claim that all things being equal (gear, AAs, skill, masters, appropriate buffs) no fighter is going to out DPS a DPS class. I have yet to encounter that with any of my guildmates....sure our SK blows the rest of us fighters away but only when our wizards are slacking does he out-dps them.This whole notion that fighters are doing too much DPS to me seems way overblown. There might be a few isolated cases of having the exact perfect group makeup, perfect gear, perfect buffs, ideal mobs where SK is putting out crazy numbers but that is no reason to nerf them...to say nothing about nerfing all fighter DPS.

Grumpy_Warrior_01

02-17-2009, 04:02 PM

<cite>Motzi@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>We have a monk making the same complaints. He's fully raid geared on his monk, been raiding monk for a long time with the DKP to get every item he wanted. He has an SK alt with some rotting fabled drops and mostly shard gear.What we've found is the undergeared SK slightly out parses his geared monk on single targets, on multiples, all hell breaks loose. Needless to say, he's not too thrilled by this.</blockquote>A couple of weeks ago I took my guardian into the Commonlands AoE instance with an SK pickup that was somebody's alt. I was presumed to be tanking for the group which I have done a few times, albeit with difficulty. The SK had 39 days played and some twink armor, no mythical. Starting with the first mob in the zone I got straight up humiliated, this guy was just RAKING the mobs in, nobody wiped except on the earthworm and we had a warlock. I tried sneaking in a bunch of rescues and TSO snaps just to be snarky but nothing ever budged off him. It's like I wasnt even there. In 400+ days played on my guard I have never seen anything like it. Reminded me of a group version of Harclave's.Give me aggro control even remotely like that and I'll shut up about it.

DMIstar

02-18-2009, 01:18 AM

<cite>Goldenpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Zahne@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>SK's need some hard nerfing on Live currently. They do far too much damage, hold aggro far too well, and tank far too well. There is no seperation or weak points to the class currently.</blockquote>Amen to this. Well most of it <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> I hate calling for a nerf to any class because it hurts everyone on a whole, but if roughly an equally equipped SK can do 150% the dps of a defensive guardian, holding hate, surviving just as easily and dropping the mob faster because of them, it makes the smarter choice the SK every single time, then something HAS TO BE FIXED.If it is 150% easier for the healers to heal the guardian and 150% more survivability for the group because of the guardian and 150% more hate to the guardian, then it is balanced, as it is the SK is the smart choice, because they survive, they dps, and they hold hate.It is silly not to utilize them in -every singly environment- where a tank is needed if they are an option.That does not equal balance.</blockquote>The guard in comparison to this just plain out sucks in playing the game compared to the SK.. maybe should choose a difference class to play if it seems this bad. Guards are not that far off and never will be. The DPS yes, they will not do as much DPS as the SK with TSO out. And they never should of been doing it either.THough this sounds more like the SK just outgears him completly

mr23sgte

02-18-2009, 01:27 AM

Glerin

02-19-2009, 12:17 AM

<cite>Gaylon@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>Well Im not a Pally...but yeah in zones where I can afford to use DPS gear, duel wield and O stance im usually around 2.5k.whats your groupwide dps at? mine usually hovers around 15-30k, and i usually hover around 3-5k, with spikes going up towards 8-9k (this is with a troub / illu for potm+pom, which is also how the SK i know can spike up above 10k+ on even single target fights)I still claim that all things being equal (gear, AAs, skill, masters, appropriate buffs) no fighter is going to out DPS a DPS class. I have yet to encounter that with any of my guildmates....sure our SK blows the rest of us fighters away but only when our wizards are slacking does he out-dps them.In most cases no, they won't, game mechanic wise, this should not be remotely possible, but due to 9/10 cases the equal "skill" part is not there, alot of DPS classes complain about how "Overpowered the tank dps is", just because they suck at their class or the like.This whole notion that fighters are doing too much DPS to me seems way overblown. There might be a few isolated cases of having the exact perfect group makeup, perfect gear, perfect buffs, ideal mobs where SK is putting out crazy numbers but that is no reason to nerf them...to say nothing about nerfing all fighter DPS.Now, I think that the fighter dps is kinda out of whack (as much fun as i have parsing really high though!), especially with SK's, a T2 void armoured SK, with fabled epic, mostly legendary jewelery etc, should not be able to hit 10k+ dps though, even very few wizards or swashbucklers i've seen can parse 10k+ in single target heroic fights.</blockquote>but dont you -really- deep down inside, think that -something- must be wrong when a heroic geared SK is doing 4-5times your dps, have better survivability (for heroic content) then you do, far superior aggro control? Atleast I consider something being wrong when this is the case.