Page 39 of 131 FirstFirst ...
29
37
38
39
40
41
49
89
... LastLast
  1. #761
    Warchief Akraen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    2,130
    I'm really of the mind that they need to swing the pendulum back a little bit from "balance" and reintroduce "fun" because the sterile DPS environment of today isn't something I'm too keen on continuing into future expansions.

  2. #762
    Bloodsail Admiral Frost1129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    I'm really of the mind that they need to swing the pendulum back a little bit from "balance" and reintroduce "fun" because the sterile DPS environment of today isn't something I'm too keen on continuing into future expansions.
    Nobody has fun at the bottom though. And that would definitely kill class for raiding. Imagine if mages were consistently the lowest, but most fun mechanically. We'd never be brought into raids again.

    A good thought, but it would never work in the current content design where basically everyone has to raid at some level to get any sort of end-game experience.

  3. #763
    Warchief Akraen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    2,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Frost1129 View Post
    Nobody has fun at the bottom though. And that would definitely kill class for raiding. Imagine if mages were consistently the lowest, but most fun mechanically. We'd never be brought into raids again.

    A good thought, but it would never work in the current content design where basically everyone has to raid at some level to get any sort of end-game experience.
    That'd depend entirely on encounter design.

  4. #764
    Bloodsail Admiral Frost1129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    That'd depend entirely on encounter design.
    What encounter design would benefit / be neutral towards having lower DPS in the raid?

    At the end of the day the bosses still have to die, and the quicker they die the easier the fight tends to get.

  5. #765
    Warchief Akraen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    2,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Frost1129 View Post
    What encounter design would benefit / be neutral towards having lower DPS in the raid?

    At the end of the day the bosses still have to die, and the quicker they die the easier the fight tends to get.
    Ones with magnitude buffs. Ones with phase checks, mechanics checks.

    Entire tiers with varieties of encounters, so that if a class has an AoE niche they become awesome even if they aren't so good at single target. So that if a class has multidot niche, they do that. If they bring utility they justify lower DPS. If they can negate an entire mechanic (think Lei Shen), then they can be worth it.

    My biggest gripe with current class design is every spec seems to think it needs to be capable of doing every facet of this game.

    I wish, truly wish, the game design could be such that you choose a niche, rather than choose based off raidbots as so many do. It's this numbers focus that has removed so much pleasure of content itself. It came with heroic mode, largely. I remember doing Patchwerk 40, where people's DPS mattered, and yes we watched damage meters, but it seemed like we acknowledged some classes fared worse and it was fine. On Lady Vashj there was something for every class to do: spriests and locks got the bats, mages burst the striders with the ele shaman and a hunter. Hunter could oversee the rogues gathering up the tainted cores, while ret paladins and warriors could beat up the naga.

    Mythic might bring back some of that design.

  6. #766
    Bloodsail Admiral Frost1129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    Ones with magnitude buffs. Ones with phase checks, mechanics checks.

    Entire tiers with varieties of encounters, so that if a class has an AoE niche they become awesome even if they aren't so good at single target. So that if a class has multidot niche, they do that. If they bring utility they justify lower DPS. If they can negate an entire mechanic (think Lei Shen), then they can be worth it.

    My biggest gripe with current class design is every spec seems to think it needs to be capable of doing every facet of this game.

    I wish, truly wish, the game design could be such that you choose a niche, rather than choose based off raidbots as so many do. It's this numbers focus that has removed so much pleasure of content itself. It came with heroic mode, largely. I remember doing Patchwerk 40, where people's DPS mattered, and yes we watched damage meters, but it seemed like we acknowledged some classes fared worse and it was fine. On Lady Vashj there was something for every class to do: spriests and locks got the bats, mages burst the striders with the ele shaman and a hunter. Hunter could oversee the rogues gathering up the tainted cores, while ret paladins and warriors could beat up the naga.

    Mythic might bring back some of that design.
    Mythic probably will bring back the type of design that Vashj had (or at least that is what I'm hoping), but balance still has to be there. When you say niche I'm assuming you mean expert at one thing (say sustained AoE), but still being decent at ST and burst AoE? Or do you mean expert in sustained AoE and significantly sub-par with the remaining fields?

    Like how if I wanted to be boss ST I go arcane, if I wanted to have good burst I go fire, and if i wanted sustained AoE I go frost? (random example to convey an idea not based on current spec strengths)

    Also, to a lesser extend mechanics and phase checks are a function of DPS. Higher DPS means you have less mechanics going out (Falling ash/Iron Prison/Galakras Waves/Spouts for Immerseus), or less phase changes (Malkorok/Iron Jugg). You'd have to have those phases be more like Kael phases where they happen at certain percents, and even then you sometimes wanted certain phases to end ASAP cause they sucked ass to deal with.

    It's an interesting idea to toy with, but I think execution would be very difficult to do and also maintain a good distribution of class representation in raids.

    They could always just make our specs actually be different in what they do, that'd be cool
    Last edited by Frost1129; 2013-12-05 at 05:45 PM.

  7. #767
    Warchief Akraen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    2,130
    You can have some niche specialty without sacrificing viability. I think frost is an example of that right now, actually.

    Yes classes/specs need to be balanced, but not necessarily as tightly as they are to provide a good game.

    If a shadow priest brought 15% less single target damage than any spec mage, but offered mana regeneration and off-heals, along with 10% more multidot capability, then I think it would be foolish to discount either for a raid spot, both would be viable, and the only class stacking would happen in the top 25 guilds or so.

    This leads to a pure DPS problem. A shadow priest is either shadow or a healer, so their life is simple. Our problem is having to change from one spec to another to become niche. I think the most successful design philosophy there is for each pure DPS spec to play drastically different than the other but be balanced according to the same criteria as a class that only has one DPS spec. So if you choose the path of fire, you are able to function according to the niche of the mage class in a broader sense. Each spec needs to follow the design goals of the class, rather than be niche within the class.

    I probably have some of you going "ehhhhhhhhh" at that point. The reason I think that's a requirement is because it is established criteria with hybrid classes and it is more or less a fair treatment at that point. It also allows people to choose based off playstyle, not the results. When results govern choice, numbers being the pointer to which class or spec to play, then it constantly disrupts players in the game. Sure, many adapt, but many more would adapt, get better, and reach the endgame if they could fine tune what they enjoy by playstyle (i.e. I play fire because I love x, y, and z about the rotation and how it feels) and allow subjectivity to be the deciding factor in spec, then much is lifted off the player.

    Key in development is then to balance the specs. This shouldn't be too hard in the new gearing method of WoD. Where there's math, there's a way.

    tldr; I agree all DPS should be within a few % of each other, but some exceptions can be offered for greater utility, even if the tradeoffs are by glyph or talent choice, rather than spec choice.

  8. #768
    Bloodsail Admiral Frost1129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    You can have some niche specialty without sacrificing viability. I think frost is an example of that right now, actually.

    Yes classes/specs need to be balanced, but not necessarily as tightly as they are to provide a good game.

    If a shadow priest brought 15% less single target damage than any spec mage, but offered mana regeneration and off-heals, along with 10% more multidot capability, then I think it would be foolish to discount either for a raid spot, both would be viable, and the only class stacking would happen in the top 25 guilds or so.

    This leads to a pure DPS problem. A shadow priest is either shadow or a healer, so their life is simple. Our problem is having to change from one spec to another to become niche. I think the most successful design philosophy there is for each pure DPS spec to play drastically different than the other but be balanced according to the same criteria as a class that only has one DPS spec. So if you choose the path of fire, you are able to function according to the niche of the mage class in a broader sense. Each spec needs to follow the design goals of the class, rather than be niche within the class.

    I probably have some of you going "ehhhhhhhhh" at that point. The reason I think that's a requirement is because it is established criteria with hybrid classes and it is more or less a fair treatment at that point. It also allows people to choose based off playstyle, not the results. When results govern choice, numbers being the pointer to which class or spec to play, then it constantly disrupts players in the game. Sure, many adapt, but many more would adapt, get better, and reach the endgame if they could fine tune what they enjoy by playstyle (i.e. I play fire because I love x, y, and z about the rotation and how it feels) and allow subjectivity to be the deciding factor in spec, then much is lifted off the player.

    Key in development is then to balance the specs. This shouldn't be too hard in the new gearing method of WoD. Where there's math, there's a way.

    tldr; I agree all DPS should be within a few % of each other, but some exceptions can be offered for greater utility, even if the tradeoffs are by glyph or talent choice, rather than spec choice.
    Unfortunately I don't think this will be what happens.

    If we look back at BC we can find a few situations like you say - Frost mages bringing replenishment so a token frost mage was allowed even though fire/arcane with SSC tier did better DPS. Shadow priest DPS being allowed due to replenishment and shadow debuff for warlocks. Fire mages doing the scorch debuff. Im sure i'm missing a few here that also existed.

    That being said, Blizzard no longer views these types of bonuses to raid effectiveness, which may help offset lower DPS, to be bonuses or utility - they view them as a mandatory addition to a raid (as they rightly should, because they are). However, I wish they had the additional view that you did - that while these specs were in most cases required they also made class roles more diverse. If I didn't like being a scorch bitch or playing fire in general I could go frost and still fill a role. Same for priests, they had an additional spec to fill a role and allow for greater play options.

    Re-instating these types of changes to offset lower DPS potential seems like a significant step backwards in their current logic of simplifying the game, wanting to bring the player not the class/spec, and in general making classes and raiding more accessible. I'd be totally for it (and it seems like you would too if it came along with a varied gameplay options), but Blizzard wouldn't go for it. Apparently retard raid wide CDs are now the acceptable currency for raid spots, in addition to having balanced DPS.
    Last edited by Frost1129; 2013-12-05 at 07:29 PM.

  9. #769

  10. #770
    I think it would take a massive reorganization of the frameworks the game is based on in order for anything like that to happen. The fact of the matter is that your primary mode of interaction with almost everything in the game is by smacking it in the face. It's a combat based game so dps is always going to be glamorized over everything else. Call me a simpleton but I'd personally not be happy accepting any added utility if it means a corresponding loss in damage potential, if I enjoyed playing a supportive role in any way I would have rolled a healer, I just like making things explode.

  11. #771
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    This leads to a pure DPS problem. A shadow priest is either shadow or a healer, so their life is simple. Our problem is having to change from one spec to another to become niche. I think the most successful design philosophy there is for each pure DPS spec to play drastically different than the other but be balanced according to the same criteria as a class that only has one DPS spec. So if you choose the path of fire, you are able to function according to the niche of the mage class in a broader sense. Each spec needs to follow the design goals of the class, rather than be niche within the class.

    ...

    tldr; I agree all DPS should be within a few % of each other, but some exceptions can be offered for greater utility, even if the tradeoffs are by glyph or talent choice, rather than spec choice.
    To a certain extent, that's how it works today, although it is true there is more homogenization than not.

    The bigger problem with what you're suggesting, and why it would never, ever fly in wow again, is that it would lead to class stacking.

    To a certain extent, class stacking happens now, but it's not as bad as the 14 druids and 11 other guys versus nafarian kind of bad. But if you were to implement this system, that is exactly what is going to happen - all high end guilds would require each of their raiders to level up a dps that would be the best at each niche, so they could class stack. Let's say an encounter had a thing where healers effectiveness was reduced by 90%, but offhealing was 100%. Well you'd probalby have a raid of like 23 shadowpriests and shaman, and a dk and a monk tank.

    Homogenization, as bad as it is in terms of making the game feel to same-ey, makes it such that no one should feel like they need to bench a certain class or player just to down a boss.

    Generally speaking, class stacking happens these days simply by whichever class happens to be the absolute top of the pile of dps (cough *warlocks* cough). If you were to implement niches like that, you'd be seeing boss comps where it would be all 2-3 classes being stacked for every boss for heroic/mythic raiding. And while many may say "well it's world first it shouldn't matter" - well it matters to me, and it matters to raid leaders who pay attention to such things, when they see paragon or method stacking druids or warlocks or paladins and benching mages.

    I'm also not going to say I'm smart enough to offer a better solution. I tend to think the current philosophy is the best way to go.

    In regards to skill - I'd like to see much more penalty to movement. DPS used to be hugely skill capped by how well you did mechanics in terms of moving as little as possible. I remember in ICC, my dps would climb by a good 20-30% from first pull to the 3rd or 4th pull, just from learning the encounter. I think THAT'S what's missing from the game - there's so much movement dps, and so little penalty, that the skill of actually learning a boss encounter is significantly cheapened from a dps perspective. And it's made it such that as long as you have a decent UI to track your buffs and dots, your dps won't change that much, and gear makes a much bigger difference than skill does.

    Key in development is then to balance the specs. This shouldn't be too hard in the new gearing method of WoD. Where there's math, there's a way.
    Balance seems better, but I would like to see the delta from top spec to bottom spec be 5% at an absolute maximum (across all classes, all specs). They've got about the top 50% of dps specs within a 10% delta, which is good progress, but I'd like to see all specs in that range, and better.

  12. #772
    Warchief Akraen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    2,130
    I think things need to stop getting designed based around what Method and BL will do.

    Or even the top 200 guilds. I preferred the C'thun method. Just make it unkillable for a while if they don't want it killed. Any other system you try to invent will have a workaround, multiple accounts, servers, whatever.

    A fun way to introduce some sort of gating that is less gear-focused, is for penultimate and end bosses, NPCs relevant to the story could assist by removing a mechanic from the fight.

    Say Heroic Garrosh had three additional adds from what he has today, Manifestation of Desperation, Emnity, and Arrogance. On Week 1 of heroics, you have to manage these adds which sit in opposite corners of the room and do various abilities on their own unless killed. On week 2 of heroics, Wrynn joins the fight and takes one of the adds completely out of the fight. Week 3 Jaina shows up and ice blocks the other for the entire fight. On week 3, Tyrande uses the Light of Elune to remove the third, which would bring Heroic Garrosh down to the difficulty of today. So any guild dealing with those extra things would be foolish and probably determine it to be completely impossible until week 3.

    Anyway that isn't mage discussion so I'll end it there, I just think it all is pretty interconnected. The compulsion to always be top DPS is related to the mindset of progression. Progression -could- mean something differnet, but it doesn't and likely won't ever again.

  13. #773
    Moderator LocNess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Indiana, United States
    Posts
    3,357
    I don't think it is strictly compulsion to wanting to be the top DPS, it is just DPS is the only thing Mages can do, and if that isn't the case (like at certain times this expansion) we are just bench warmers and our class is useless for any sort of major progression. I have no issue with dropping 1% to 4% dps if we an get raid utility to compensate (which I had my Level 75 Tier Raid CD suggestion earlier this thread).

  14. #774
    Quote Originally Posted by LocNess View Post
    I don't think it is strictly compulsion to wanting to be the top DPS, it is just DPS is the only thing Mages can do, and if that isn't the case (like at certain times this expansion) we are just bench warmers and our class is useless for any sort of major progression. I have no issue with dropping 1% to 4% dps if we an get raid utility to compensate (which I had my Level 75 Tier Raid CD suggestion earlier this thread).
    A lot of the "mages have to be #1" comes from non-mage players stuck in the past where mages were consistently on top. Raid leaders bring a mage and it ends up maybe #3 or 4 on the charts and they think "oh, they're not top, let's bench them" when in reality we aren't the top. Sane goes for guilds who think every mage has to play fire or arcane because that's what the top guilds do. As soon as raid leaders acknowledge our situation this then we might see some love. Do we need more utility? Not really. We need people to better understand our abilities (if mitigation CDs are used properly, we take very, very little damage).

  15. #775
    Quote Originally Posted by Akraen View Post
    I think things need to stop getting designed based around what Method and BL will do.

    ----


    Anyway that isn't mage discussion so I'll end it there, I just think it all is pretty interconnected. The compulsion to always be top DPS is related to the mindset of progression. Progression -could- mean something differnet, but it doesn't and likely won't ever again.
    The game isn't designed around what Method and BL do. But raid leaders will tend to follow them - you can't ignore the highest end. Raid leaders of even middle-class type guilds will be aware of what the high-end is doing, since the goal of progression raiding is to progress as much as possible, meaning kill every boss on heroic. If I'm a RL and my raid team is ranked say like world 2000, then I'm going to know that I need a lot of ranged dps on thok, and that warlocks are amazing on that fight, so I'm going to prefer warlocks. This is one small example - all I'm saying is that if we implement a system where each spec has a niche, you're going to take fights like that and make it much more "mandatory" that you bring whatever class that fits that niche, instead of simply favoring the slightly better dps classes.

    This is why I'm of the opinion the current system is best. While warlocks are being stacked, it's because they bring too much utility, and they do too much dps - it's not necessarily a niche, rather it's that they are OP. A 10% nerf to warlock dps and removing healthstones, all the sudden warlocks are the same as mages. Versus saying "okay destro is the single target spec, afflic is the movement spec, demo is the AoE spec" - this does relate to mages though because if we are speculating on what is coming in WoD, we have to talk about our place in the raid. The one niche mages have filled quite well is when arcane is burning down a large add, since they have zero ramp up time versus other classes.

    ----



    I'd just like to point out that progression isn't reserved for the top 10 guilds - I've heard this type of talk, that people not going for world firsts shouldn't be worried about small differences in dps - but in my opinion, it does matter. For one, it feels good to be rewarded for good play. For another, classes doing more dps can make the difference between a kill and a wipe.

    Bringing this back to the overall point, I think the idea of having niches and real differences between classes is a nice thought, but because of the above reasons, is just not viable for how this game is designed, and really for MMO's in general. We're all min-maxers in our own way. The only way to bring a niche that is beyond "do moar dps" is to have a dedicated support class (like archons and bards in rift), or to completely alter the triad of heal-tank-dps, which again is not going to happen in wow.

    What this means for mages, is that there won't be any paradigm shifts. Hopefully the bombs and L90 talents will get reworked, but there's little chance of any major changes to reduce homogenization.
    Last edited by Pyromelter; 2013-12-07 at 02:36 AM.

  16. #776

    Mage bombs gone?

    https://twitter.com/Celestalon

    According to Celestalon, Mages will not be able to multidot at all. Does this mean bombs are gone? And if so, thoughts?
    FC: 3067-6604-6289. Steel Safari - Skarmory - Klefki - Ferrorseed

  17. #777
    I doubt it means they are "gone", since he didn't mention the bombs at all. He merely stated that they wouldn't multi-dot, which could imply that they will change the bombs to make it less appealing, perhaps making them like frost bombs 1-target limit only. Also, it appears that the bigger suggestion he is making is that we will no longer spread Combustion to other targets. That would be a major hit to Mage AoE and the way Fire is played right now.

  18. #778
    Quote Originally Posted by bradok View Post
    I doubt it means they are "gone", since he didn't mention the bombs at all. He merely stated that they wouldn't multi-dot, which could imply that they will change the bombs to make it less appealing, perhaps making them like frost bombs 1-target limit only. Also, it appears that the bigger suggestion he is making is that we will no longer spread Combustion to other targets. That would be a major hit to Mage AoE and the way Fire is played right now.
    Many expected Fire to get significant changes anyways given how much of a pain it is to balance and how overly dependent on crit it is. Trash tier at lower gear and god tier at higher (yes I know Fire isn't over the top on live but it got hit hard) isn't really healthy design.
    FC: 3067-6604-6289. Steel Safari - Skarmory - Klefki - Ferrorseed

  19. #779
    Well I'm all for not being a multidot spec since I didn't roll a mage once upon a time to watch as my arcane dot tore shit up as a frost/fire mage when multiple targets come into play. They also really sorta make the specs too similar as it is anyways. They had better buff our AoE/cleave though so we aren't total shit since nearly every boss these days favors multidotting.

  20. #780
    Boy, I can't wait to see the amazing changes Blizzard will pull out of the hat on this one. They can't exactly destroy the fun of playing the mage class anymore. Maybe a button we can toggle to evocate every minute for us without having to push it manually? That would be Blizzard's revolutionary mage development.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •