Yes it does. If you can't understand it, that's another thing entirely.
See, now this doesn't make sense lol. What/whom determines how much survivability is "enough" ?MMOs, like the lion's share of video games, are about you not dying and the enemy dying. As soon as you have enough survivability not to die, any effort towards more survivability (versus throughput) makes fights take longer, creating a sense of a weaker character.
You're talking like if you're doing the maximum DPS that a fight is an autowin. That's not the case. There are fights that are battles of attrition and can be won through you simply outlasting your opponent.
Again, who/what determines what weaker is? I might consider a Mage that can do big crits but gets squashed by a melee as "weak" others might see big crits and go OOoo nice. Where-as a Warlock who doesn't do as much damage as said Mage could end up outlasting that same melee because of leeching / drain, DoTs, curses, etc.If you want to be more blunt about it: when your character does less throughput, you're weaker.
It most certainly is debatable or else we wouldn't be having this conversation. Blizzard wouldn't be trying to put the trees back into the game to increase specialization diversity and (by their own words) encourage hybrid-builds.This isn't even a debatable point. These games are all about maximizing your output and not dying. There is no other binary that matters. You only diverge from maximizing output when you / your group can't survive the encounter.
Just because you can't understand something doesn't mean it's not worth discussing.