Two expansions with target cap, how do you feel?

[Relapses]

I don't mind it if all the classes followed the rules. Can't have class A doing 30k dps AoE and class B doing 420k.

If all classes did the same amount of damage in all situations then instead of bitching about "balancing" we'd be bitching about how much cooler Warrior's color on the DPS meter is than Rogue's.

[Garymorilix]

I think it boils down to Blizzard's recent move away from homogenization. This was likely the biggest motivating factor for them inserting target caps in the first place. They want Warriors to feel strong in 5-target cleave situations but not as strong in 40-target cleave situations. They want Destro locks to feel strong in 40-target cleave situations but feel average in single target. The problem is that these wants and desires are interpreted in a very binary manner by the playerbase (Destro is S+ Tier in M+, Warrior dogwater). I agree with some of the reasoning behind it but... it's a hard thing to get 100% correct. I think given all the variables they do a decent job but target capping was probably the worst way to achieve their goal. I like the square root capping they've added as they've begun to walk back some of their target capping so hopefully we'll see more of that in the future.

I've been saying this for a while now.
It all comes down to how dungeons are designed.

When you have 8 dungeons where 6 of them have low-impact 3-4-5 mob trash groups from start to end then obviously mass pulling and/or low CD AoE pumpers are considered S+ (Like Fire Mages, Outlaws, Destros [now], WW etc).

The main issue is that these 8 dungeons will stay the same from the start of the expac until the end of the expac.
So in the end no tuning will change what is considered "top tier". Numbers might determine the top order but it will always be the same classes/specs.
The only way a new class/spec may emerge if they add a new broken power (like current Destro and Survival).

They should really start looking into designing at least half the dungeons in unique ways. More big mini-bosses, less grouped trash.
Environment that makes it impossible to group large amounts of trash. Things that allow cd based classes to get their big CD's back earlier (low CD classes already don't care, but if big CD based classes get more uptime it might push them forward).

It's all about content design in the end, you can adjust classes any time, but you need the content to be ever-green.

[Relapses]

I've been saying this for a while now.
It all comes down to how dungeons are designed.

When you have 8 dungeons where 6 of them have low-impact 3-4-5 mob trash groups from start to end then obviously mass pulling and/or low CD AoE pumpers are considered S+ (Like Fire Mages, Outlaws, Destros [now], WW etc).

The main issue is that these 8 dungeons will stay the same from the start of the expac until the end of the expac.
So in the end no tuning will change what is considered "top tier". Numbers might determine the top order but it will always be the same classes/specs.
The only way a new class/spec may emerge if they add a new broken power (like current Destro and Survival).

They should really start looking into designing at least half the dungeons in unique ways. More big mini-bosses, less grouped trash.
Environment that makes it impossible to group large amounts of trash. Things that allow cd based classes to get their big CD's back earlier (low CD classes already don't care, but if big CD based classes get more uptime it might push them forward).

It's all about content design in the end, you can adjust classes any time, but you need the content to be ever-green.

For M+ you're completely right. The problem is that Blizzard never designs implicitly around M+. (That's why we get ridiculous shit like Destro getting a 5% aura buff when they're already the strongest DPS spec in M+.) It'd be nice if every class had an ability to choose between being good at low, medium and high density pulls but this is difficult to pull off in practice and with Blizzard moving away from homogenization I doubt we'll ever get to a point where all classes feel good in all situations.

[Garymorilix]

For M+ you're completely right. The problem is that Blizzard never designs implicitly around M+. (That's why we get ridiculous shit like Destro getting a 5% aura buff when they're already the strongest DPS spec in M+.) It'd be nice if every class had an ability to choose between being good at low, medium and high density pulls but this is difficult to pull off in practice and with Blizzard moving away from homogenization I doubt we'll ever get to a point where all classes feel good in all situations.

WDYM they don't design around M+?
They literally make the dungeons around M+ since BfA (Legion was more of a test-ground).

Again, you're not getting my point.
It's not about class balance. It's about encounter design.
Classes don't need to feel good in all situations. But currently the "all situations" is 80% big AoE. Which skews the viability of certain classes/specs.

For example, what if a dungeon started off in an arena (like Highmaul) where you had to face 2/3 minibosses and then a boss. All single target. Then the rest of the dungeon was your usual small packs -> aoe -> boss whatever.
All the sudden hardcore AoE classes/specs are at a disadvantage for like half of the dungeon. Opens up more DPS options you can bring.

Currently the biggest issue I find with dungeon balance is that single target talents are not even worth bringing on Tyrannical weeks. Because outside of bosses (and even some bosses) the whole dungeon is just AoE'ing down medium to large stacks.
This means the time lost on not using a single target build is easily made up like 3-4 times by just pulling more trash together to AoE.

Then again, you'd need to implement varied design in more than 1 dungeon for this to have an effect.
If you have 8 dungeons where only 1 is made like my above example then that's still not worth having a whole different roster for.
It all comes down to encounter design. Not individual class +/- 5% damage numbers.

[Relapses]

WDYM they don't design around M+?
They literally make the dungeons around M+ since BfA (Legion was more of a test-ground).

Again, you're not getting my point.
It's not about class balance. It's about encounter design.
Classes don't need to feel good in all situations. But currently the "all situations" is 80% big AoE. Which skews the viability of certain classes/specs.

For example, what if a dungeon started off in an arena (like Highmaul) where you had to face 2/3 minibosses and then a boss. All single target. Then the rest of the dungeon was your usual small packs -> aoe -> boss whatever.
All the sudden hardcore AoE classes/specs are at a disadvantage for like half of the dungeon. Opens up more DPS options you can bring.

Currently the biggest issue I find with dungeon balance is that single target talents are not even worth bringing on Tyrannical weeks. Because outside of bosses (and even some bosses) the whole dungeon is just AoE'ing down medium to large stacks.
This means the time lost on not using a single target build is easily made up like 3-4 times by just pulling more trash together to AoE.

Then again, you'd need to implement varied design in more than 1 dungeon for this to have an effect.
If you have 8 dungeons where only 1 is made like my above example then that's still not worth having a whole different roster for.
It all comes down to encounter design. Not individual class +/- 5% damage numbers.

The dungeon design team is completely separate from the class balance team which is what I meant by not designing around M+. I agree to an extent with what you're saying but it's unlikely we'll ever get what you're suggesting because, to me, it seems like Blizzard simply doesn't give a shit how dungeons "feel" in M+.

[Mardux]

Since BFA, blz has introduced target cap to the game, how do you feel about this feature?

What do you mean "since BFA"? The game has had target caps since at least ICC.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't mind it if all the classes followed the rules. Can't have class A doing 30k dps AoE and class B doing 420k.

At least not until class B is the one you're playing, right?

[Ashana Darkmoon]

controversial take I guess, but I think Ae damage should be reasonably balanced, too! Nothing will ever be perfect but having some classes do double or triple someone else is pretty dumb!

[Algorath]

What do you mean "since BFA"? The game has had target caps since at least ICC.

- - - Updated - - -



At least not until class B is the one you're playing, right?

Sure, that's fun and all - but I'd prefer playing a game that's somewhat balanced and doesn't have DPS classes being 1000% stronger than others. Makes for a more interesting game imo.

- - - Updated - - -

If all classes did the same amount of damage in all situations then instead of bitching about "balancing" we'd be bitching about how much cooler Warrior's color on the DPS meter is than Rogue's.

I don't really care if it's completely balanced, but you have to expect and demand a more balanced game than 30k vs 400k.

[Relapses]

I don't really care if it's completely balanced, but you have to expect and demand a more balanced game than 30k vs 400k.

If you're doing 400k on a pull with 80 targets that is only ever done in the MDI after people practice it for 2 weeks straight and you can pull 30k in pretty much every situation then I don't see the point. Fringe specs are always going to exist, it's only a problem if the class doing 400k DPS can do that every single time in every single situation...something that has never happened in WoW.

[Algorath]

If you're doing 400k on a pull with 80 targets that is only ever done in the MDI after people practice it for 2 weeks straight and you can pull 30k in pretty much every situation then I don't see the point. Fringe specs are always going to exist, it's only a problem if the class doing 400k DPS can do that every single time in every single situation...something that has never happened in WoW.

Mate, you are 14.100 posts too deep into Kotick. If one class played by the best players in the world with the most insane pulls in the world, either every single class in that context should, or none should.

Back to my point, if there is a decent balance, and no classes do 1000% more damage than another, then capping is fine.

[Relapses]

Mate, you are 14.100 posts too deep into Kotick. If one class played by the best players in the world with the most insane pulls in the world, either every single class in that context should, or none should.

Back to my point, if there is a decent balance, and no classes do 1000% more damage than another, then capping is fine.

Then what you're arguing for is homogenization between classes which is exactly what I mentioned in my first reply to you. I personally think this is a boring way to balance the game.

[Ashana Darkmoon]

Then what you're arguing for is homogenization between classes which is exactly what I mentioned in my first reply to you. I personally think this is a boring way to balance the game.

It would certainly be less of a big deal if survival hunters only did good damage on gigapulls and had nothing else to offer groups, but that is not the case. They're the best class in most situations who also happen to have insane utility.

Scaling that back and giving other people fun toys is not homogenization imo.

Put another way, you should always be able to point to other realistic situations where you would actually bring every spec in the game, but that's just not the reality. The specs that do the most damage also often have the best utility

[Algorath]

Then what you're arguing for is homogenization between classes which is exactly what I mentioned in my first reply to you. I personally think this is a boring way to balance the game.

That isn't what I am advocating at all. I want to see classes be as unique and special as they can be; have them bring unique and exciting toolkits, have them be able to branch into pure damage, into AoE, into locking down and controlling fights. What I don't want to see is one class having the potential to pull off THOUSANDS OF PERCENT more damage than the next, because Blizzard forgot to add a mitigation of damage past 8 targets or whatever it is, on an ability or two. It's like when fire was uncapped at one point, either lift the cap from all and balance around that, or have that restriction count for all.

[Relapses]

That isn't what I am advocating at all. I want to see classes be as unique and special as they can be; have them bring unique and exciting toolkits, have them be able to branch into pure damage, into AoE, into locking down and controlling fights. What I don't want to see is one class having the potential to pull off THOUSANDS OF PERCENT more damage than the next, because Blizzard forgot to add a mitigation of damage past 8 targets or whatever it is, on an ability or two. It's like when fire was uncapped at one point, either lift the cap from all and balance around that, or have that restriction count for all.

It doesn't make sense to me for Blizzard to balance around situations that 99.9% of the playerbase will never encounter.

- - - Updated - - -

It would certainly be less of a big deal if survival hunters only did good damage on gigapulls and had nothing else to offer groups, but that is not the case. They're the best class in most situations who also happen to have insane utility.

Scaling that back and giving other people fun toys is not homogenization imo.

Put another way, you should always be able to point to other realistic situations where you would actually bring every spec in the game, but that's just not the reality. The specs that do the most damage also often have the best utility

Hunter's utility has always been relevant and it hasn't changed much through the expansion. It wasn't until SV's set bonus in 9.2 that the spec started to elevate stonks into the stratosphere. It should be argued that Blizzard should avoid giving super OP set bonuses to classes that already have decent utility, imo.

[Zenfoldor]

My 2 cents, uncapped AOE is really very fun and capped AOE actually sucks.

The reality is that with uncapped AOE, you will have people who will plan around overall damage numbers and post them(edit: plus, as mentioned below, mythic+ keys potentially being cheesed with aoe).

I would much rather everyone simply have balanced toolkits for aoe, than have to deal with the shameful fun suck that is capped aoe. It's just a pure shame that one of the few aspects of gameplay in this game which is actually fun, and which still holds up to modern games, is really just an illusion.

tldr: fun detected, wish aoe was balanced or an important dps niche, and not normalized so that it can be safely ignored

[PassingBy]

IMO if the reason for AOE cap is that without it people would be able to do too crazy of a pull in a higher M+ keys - they should rather reduce the amount of AOE CC available to people.
No aoe stuns, less effective snares/slows.

Make tank threat matter much more, vastly reduce the ability of tanks to generate threat without being in contact with the mobs.

This way you would be at some point naturally hindered by your tank's survivability. Your healer having to actually heal instead of dpsing. Your DPS actually having to watch their threat risking too pull aggro and die.

[Zenfoldor]

IMO if the reason for AOE cap is that without it people would be able to do too crazy of a pull in a higher M+ keys - they should rather reduce the amount of AOE CC available to people.
No aoe stuns, less effective snares/slows.

Make tank threat matter much more, vastly reduce the ability of tanks to generate threat without being in contact with the mobs.

This way you would be at some point naturally hindered by your tank's survivability. Your healer having to actually heal instead of dpsing. Your DPS actually having to watch their threat risking too pull aggro and die.

That's my problem with it. They removed something I love(real aoe) for the sake of something I hate(mythic+ or really most group content on a timer).

Making your game a timer/speedrun game has real consequences.

[Relapses]

IMO if the reason for AOE cap is that without it people would be able to do too crazy of a pull in a higher M+ keys - they should rather reduce the amount of AOE CC available to people.
No aoe stuns, less effective snares/slows.

Make tank threat matter much more, vastly reduce the ability of tanks to generate threat without being in contact with the mobs.

This way you would be at some point naturally hindered by your tank's survivability. Your healer having to actually heal instead of dpsing. Your DPS actually having to watch their threat risking too pull aggro and die.

D...do you play a tank? Tank threat already sucks dick. Why would you want make it worse?

[Ashana Darkmoon]

It doesn't make sense to me for Blizzard to balance around situations that 99.9% of the playerbase will never encounter.

- - - Updated - - -



Hunter's utility has always been relevant and it hasn't changed much through the expansion. It wasn't until SV's set bonus in 9.2 that the spec started to elevate stonks into the stratosphere. It should be argued that Blizzard should avoid giving super OP set bonuses to classes that already have decent utility, imo.

Yeah but that's not really the point, right? I'm just saying that I don't really buy into the homogenization stuff when you end up in situations where certain specs have all the damage AND all the utility. It would be different if like feral druids had this completely insane utility but did garbo damage, ya know? But like, that's never the situation. Rogues, monks, mages, etc are pretty much always top dog in dungeons because they get huge pieces of the pie.

- - - Updated - - -

IMO if the reason for AOE cap is that without it people would be able to do too crazy of a pull in a higher M+ keys - they should rather reduce the amount of AOE CC available to people.
No aoe stuns, less effective snares/slows.

Make tank threat matter much more, vastly reduce the ability of tanks to generate threat without being in contact with the mobs.

This way you would be at some point naturally hindered by your tank's survivability. Your healer having to actually heal instead of dpsing. Your DPS actually having to watch their threat risking too pull aggro and die.

So I actually think the new dungeons (especially) originally are a fresh change of pace because healers have to actually heal a lot and throughput matters. But the problem is that if you tank away sustain from tanks it becomes an incredibly boring role that even fewer people want to do, which is bad for the game.

Separate note, but watching threat as dps is miserable lol. So glad the game moved away from that

[Garymorilix]

The dungeon design team is completely separate from the class balance team which is what I meant by not designing around M+. I agree to an extent with what you're saying but it's unlikely we'll ever get what you're suggesting because, to me, it seems like Blizzard simply doesn't give a shit how dungeons "feel" in M+.

I mean, I think they do but not in the way I suggested.
Bottom line is this is not a class design issue.

If rogues are the best at 3-target cleaving and every fight is a 3-target cleave then it's not the specs fault.

It is impossible to balance things around output alone.
Encounters need to promote unique playstyles.
When you see a warlock or DH or whatever pull 100k dps on every other pull we need to question why is every other enabling this kind of damage, while other classes with a different damage profile get left behind.