Everyone is affected by every change (not just sin changes) either directly or indirectly. The numbers gave BW the support needed for the changes on an average player level - likely not on your personal level. Everyone needs to adjust to the changes. It is very possible that some of the good players are not adjusting very well. You can deny it all you want, and claim to be a great player, but the possibility is still there that you adjusted less efficiently than others. Changes made often suit different playstyles better than others, and if the changes go away from your personal tendencies/strategies, then you will have more adjusting to do than someone else who may look more "pro" than you now.

 

The changes were just recently done, and people havent given themselves much of an opportunity to adjuat.

 

But hey, im open minded about changes and nerfs, and dont jump to conclusions, so maybe its just me.

 

And Evolixe, its not that they ignored you, its that their numbers didnt support your findings. Without supportive data, changes arent likely to be made.

Just a quick point here about changes supposedly based on data. I don't disagree that they do have data that we are not privy to to the extent they are. The problem they [the combat 'team'] keep demonstrating that some of the changes they make are not based on data and to such a degree that it's been seen that they literally don't know how some specs actually operate. This was why I did come to a forum that was not about the class and spec I play because I was concerned that another mistake on the devs part can influence certain changes in other classes and specs. I did not post here to get my class looked at, but i did use the situation with Carnage Marauders as part of what I mentioned in my original post because it serves as a blantant example of a spec changes based entirely on a faulty premise. I'll try and be brief ,I know I tend to be long winded, I'm working on that

Carnage Marauders in 5.6 received a "utility nerf" that had nothing to do with any utility whatsoever, it was the only change on their list of utility changes that did not give a name of a utility that was being changed, how that unnamed 'utility' has been operating and how they want to change that 'utility' in 5.6. So, Carnage received a tremendous DPS nerf in a utility change patch even though the change had nothing whatsoever to do with any existing utility. This is in addition to the DPS nerf they received in 5.2. The stated purpose of the change to Carnage was that they wanted to remove clipping from the spec as it was "unintended". Okay, fine. Now anyone who plays the spec knows full well that clipping only got you one extra attack in the Berserk Ferocity window but did not need clipping to get three attacks into the non-berserk ferocity window [three second ferocity window, 3 instant attacks, doesn't take a rocket scientist to do that math], so when people raised the issue that they were losing a ton of DPS because the original carnage change wanted there to be only two attacks that could fit into any ferocity window [beserk or non-berserk]. Which would have removed three attacks from the specs burst window which is a huge dps loss [4/3 to 2/2]. It was pointed out by players that the clipping only gave us spec one extra attack in that window, so we shouldnt be losing two attacks when clipping only provided one extra attack so, there was no justification to make the Berserk Ferocity window lose to attacks due to clipping. It was also pointed out that the non beserk window did not need to clip at all to get three attacks in it.

So what did they do? They gave one attack back to the Beserk window but did not change the amount of attacks allowed to the non-beserk window despite the fact you never needed to clip to get three attacks in it in the first place. So, for no good reason, they still withheld an extra attack without any basis to their stated change to do away with clipping. I wanted to make people aware of it, not because I was trying to rally anyone for Carnage [wrong forum for that], but to be aware of the fact changes being made may in fact be based on the lack of understanding of specs by people who are the ones effecting such massive changes to classes. They have not said one word to Carnage players as to why they are still withholding an attack that could not have been based on clipping.

When I saw the DR change for Deception during stuns, I realized what a huge effect that would have on Assassin players. If BW could do what they did to Carnage it would be foolish to think that they couldn't/woundn't do it to other specs. The basis for the DR Change to deception I cannot imagine. When everyone is getting stunned every three seconds in PVP such a big change would hurt any spec. I want players of Deception to look into the reasoning so maybe they might be able to address this change and perhaps if justified have a change made to it. Carnage didn't get everything it was owed back, but it did get part it back, so maybe Deception could get at least get a partial improvement like carnage.

Deception and Carnage are both mDPS specs, they face many of the same sorts of perils despite that they operate in different manners. mDPS already has it hard enough in this meta in PVP with the never ending hoards of Mercs and Snipers and their incessant CCs and ridiculous dcds and healing as DPS specs, these mDPS specs did not deserve such big hits. Additionally, if I'm not mistaken, Assassins are also the only class that has to spend a utility point to use it's class buff [Assassin's Shelter], that's some BS too. So yeah, sometimes bytching is justified

Honestly, all this guy is saying is "Biowaer haz dataz, hail lewrd Biowaer".. Essentially, anyway.

No. I have seen them work up close, and not only do they not have a data basis for everything, they also very plainly don't always know how a spec even works in the real world in the first place.

Look, all due respect to the developers but this attitude of "Trust me, im a developer" has got to change.

If 90% of your feedback here is that a decision was bad, it's is more than likely a bad decision.

It's not about adjusting. This is entirely passive, it's not an adjustment it's just sitting there and taking it. Literally.

Assassins got shafted on something the class had no problems with, not from itself and not with other classes.

I say this not just as an Assassin, but as someone who takes in consideration the pov from all the other classes as well.

I honestly really just wish the people who made these class balance decisions would come here for a discussion for once. I would LOVE to have a word with them on a number of things.

Shadow's/Assassin's Shelter isn't a raid buff. It's a tiny 5% damage reduction within a 5-meter range and 2800 points of healing.

It's basically useless. It was useful back in 3.X when it had a 30 m range, did like a 5% healing buff and like a 5% DR buff, but it's useless now.

Shadow's/Assassin's Shelter isn't a raid buff. It's a tiny 5% damage reduction within a 5-meter range and 2800 points of healing.

 

It's basically useless. It was useful back in 3.X when it had a 30 m range, did like a 5% healing buff and like a 5% DR buff, but it's useless now.

Eh, its used in pve. But only because there is nothing better.

Eh, its used in pve. But only because there is nothing better.

Tank only though, and not even on every fight.

Tank only though, and not even on every fight.

I used it in Deception?

What else are you going to get, Insulation? On what is already the lowest DTPS DPS class?

Nah, I'll take that raidwide cooldown.

Just a quick point here about changes supposedly based on data. I don't disagree that they do have data that we are not privy to to the extent they are. The problem they [the combat 'team'] keep demonstrating that some of the changes they make are not based on data and to such a degree that it's been seen that they literally don't know how some specs actually operate. This was why I did come to a forum that was not about the class and spec I play because I was concerned that another mistake on the devs part can influence certain changes in other classes and specs. I did not post here to get my class looked at, but i did use the situation with Carnage Marauders as part of what I mentioned in my original post because it serves as a blantant example of a spec changes based entirely on a faulty premise. I'll try and be brief ,I know I tend to be long winded, I'm working on that

 

Carnage Marauders in 5.6 received a "utility nerf" that had nothing to do with any utility whatsoever, it was the only change on their list of utility changes that did not give a name of a utility that was being changed, how that unnamed 'utility' has been operating and how they want to change that 'utility' in 5.6. So, Carnage received a tremendous DPS nerf in a utility change patch even though the change had nothing whatsoever to do with any existing utility. This is in addition to the DPS nerf they received in 5.2. The stated purpose of the change to Carnage was that they wanted to remove clipping from the spec as it was "unintended". Okay, fine. Now anyone who plays the spec knows full well that clipping only got you one extra attack in the Berserk Ferocity window but did not need clipping to get three attacks into the non-berserk ferocity window [three second ferocity window, 3 instant attacks, doesn't take a rocket scientist to do that math], so when people raised the issue that they were losing a ton of DPS because the original carnage change wanted there to be only two attacks that could fit into any ferocity window [beserk or non-berserk]. Which would have removed three attacks from the specs burst window which is a huge dps loss [4/3 to 2/2]. It was pointed out by players that the clipping only gave us spec one extra attack in that window, so we shouldnt be losing two attacks when clipping only provided one extra attack so, there was no justification to make the Berserk Ferocity window lose to attacks due to clipping. It was also pointed out that the non beserk window did not need to clip at all to get three attacks in it.

 

So what did they do? They gave one attack back to the Beserk window but did not change the amount of attacks allowed to the non-beserk window despite the fact you never needed to clip to get three attacks in it in the first place. So, for no good reason, they still withheld an extra attack without any basis to their stated change to do away with clipping. I wanted to make people aware of it, not because I was trying to rally anyone for Carnage [wrong forum for that], but to be aware of the fact changes being made may in fact be based on the lack of understanding of specs by people who are the ones effecting such massive changes to classes. They have not said one word to Carnage players as to why they are still withholding an attack that could not have been based on clipping.

 

When I saw the DR change for Deception during stuns, I realized what a huge effect that would have on Assassin players. If BW could do what they did to Carnage it would be foolish to think that they couldn't/woundn't do it to other specs. The basis for the DR Change to deception I cannot imagine. When everyone is getting stunned every three seconds in PVP such a big change would hurt any spec. I want players of Deception to look into the reasoning so maybe they might be able to address this change and perhaps if justified have a change made to it. Carnage didn't get everything it was owed back, but it did get part it back, so maybe Deception could get at least get a partial improvement like carnage.

 

Deception and Carnage are both mDPS specs, they face many of the same sorts of perils despite that they operate in different manners. mDPS already has it hard enough in this meta in PVP with the never ending hoards of Mercs and Snipers and their incessant CCs and ridiculous dcds and healing as DPS specs, these mDPS specs did not deserve such big hits. Additionally, if I'm not mistaken, Assassins are also the only class that has to spend a utility point to use it's class buff [Assassin's Shelter], that's some BS too. So yeah, sometimes bytching is justified

I dont play a mara, and never have, so i will start off with that premise, but as I understand it, the clipping nerf is something that can be easily overlooked based on the way it is implemented. The players presented a repeatable, logical argument that supports that the change needed to be re-evaluated based on the idea that they were not 100% aware of the mechanics involved. This shows that they are able to swallow their pride and are willing to reevaluate as needes, if facts (read: data) are presented.

The argument the sin population is making is not based on repeatable data or facts. It is essentially "i die faster, the change isnt merited, and i told you before it was nerfed that this would be the result." Well duh, if defensives are nerfed, u will die faster.

The argument the sin population is making is not based on repeatable data or facts. It is essentially "i die faster, the change isnt merited, and i told you before it was nerfed that this would be the result." Well duh, if defensives are nerfed, u will die faster.

You can't possibly argue that a survivability nerf was warranted with the current meta on Marauders/Mercinaries and Snipers, seriously?

It was supposed to be a buff to hatred. But it shafted both DPS specs in every aspect.

You can't come to me with "Bioware has Data" when Marauders do literally everything better.

Surviving, dealing damage, staying on target. It doesn't work like that.

You can't possibly argue that a survivability nerf was warranted with the current meta on Marauders/Mercinaries and Snipers, seriously?

 

It was supposed to be a buff to hatred. But it shafted both DPS specs in every aspect.

For the average player? Not sure about you, but my sniper gets torn to shreds when i play him. It is certainly possible that i am a less than average sniper, and merc, too. Again, i think you are putting your personal experience and end game experiences firat, and not seeing it from the average player perspective.

For the average player? Not sure about you, but my sniper gets torn to shreds when i play him. It is certainly possible that i am a less than average sniper, and merc, too. Again, i think you are putting your personal experience and end game experiences firat, and not seeing it from the average player perspective.

I don't see how the average players perspective really matters. I could be an average sin doing 5k dps, does that mean the class needs buffs or does that mean i need to level the up?

The game should be a balanced system at the top end. People below it will learn if they are willing.

If they aren't willing to learn then their opinion of balance doesn't really matter to begin with tbh.

I don't see how the average players perspective really matters. I could be an average sin doing 5k dps, does that mean the class needs buffs or does that mean i need to level the up?

 

The game should be a balanced system at the top end. People below it will learn if they are willing.

If they aren't willing to learn then their opinion of balance doesn't really matter to begin with tbh.

In your opinion.

In the opinion of most business models, they balance for the majority of players, and the top tier players dont represent the bulk of the playerbase best. Its admirable that they have taken the time to master their class(es) by spending more time and studying the ins and outs, but that isnt what their average player does. You may not like it, or understand it, but thats how you hold most of the players for a longer amount of time. Hardcore subs will likely swap to another toon if success is what they seek. The average player doesnt have the time or desire to level/gear alts.

Agreed, Infiltration is absolutely terrible in PvP now, I don't even want to go into PvP anymore on my shadow. I'd rather take my Jugg or Sent, two classes I barely know how to play, than my shadow which I've played for years into PvP now. The chain stuns and gimp damage destroy the class and any role it used to have in PvP. Can't stealth cap nodes worth a crap, can't defend nodes worth a crap, can't burst down healers, etc. etc.

This is a bit over dramatic, yes deception got need, yes our survivability is atrocious, but our burst is still there and we can do some serious damage. We were never a facetank class, it's all about finesse, everytime I get complacent and facetank I end up dying and no stun DR is gonna save me. You can still sap cap just like before, you can guard nodes just like before, deception is still good in 1v1 especially since we have stealth opener where we can hard stun our opponent for 7 seconds. I really don't have a problem with the burst right now. With everything lined up you can do at least 70-80k on your burst (3 discharges, procced maul, procced ball lightning). On SF deception sins are usually top of the score board or in the top quarter now that might be due to player skill and domination but it still is a strong class.

Keep your head in the sand. Thats your decision. The perception is that you are unaware of how balance and business work, even if you are a good player.

As dumb as it may seems, I think Exi' has a way bigger knowledge of BW's team than any of us here, so I would advise you to watch what you're saying. You might be surprised.

Nobody is willing to take responsibility for needing to change their playstyle to adjust for the changes.

I'm also waiting for you to enlighten us then. In what way does our playstyle of Deception must be changed to be "working as intended" ? You seem to have a pretty set opinion on those changes, I'm waiting for you to show us how are they well made, clever or just good ? Y'know, with actual facts, numbers and examples.

But at this point, I'm pretty sure that you're just arguing because you want to, not because you have something to say. I'm almost tempted to say that you're pulling a Bioware to us, but I won't do the comparison.

The issue here is that you're just saying "BW is gud, they have numbers not you", but again they do not play the game at all (as I already said in another post I think, but you completely ignored that, strangely). Sure, Keith plays the game, he said it, and we've seen him play.

On the other hand we have Musco for example, a "GTN warrior", who didn't even had a clue to what class was a tank the last time we saw him play an uprising live.

Or we also have the balance guy, who made a whole bunch of "utility changes" or "improvement" but didn't saw some major bugs like the double stance, the curative agent H2F or the Sonic Wall removing Static Barriers, even though he's the guy who made all of those changes, who where spotted on day one by players.

Doesn't take a whole much to admit that you're wrong y'know, and that maybe BW don't really know what they're doing with class balance... But whatever, keep arguing if you like that so much. Don't be surprised if you get less and less peoples paying attention though.

As dumb as it may seems, I think Exi' has a way bigger knowledge of BW's team than any of us here, so I would advise you to watch what you're saying. You might be surprised.

I have read many of Exi's posts and while he does contribute insight that others may not have, he also has a perspective that does not mimic that of most players. Even with this current, ongoing "issue," he continues to bring a perspective that is not of the majority based on BW data, and isnt able to provide his own supportive data, but the content of his posts regularly show that he believes his words mean more than they do. If he knows the inner workings of BW so well, then why couldnt he have predicted or expected this change that was obviously data supported. Again, trying to get credibility without showing why he should be credible.

I'm also waiting for you to enlighten us then. In what way does our playstyle of Deception must be changed to be "working as intended" ? You seem to have a pretty set opinion on those changes, I'm waiting for you to show us how are they well made, clever or just good ? Y'know, with actual facts, numbers and examples.

But at this point, I'm pretty sure that you're just arguing because you want to, not because you have something to say. I'm almost tempted to say that you're pulling a Bioware to us, but I won't do the comparison.

You'reinterpretting my statements incorrectly. I am not trying to prove anything. Im simply saying that many of the haters are casually ignoring facts that have been given to them based on supportive data, and many of them are ignoring the personal dynamic that goes into gaming. Not everyone adjusts easily to change, that is a fact you can go research yoirself. And i would bet money that very few people are willing to put blame on themselves for being bad at something - most prople displace the blame away from themselves, and that is inherently a flaw in their way of thinking if they trulywish to "fix" the problem. Even yours (and others) opposition to my posts show that you arent willing to accept it as a possibility. And because of that, people wont ever reach their potential.

The issue here is that you're just saying "BW is gud, they have numbers not you", but again they do not play the game at all (as I already said in another post I think, but you completely ignored that, strangely). Sure, Keith plays the game, he said it, and we've seen him play.

On the other hand we have Musco for example, a "GTN warrior", who didn't even had a clue to what class was a tank the last time we saw him play an uprising live.

So you are going to use one moment as a basis for your argument? I see. So you are using your limited knowledge of his playstyle and skill level as a premise for him not knowing how to help develop thr game properly. Where is the flawed thinking in that?

I dont honestly expect to change your opinion or exis or many others, but people who are open-minded (even ones who dont like the changes) may develop a different perspective and understanding of the purpose of the changes by reading my posts. Or they can read all the hate and close their eyes.

Its simple honestly, the entire argument gets debunked by the fact that unless you know how to play Assassin very well, your survivability is already going to be below average.

(DPS) Assassins survival unlike Mercs or Marauders doesn't involve just standing there and taking it.

With or without cooldowns, If you try to apply that method to this class you are going to have a really bad time.

You get most of your staying alive from taking control of the fight.

And this CAN absolutely look OP to less experienced people.

"How TF is that Assassin soloing the 2/3/4 of us together?!"

Well if this feels familiar you probably aren't using your own cooldowns right in corralation to mine.

I will attempt to read you, stay one step ahead of you all the way.

If you want to beat a good Assassin.. the way is to (unpleasantly) SURPRISE him.

The problem with your argument is that somehow apparently average joes were too sturdy, yet... those guys are the least sturdy of all Assassins. And when I reflect on myself with a half a dozen years of experience all I can conclude is that Assassin Survivability was right around average given you play the class to its fullest potential.

All the while Mercs and Maras have little control compared to us, they just have to eat most of the crap they get thrown at them. Then again those classes are built to withstand that a lot better than us.

All in all, it doesn't matter what biowares numbers say.. they do not reflect upon reality.

Its simple honestly, the entire argument gets debunked by the fact that unless you know how to play Assassin very well, your survivability is already going to be below average.

 

(DPS) Assassins survival unlike Mercs or Marauders doesn't involve just standing there and taking it.

With or without cooldowns, If you try to apply that method to this class you are going to have a really bad time.

 

You get most of your staying alive from taking control of the fight.

And this CAN absolutely look OP to less experienced people.

"How TF is that Assassin soloing the 2/3/4 of us together?!"

Well if this feels familiar you probably aren't using your own cooldowns right in corralation to mine.

 

I will attempt to read you, stay one step ahead of you all the way.

If you want to beat a good Assassin.. the way is to (unpleasantly) SURPRISE him.

 

The problem with your argument is that somehow apparently average joes were too sturdy, yet... those guys are the least sturdy of all Assassins. And when I reflect on myself with a half a dozen years of experience all I can conclude is that Assassin Survivability was right around average given you play the class to its fullest potential.

 

All the while Mercs and Maras have little control compared to us, they just have to eat most of the crap they get thrown at them. Then again those classes are built to withstand that a lot better than us.

 

 

All in all, it doesn't matter what biowares numbers say.. they do not reflect upon reality.

The argument gets debunked by providing contrary evidence and data. Whether its data from a pool of average players or from end-game l33t players, data will have your opinion actually reviewed. Still havent seen any though. Personally, i think im an above average sin, and have seen our classes strengths and weakness in the past and now, through various changes. I can absolutely see both sides of the argument, BUT my opinion on things is no more or less valuable than yours if neither of us have data/evidence to provide to BW to support our findings.

The argument gets debunked by providing contrary evidence and data. Whether its data from a pool of average players or from end-game l33t players, data will have your opinion actually reviewed. Still havent seen any though. Personally, i think im an above average sin, and have seen our classes strengths and weakness in the past and now, through various changes. I can absolutely see both sides of the argument, BUT my opinion on things is no more or less valuable than yours if neither of us have data/evidence to provide to BW to support our findings.

Can you provide such contrary evidence and data? I can very easily show that the DTPS on a sin is higher than any other class in the game, even sorcs. Passively, sins take the most damage of all classes in PvP, and actively they have very few DCDs compared to any other class apart for PT DPS (and we all know how good they're doing...) It's very easy to show these things, too.

If you say "but BW have the data!" I'm going to call BS. That's nothing but an excuse, frankly. You haven't seen that data, I haven't seen it, and you can't point me to anyone who has actually seen it. Your whole argument hinges on some ethereal evidence you can't provide, and to me that seems disingenuous at best.

For the average player? Not sure about you, but my sniper gets torn to shreds when i play him. It is certainly possible that i am a less than average sniper, and merc, too. Again, i think you are putting your personal experience and end game experiences firat, and not seeing it from the average player perspective.

Sniper is literally. the hardest class to bring down. I have easier time bringing down tanks and mercs. When you're melee, Sniper owns for the simple fact that Snipers, if they give that melee proper attention, can't keep them off them almost indefinitely.. Now, I'm not saying that you can always give any one enemy all you're attention, clearly you can't, but, but even for those times when you do get some uptime on snipers, and if they're worth their salt that's not often and not for very long, but at those times, their defenses are so absurd as to make the amount of damage you do minor and given that they can heal that damage is of even less concern.

Sniper's, as far as melee go, are the most OP class in the game. It was, your experience playing a Sniper that was, ironically, a case of not seeing it from the average player perspective. A skilled sniper is not getting torn to sherds. Sniper>Merc.

I'm sorry to say this to you, but if you were getting ripped to shreds it's because you were doing something very very wrong.

Can you provide such contrary evidence and data? I can very easily show that the DTPS on a sin is higher than any other class in the game, even sorcs. Passively, sins take the most damage of all classes in PvP, and actively they have very few DCDs compared to any other class apart for PT DPS (and we all know how good they're doing...) It's very easy to show these things, too.

 

If you say "but BW have the data!" I'm going to call BS. That's nothing but an excuse, frankly. You haven't seen that data, I haven't seen it, and you can't point me to anyone who has actually seen it. Your whole argument hinges on some ethereal evidence you can't provide, and to me that seems disingenuous at best.

You say you have data regardings sins dtps - show it and make the argument. Show the method, and i will attempt to do the same test and see what data i come up with and we can compare.

Sniper is literally. the hardest class to bring down. I have easier time bringing down tanks and mercs. When you're melee, Sniper owns for the simple fact that Snipers, if they give that melee proper attention, can't keep them off them almost indefinitely.. Now, I'm not saying that you can always give any one enemy all you're attention, clearly you can't, but, but even for those times when you do get some uptime on snipers, and if they're worth their salt that's not often and not for very long, but at those times, their defenses are so absurd as to make the amount of damage you do minor and given that they can heal that damage is of even less concern.

 

Sniper's, as far as melee go, are the most OP class in the game. It was, your experience playing a Sniper that was, ironically, a case of not seeing it from the average player perspective. A skilled sniper is not getting torn to sherds. Sniper>Merc.

 

I'm sorry to say this to you, but if you were getting ripped to shreds it's because you were doing something very very wrong.

You proved my point for me.

Im not over on the sniper forums claiming that snipers suck and need a buff simply because my skills could be "other-than-average," and my personal experience and parses dont align with what Bioware has found from their data. Im not the only one either. I have seen other snipers torn to shreds too. It doesnt mean they fit the average mold either. Or MAYBE they/we do, and hence they werent nerfed as much.

Any of these people crying about it could be "other-than-average" too, so of course they will not have the same experience as an average player. And they may not truly understand why the nerfs happened. If you dont understand the entire context of the scenario, things can easily be misunderstood. Its like starting to watch a new movie halfway through and guessing as to what is going on.

And none of these "overperfomances" are ever seen in the main pve portion of the game.

I have had to respec almost every character almsot every time some PVP player screams out about how a class perfomes in what is less than 10% of the game.

When are we ever going to see a PVE favoring class change?

I didn't know the 10%(ish) of the game was THAT important.

I am getting rather tired of these constant class changes to cater to a minor minority at the expense of the overall majority.

And none of these "overperfomances" are ever seen in the main pve portion of the game.

 

I have had to respec almost every character almsot every time some PVP player screams out about how a class perfomes in what is less than 10% of the game.

 

When are we ever going to see a PVE favoring class change?

 

I didn't know the 10%(ish) of the game was THAT important.

 

I am getting rather tired of these constant class changes to cater to a minor minority at the expense of the overall majority.

Lol mate becayse you thought that this was asked by PvP players ? XD

Nobody asked for that, we got hit anyways. :')

And none of these "overperfomances" are ever seen in the main pve portion of the game.

 

I have had to respec almost every character almsot every time some PVP player screams out about how a class perfomes in what is less than 10% of the game.

 

When are we ever going to see a PVE favoring class change?

 

I didn't know the 10%(ish) of the game was THAT important.

 

I am getting rather tired of these constant class changes to cater to a minor minority at the expense of the overall majority.

I really have to agree with the above poster, it isn't fair to see that nerfs are always coming because of PVPer complaints. It's really not true.

At this point in the game, having played since 1.x I am now pretty much just a PVPer. But, prior to 5.0 I was a progression raider [HM/NiM] and spent most of the those years basically solely doing PVE. I just started to try out PVP really in the middle of 4.0. So I really am, even know, very sympathetic to PVEs needs. Even though I don't really PVE anymore, I always keep an eye out for both PVE and PVP. Raiding was my passion for years. I don't feel more predisposed to what's best for PVP over PVE.

I can tell you as a Carnage Marauder, the nerfs to Carnage in 5.4 and 5.6 were solely based on PVE. Carnage was not overperforming in PVP, but was in PVE. That was definately a nerf for PVE that had effects on PVP that weren't deserved.

Anyways, if you really want to get an idea about what nerfs you can lay at the feet of PVPers, it's very easy to find out, all you'd need to do is go into the PVP forum and look up posts calling for nerfs or class balance issues from the time 5.0 dropped [even before because they announced some changes prior] until 'class balancing" patches began [which of course only made the class balance worse]. If you took the time to really look into it you would find that the only nerfs pvpers were calling for a longggggggg time, were to mercs and snipers because of their OP DCDs. DPS nerfs, were never ever even talked about until BW started nerfing almost every spec in the game.

BW's "class balance" strategy is inherently flawed. They're the ones to blame wholely and totally. Consider that BW literally nerfed almost every spec in the game, you can't possibly lay the blame for that on either PVPers or PVEers because they both got a majority of specs nerfed. Lose/Lose. Plenty of blame to go around, but mostly it lies with BW. Anyone recall anyone calling for nerfs to Lightning Spec? They got nerfed too. - I don't recall anyone bytching about Assassin's stun DR, but that went for some unknown illogical reason.

This PVE/PVP animosity thingy is nothing new. PVPErs want to say that PVEers have no skill because everything is scripted [which is BS] and PVEers want to say PVP is a joke because it's just players bashing each other over the head in a mass war to the death with no real rotations or strategies that need to be skillfully kept to.

The best PVPer ever, if he had no real raiding experience would be the worst of the lot if they tried to do HM/NiMs, if it even got far enough not to just result in a raid wide wipe which it would in NiM. Conversely, the best Raider who had cleared 26/26 NiM, would get his *** ripped apart in about 5 seconds even in Regs repeatedly if he went into it with little PVP experience. They're separate beasts, both requiring skill but of a different sort from one another. Anyone who said differently I would call an idiot.

We play the same game, we love the same Star Wars, we want to excel in our favored play style. The pointing of fingers at one another is just two groups of kids flipping each other off because of which side of the street they live on.

I really have to agree with the above poster, it isn't fair to see that nerfs are always coming because of PVPer complaints. It's really not true.

 

At this point in the game, having played since 1.x I am now pretty much just a PVPer. But, prior to 5.0 I was a progression raider [HM/NiM] and spent most of the those years basically solely doing PVE. I just started to try out PVP really in the middle of 4.0. So I really am, even know, very sympathetic to PVEs needs. Even though I don't really PVE anymore, I always keep an eye out for both PVE and PVP. Raiding was my passion for years. I don't feel more predisposed to what's best for PVP over PVE.

 

I can tell you as a Carnage Marauder, the nerfs to Carnage in 5.4 and 5.6 were solely based on PVE. Carnage was not overperforming in PVP, but was in PVE. That was definately a nerf for PVE that had effects on PVP that weren't deserved.

 

Anyways, if you really want to get an idea about what nerfs you can lay at the feet of PVPers, it's very easy to find out, all you'd need to do is go into the PVP forum and look up posts calling for nerfs or class balance issues from the time 5.0 dropped [even before because they announced some changes prior] until 'class balancing" patches began [which of course only made the class balance worse]. If you took the time to really look into it you would find that the only nerfs pvpers were calling for a longggggggg time, were to mercs and snipers because of their OP DCDs. DPS nerfs, were never ever even talked about until BW started nerfing almost every spec in the game.

 

BW's "class balance" strategy is inherently flawed. They're the ones to blame wholely and totally. Consider that BW literally nerfed almost every spec in the game, you can't possibly lay the blame for that on either PVPers or PVEers because they both got a majority of specs nerfed. Lose/Lose. Plenty of blame to go around, but mostly it lies with BW. Anyone recall anyone calling for nerfs to Lightning Spec? They got nerfed too. - I don't recall anyone bytching about Assassin's stun DR, but that went for some unknown illogical reason.

 

This PVE/PVP animosity thingy is nothing new. PVPErs want to say that PVEers have no skill because everything is scripted [which is BS] and PVEers want to say PVP is a joke because it's just players bashing each other over the head in a mass war to the death with no real rotations or strategies that need to be skillfully kept to.

 

The best PVPer ever, if he had no real raiding experience would be the worst of the lot if they tried to do HM/NiMs, if it even got far enough not to just result in a raid wide wipe which it would in NiM. Conversely, the best Raider who had cleared 26/26 NiM, would get his *** ripped apart in about 5 seconds even in Regs repeatedly if he went into it with little PVP experience. They're separate beasts, both requiring skill but of a different sort from one another. Anyone who said differently I would call an idiot.

 

We play the same game, we love the same Star Wars, we want to excel in our favored play style. The pointing of fingers at one another is just two groups of kids flipping each other off because of which side of the street they live on.

You call it a nerf, I call it rebalancing and correction. The process is definitely credited to BW, at least the majority. However, what caused it to get to the point of needing a complete rebalancing was the fault of the BW AND the players. In the past, as most MMOs do, they continued to overbuff classes due to player suggestions and requests because their class was lacking equality with other classes or because they "needed" a buff. BW unfortunately went along with it to appease the public, and well, how did that public view turn out? Anyways, now that most classes were overbuffed and every aspect of balance was destroyed, they needed to perform this class rebalance. It was necessary for any balance going forward. Is it perfect? No. Is it ever gonna be perfect? Likely not either.