Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Bloodthirst needs a Global Cooldown


oofalong's Avatar


oofalong
05.16.2013 , 02:47 PM | #111
Quote: Originally Posted by Grimsblood View Post
............So you want to take a fight that is tailor made for a specific class, state is as an arguing point for stacking said class and then use it to justify a change to the class? Operator IX favors burst over sustained classes, nerf (change) please...........Writhing Horror and Dash'roode favor AoE classes, nerf (change) those classes............................
You jumped like 20 steps down the road, and unfortunately, the wrong road.

Right now, I am saying that at any given stat/gear level Marauders/Sentinels will have the easiest time defeating 8m HM Golden Fury and HM Styrak based on the Torparse leaderboards. These two fights currently have the tightest enrage timers as well. Do you agree with this and just this? (Don't jump ahead again.)

BTW, go back and re-read my post on page 1 my position is that utility and mixed ACs in a raid are good. However, I do think the argument The_Rye_Guy and Korse made is accurate. And, I think you and LostPenguins didn't fully understand it so I am just trying to explain it another way.
The Shadowlands
Read my Annihilation | Watchman Compendium & use my model to figure out how to best gear your toon.
Read my Theorycrafting Articles on Dulfy.net
Confused by all of the Proc Relics? Check out my new and improved relic explanation.
See the best of the best on the Operations Leaderboards

Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
You are correct Oofalong.

Grimsblood's Avatar


Grimsblood
05.16.2013 , 03:11 PM | #112
Quote: Originally Posted by oofalong View Post
You jumped like 20 steps down the road, and unfortunately, the wrong road.

Right now, I am saying that at any given stat/gear level Marauders/Sentinels will have the easiest time defeating 8m HM Golden Fury and HM Styrak based on the Torparse leaderboards. These two fights currently have the tightest enrage timers as well. Do you agree with this and just this? (Don't jump ahead again.)

BTW, go back and re-read my post on page 1 my position is that utility and mixed ACs in a raid are good. However, I do think the argument The_Rye_Guy and Korse made is accurate. And, I think you and LostPenguins didn't fully understand it so I am just trying to explain it another way.
Using the leaders boards to support the argument that maras will have the easiest time defeating the two tightest enrage timers we have right now is fine. However, using it to justify them being one of the higher dps class and then to further use it to facilitate a change to one of the class's utility abilities to "balance" them is not ok. It is not ok because the class is not performing as well in other fights where different AC's utilities and/or damage is superior. If marauders were consistently ahead in EVERY instance and not only ahead based off of skill tree but their utility buffs, THEN and only then your argument would hold merit. Otherwise, we find ourselves going down that road I jumped 20 steps ahead on. Have I missed some fundamental point that greatly changes your purpose or point?
DPS is science. Healing is art. Tanking is strategy.
Hippolytà - Level 50 Sentinel - Grimsblood - Level 55 Sage
Saphyria - Level 55 Sniper - Fenrîr - Level 55 Gunslinger

Lostpenguins's Avatar


Lostpenguins
05.16.2013 , 03:43 PM | #113
Quote: Originally Posted by oofalong View Post
You jumped like 20 steps down the road, and unfortunately, the wrong road.

Right now, I am saying that at any given stat/gear level Marauders/Sentinels will have the easiest time defeating 8m HM Golden Fury and HM Styrak based on the Torparse leaderboards. These two fights currently have the tightest enrage timers as well. Do you agree with this and just this? (Don't jump ahead again.)

BTW, go back and re-read my post on page 1 my position is that utility and mixed ACs in a raid are good. However, I do think the argument The_Rye_Guy and Korse made is accurate. And, I think you and LostPenguins didn't fully understand it so I am just trying to explain it another way.
Grimsblood and I are saying the same thing. You're picking two fights that are tightest enrage to base your argument that Marauders have superior dps w/out looking at other factors in the fight. Sure, they are the best on those two fights, which, coincidentally, have the tightest two enrage mechanics. The only problem is, you're making a jump there as well.

You cannot say that the only fights that have merits are these two because they are dps checks. As I stated, if there was a boss that had significant melee-ranged downtime, but also was a dps check, wouldn't that have made your criteria simply on the "dps check" requirement and then you'd see melee classes taking a dive, thus negating the validity of your argument?

Essentially, you're sort of cherry-picking the 2 patchwerk fights and using that as evidence while Grimsblood has given links to essentially all the bosses that contradicts what you're saying. Forget "tighest dps checks" and really say "patchwerk style" for the 2 bosses and you'd be way more accurate. You're saying there's correlation between Marauder Top DPS and Tightest DPS Check, but that's really coincidence. It's correlation for Marauder Top DPS and Pathwerk Sytle Fight.

And we're not arguing that Marauders aren't the top dps sometimes, but Korse and Rye were saying that, on the whole, Marauders do the best dps, which Grimsblood shot down with evidence. Then, you cherry-picked two specific fights and trying to use a coincidental trait (tighest dps check) as giving validity to your argument. And Grim and I are saying that isn't a valid argument.

oofalong's Avatar


oofalong
05.16.2013 , 03:57 PM | #114
Quote: Originally Posted by Grimsblood View Post
Using the leaders boards to support the argument that maras will have the easiest time defeating the two tightest enrage timers we have right now is fine.
I believe The_Rye_Guy and Korse were arguing that every other fight is immaterial as they are too easy so only these fights should be considered when evaluating group composition. If you subscribe to this logic, you would also agree that 4 Marauders/Sentinels are best.

The OP suggested that there was something wrong with this situation - stacking 4 Marauders/Sentinels should not have the easiest time on the hardest fights currently in the game - and they proposed a change to Bloodthirst/Inspiration to alter the situation. As The_Rye_Guy pointed out this would only impact groups that were stacking Marauders/Sentinels. He was suggesting better balance by reducing the upside of stacking multiple Marauders. This wouldn't impact the DPS of a Marauder in isolation, but it would reduce the benefit of stacking more than 1 assuming there was comparable DPS available from a different AC.

Unfortunately, the whole thread spiraled out of control shortly afterwards, and this point got lost. I am just trying to bring civility and agreement one post at a time, and recenter the discussion on this point:

After reading the back-and-forth, I think it is clear that stacking Marauders helps on the hardest fights currently in the game. And, should something be done to encourage the use of other classes on these hard fights? Rather than changing Bloodthirst, I would rather see some new fight mechanics in Nightmare Mode which would increase the benefits of other ACs.

Quote: Originally Posted by Grimsblood View Post
However, using it to justify them being one of the higher dps class and then to further use it to facilitate a change to one of the class's utility abilities to "balance" them is not ok. It is not ok because the class is not performing as well in other fights where different AC's utilities and/or damage is superior.
This thread started with a proposal to nerf the stacking of Marauders, but this issue quickly became the crux of the debate and disagreement. You think the other fights show that Marauders in isolation or in a group do not need changing because other ACs perform better on some boss fights. The opposing view is that those other boss fights are irrelevant, too easy, and don't matter.

Feel free to debate this all you want, but this issue is not what the thread started as.
The Shadowlands
Read my Annihilation | Watchman Compendium & use my model to figure out how to best gear your toon.
Read my Theorycrafting Articles on Dulfy.net
Confused by all of the Proc Relics? Check out my new and improved relic explanation.
See the best of the best on the Operations Leaderboards

Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
You are correct Oofalong.

Thundergulch's Avatar


Thundergulch
05.16.2013 , 04:03 PM | #115
Quote: Originally Posted by oofalong View Post
If you subscribe to this logic, you would also agree that 4 Marauders/Sentinels are best.
But really.... who cares? Why should it matter if some groups/guilds use 4 of the same class to run an OP?
I'm sure we could find an argument that 4 Orbital Strikes need to be "fixed" because someone is stacking that class on a fight or a run.

Grimsblood's Avatar


Grimsblood
05.16.2013 , 04:06 PM | #116
The core of the logic is Marauders Perform Best on Fights A and B, therefor stacking Marauders on Fights A and B is the most ideal method to downing the fight. However, what that chain does not account for is fights C through O where they (Marauders) are not the best. It is pure coincidence that fights A and B are the tougher (enrage) fights in the game. Lostpenguins did a fine job of outlining this just above your post.

I would encourage the application of a 4 Marauder dps team to ALL content past (During the proper gear and progression level) and present to give more perspective on how Bloodlust and Inspiration effected the groups ability to down content (Please utilize evidence from "progression guilds).
DPS is science. Healing is art. Tanking is strategy.
Hippolytà - Level 50 Sentinel - Grimsblood - Level 55 Sage
Saphyria - Level 55 Sniper - Fenrîr - Level 55 Gunslinger

JDotter's Avatar


JDotter
05.16.2013 , 04:19 PM | #117
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthBuckets View Post
In my opinion, Bloodthirst could use some re-balancing / re-structuring.

In addition to his or her own damage and assuming all DPS being equal, a single Marauder contributes additional damage to the raid due to Bloodthirst (not counting the significant added benefits of controlling it for burn phases / CD stacking). This damage is attributed to the Marauder's groupmates in parses, but it is really contributed by the Marauder. If DPS contribution is the only balancing factor, then Marauders should be parsing a certain % behind the other classes, equal to the DPS that Bloodthirst provided. If there is a DPS balance issue in the Marauder's favor, Bloodthirst accentuates the discrepancy by at least that %.

Multiple Marauders tripping over each others' Fury could be a problem if you hyperbolically bring ONLY Marauders, but there is no appreciable downside to bringing at least one Marauder per 4 players. At the very least, I think 2 Marauders per 4-man group would be totally viable.

I'm not sold that a "Hybrid tax" is important at all in PVE. With the exception of the value of using 2 vs 3 tanks on some fights in 16man, I don't see top tier players switching all that much mid-run (especially with the way gear acquisition is now). If role-hopping is required, they need gear (especially the DPS -> tank swap). On top of that, this game is extremely alt friendly. Most off-spec gear collected can be transferred to alts via Legacy gear. With the exception of acquired Ear/Implants/Relic (and some base Armorings/Barrels for off-hands), a character with an alt with a different role offers the exact same "hybrid" utility that a character capable of respeccing between encounters does. PVP is a different matter, as being able to respec mid-warzone to a different role in order to counter the enemy team or map is of valid usefulness.

In combat, in non-trivial PVE encounters, if a DPS Sorc is off-healing or a Pyro is off-tanking adds (which doesn't really happen - DPS taunting the boss in PVE isn't really a valid tactic / help in most cases), I would consider that utility. I would say that a "Utility Tax" should definitely be factored into PVE class balance, but out-of-combat options and things that do not work during non-trivial PVE encounters should not.

The important part of discussing Bloodthirst are the following:

1. Is Bloodthirst mandatory (or greatly beneficial with no downsides)?
(I understand that the word "Mandatory" can be subjective here - the current content is all easy and a buff is only really appreciated if an encounter's tuning pushes up against the efficacy of a given group).

If so, a single role / single class out of 8 bringing it is a comp problem that affects class balance, operations comp, and representation in progression.

On top of that, multiple Bloodthirsts can be used in a given group sequentially to added benefit. There really aren't many buffs/debuffs left like that other than Sniper's shield, but a defensive buff is only valuable if you really need it, whereas damage output is always desirable.

If fights get tuned in nightmare to require DPS in BIS firing on all cylinders to make Enrage, the additional DPS that Marauders bring via Bloodlust can and will make a difference, skewing group comp. 16man NM tanks pre-nerf is probably the best example of this.

2. Do Marauders do appropriately tuned damage and provide appropriate utility relative to other classes in light of the great DPS contribution that Bloodthirst provides?

If Marauders are on top of the charts *and* they boost the other DPS via Bloodthirst *and* the other DPS classes don't have additional utility / contributing factors that make them situationally preferable over Marauders, then there is a PVE class balance issue.

I don't think Bloodthirst needs to be removed or trivialized. I think it is a worthwhile mechanic and a good "macro" gameplay element for a group attempting an Operation. However, its current incarnation makes Marauder stacking a net gain over other comps with no apparent downsides. My suggestions would be the following:
* Give a similar effect to at least one other class so that Marauders are not "required" in every Operation.
* Make it a raid wide buff.
* Put a debuff on the raid after use to avoid stacking multiple Bloodthirsts in a given time period.
* If Marauders do an appreciably lower amount of damage relative to other classes from the loss of a scalable Bloodthirst, give them a minor buff to compensate.

I also don't think Marauders need to be nerfed unless hard data proves a discrepancy, although re-structuring Bloodthirst would be seen as a nerf by many. I don't have metrics other than parses and my individual group, but *if* there is a discrepancy in damage output, I would like to see additional utility/toys given to the specs without them, or their base DPS brought up to compensate for their lack of things like Bloodthirst. In evaluating usefulness of classes in PVE, there is a pecking order right now for most people I've spoken to:
1. Snipers and Marauders on top
2. Other Ranged - Sorc and Merc - decent damage, some fights prefer ranged (although Darvannis and Asation don't really have many issues)
3. Powertech - decent damage, still represented because they were single-target top dogs pre-2.0, no real utility in PVE
4. Leftovers - DPS Jugg, DPS Op, DPS Sin - underrepresented and no significant utility in PVE

That being said, balance is "close enough" to be pretty good in PVE right now, especially since we are without a legitimate progression tier until they implement Nightmare TFB.

In my opinion, Bloodthirst could use some tweaks though.

This noob has sorcs on par with merc. Get him out *** this **** sorc goes affliction spam dps for days then go with force lighting .

You better not see me on fleet I'll fight you

Korse's Avatar


Korse
05.16.2013 , 04:27 PM | #118
Quote: Originally Posted by Lostpenguins View Post
And we're not arguing that Marauders aren't the top dps sometimes, but Korse and Rye were saying that, on the whole, Marauders do the best dps, which Grimsblood shot down with evidence. Then, you cherry-picked two specific fights and trying to use a coincidental trait (tighest dps check) as giving validity to your argument. And Grim and I are saying that isn't a valid argument.
That's not what I said at all. I said that on a pure dps comparison, I'm fine with all of the classes. However the personal and raid utility abilties in relation to pve are not balanced. Marauders easily have the most utility of any class in the game. One particular ability, Bloodthirst, allows you to bring multiple Marauders without diminishing returns on their raid utility. Because of this enhanced raid utility and its ability to be chained, other melee classes become less desirable because they lack comparable raid utility. If everything else is equal (player, gear, damage), Marauders are the dominant choice.
Characters
Spoiler

Grimsblood's Avatar


Grimsblood
05.16.2013 , 04:51 PM | #119
Quote: Originally Posted by Korse View Post
That's not what I said at all. I said that on a pure dps comparison, I'm fine with all of the classes. However the personal and raid utility abilties in relation to pve are not balanced. Marauders easily have the most utility of any class in the game. One particular ability, Bloodthirst, allows you to bring multiple Marauders without diminishing returns on their raid utility. Because of this enhanced raid utility and its ability to be chained, other melee classes become less desirable because they lack comparable raid utility. If everything else is equal (player, gear, damage), Marauders are the dominant choice.
What happens when the tanks gear and CD's create a deficiency where they keep dying? Do you bring a raid full of Snipers for their 20% damage reduction? Do you bring Merc healers for their Supercharge Cells with the 5% damage reduction on Kolto Bomb (I could be wrong in terminology and exact numbers for the merc, but I know the ability is there)? Do you bring the Marauder for: A) 10% increased defense chance (Predation, the lesser known side) B) Bloodlust for healers to heal more? What about an Assassin Tank for their Heal Increase puddle?

The ONLY reason Bloodthirst is being accused as a problem now is because 2 isolated fights favor it vs other utility abilities. I can't wait for Writhing Horror to be a dps check and to see forum posts pop up about any AoE class being OP and required to down NiM TFB........
DPS is science. Healing is art. Tanking is strategy.
Hippolytà - Level 50 Sentinel - Grimsblood - Level 55 Sage
Saphyria - Level 55 Sniper - Fenrîr - Level 55 Gunslinger

Ifrit's Avatar


Ifrit
05.16.2013 , 08:06 PM | #120
Quote: Originally Posted by Grimsblood View Post
What happens when the tanks gear and CD's create a deficiency where they keep dying? Do you bring a raid full of Snipers for their 20% damage reduction? Do you bring Merc healers for their Supercharge Cells with the 5% damage reduction on Kolto Bomb (I could be wrong in terminology and exact numbers for the merc, but I know the ability is there)? Do you bring the Marauder for: A) 10% increased defense chance (Predation, the lesser known side) B) Bloodlust for healers to heal more? What about an Assassin Tank for their Heal Increase puddle?

The ONLY reason Bloodthirst is being accused as a problem now is because 2 isolated fights favor it vs other utility abilities. I can't wait for Writhing Horror to be a dps check and to see forum posts pop up about any AoE class being OP and required to down NiM TFB........
You are partially correct . The root of the real problem is very poor operation design. EC was designed much better in comparison to SnV and TFB. EC did a better job of rewarding a mixed group composition of ranged and melee, single target and aoe dmg. HM SnV and TFB are currently designed so that melee is just as good as ranged dps and there is little need for aoe dps. There is no reason for HM SnV and TFB to take any other class than the pure raw best dps class (assuming same gear/skill of course). Mara is at least very competitive for being at the near the top of the dps charts. In addition, it can boost the entire group's dps with no downside. In addition, a group can stack 4 mara's with no real downside and a significant dps boost. There is no reason in the current HM SnV and TFB to take anything else. The devs could redesign the fights completely to fix the issue, or they could add global cooldown to maras. It is highly unlikely they would actually redesign the operations. The alternative is pretty simple, put bloodthirst on a global cooldown. The cooldown could even be set to allow for 1-2 maras to still be 100% effective and only discourage stacking 3-4 maras.