Camaalot Marauder Annihilation 2.4 PVP

You kinda just restated your opinion and didn't respond to the nuances of what I wrote..... We obviously have very different views on this, and neither is going to budge. Also, making a little fun out of your position isn't the same as insulting you. As far as potential watchman buffs go, TheCourier and I seem to agree, so you can probably just see what he's written. I do think the 2.5 buff will help it a little in PvP, but not much obviously.

It all boils down to your opinion that
and
At this point you start debating things that are mostly pure opinion. For instance, you seem to think of a whole AC as a distinct unit that should be able to respec based on the situation one is going into, whereas I think of each of the 24 specs as distinct units that should theoretically should be able to perform adequately in all of the major situations in the game. I might think it's a little silly to never play the other 2 specs for your AC simply because respecing is more convenient than switching/rolling classes, but I don't think one should be penalized for only playing one spec, or for failing to switch to the pre-assigned spec for this arena of play. I think the specs should be balanced as if they were separate classes, and that the thought that "it's ok that one of this ACs specs sucks for this, because they can just respec to that spec" should never ever cross a dev's mind. You make references to the idea that simply because this an mmo, that somehow makes such balance impossible, whereas I don't think that's the case at all. You keep strawman-ing the kind of balance I'm talking about as a sort of homogenization of the specs/classes, when it's really not it. I'm not saying that I want all the specs to merely have different rotations but have the same everything else. As far as lore goes, I'm a SW nerd and familiar with the saber forms etc.(even though I don't think it should have much influence on balance), and agree that watchman's concept should remain centered around sustained single-target damage, combat's burst single target, and focus's AOE. You think this necessarily means that each of these specs should be relegated to different arenas of play simply because they have different strengths and weaknesses, whereas I think that sustained single target, burst single target, and AOE can all theoretically be valuable in most situations, except maybe AOE in duels (then again, smash isn't that bad for dueling anyway.....). Currently, the AOE spec dominates ranked play, but there is no intuitive reason why this has to be the case.

Think about the implications of what you're saying. If your thought is that an AC's specs are only different enough from each other if they are better/worse than each other when it comes to different game modes, then by logical extension, the same concept would apply to classes. "Each class has different roles, and each performs better in certain game modes than others". Please tell me you think the previous sentence sounded completely idiotic.

I've crunched the math personally and have come to the same conclusion that crit rating is pretty bad. Sure the DR is bad, but even starting from 0 rating it definitely doesn't give you as much as it should. Maybe the 0.9 in the formula % crit chance=30(1-(1-(0.01/0.3))^((x/55)/0.9)) should be changed to like 0.7 or something. Here's the graph so you can see its changes when you alter that last number.

When it comes to watchman specifically, from a mathematically perspective, 0 crit rating gives very slightly higher dps than having a single crit mod. Factoring in the non-zen healing and the 2 talents that refund focus when critting, you can justify getting up to perhaps even 200 crit rating. However, running no crit certainly doesn't gimp you whatsoever. I will say that the +10% damage vs +4% damage numbers that TheCourier referenced do not quite seem accurate to me.

That's only to access the dispatch/vicious throw crit chance talent, and just for PvE I think.

This coming from the person who resorted to insults (call it what you want) rather than address the points of my own statement? Humorous. You never responded when I asked what was it you think watchman/anni needs. All of your statements continue to suggst that you're looking for all specs to be 100% equal. That will and can never happen, because the moment it does this ceases to be an mmorpg.

If you're in agreement with thecourier's suggestions, then I'll ask you what I did to him: Why do those need to be buffed? Watchman is already on the money when it comes to survivability. Increasing our healing isn't necessary, and we don't need dot protection since they're constantly proccing. Also how did your arguments over watchman shift from what you consider to be "poor damage" to poor survivability? This is the best spec for survivability for dual wielders.

My opinion is that watchman is fine as is, the way balance works out in an mmo however isn't my opinion, but simply the way things aren. You're going to be setting yourself up for disappointment if you think they will make all specs equally identical. Don't hold your breath on it.

And while I will openly admit what is my opinion, you on the other hand are humorously touting your opinion as proven fact, which is most certainly is not. No one is penalized for playing a certain spec. It just so happens that certain specs are more suited to certain situations. This isn't penalization, but optimal choices in a given setting.

You're also putting words in my mouth. I never claimed balance to be impossible, if bioware wanted to make all classes equal and purely cosmetic as you're suggesting they could easily do that. Thing is, that isn't how MMOS work. Thats the fundamental issue that you don't seem to be grasping. People play different roles. If you want a game where everyone is 100% equal, then I would suggest something akin to a shooter. Perhaps MMOs aren't for you.

It's not as much me thinking the different forms should be relegated to different scenarios as much as it being what they're intended to do. I didn't write the saber forms, neither did Bioware. They just happened to implement it according to how it was designed, and that seems to be whats upsetting you. I wouldn't say focus/rage dominates competitive play either, as carnage/combat is right up there with them, if not slightly above. There are just fewer who play it due to rage/focus specs incredibly easy rotation, whereas the center tree is unpredictable due to multiple procs, which is apparently difficult for some people. Carnage brings better burst and greater utility. Rage may have aoe burst, but its sustained is horrible, you're left with barely anything to follow up on. It may be good for putting group pressure on the opfors healers, but a good carnage marauder can decimate any target with relative ease, including a guarded healer. They not only have incredible burst, but outstanding sustained damage.

As for your closing line, basically I can use your line of thinking and suggest that all classes should be able to tank and heal.


As I said, you can rely on math, I'll rely on results. I test my gear setup based on performance in pvp: How quickly I'm able to dispatch a target, and how long I'm able to survive. I used to run a no crit gear setup, and when comparing it to a moderate amount of crit, I found it was better with crit. I not only noticed a dps gain, but also increase in the amount of heals I'm able to pump out, both of which are critical for watchman. I'm perplexed as to how people can suggest 0 crit is BIS for dual wielders, but most notably for watchman/anni.

I will agree with one thing you said above though, and that is that neither of us will be conceding on our viewpoints. So rather than continue to go around in circles, perhaps we can just agree to disagree? I'm content with the way pvp is balanced right now. I'm sorry that you don't feel watchman performs up to your liking, but perhaps they will address it seeing as there are few of us who hold the belief that the spec is fine as is. As I said before I wouldn't turn down a buff, I just don't see the need for it.

Eh, I still see it as a waste of points. But to each is own.

so....are you saying the math he provided is wrong? i'm honestly confused here, that would be like somebody saying "get 600 alacrity rating on a commando to shoot grav rounds much faster, the math says i'm wrong however i perceive that i'm right"

you might possibly be correct in that more crit is better then none, the fact remains that watchmen/annihilation is far worse in endgame pvp content then that of focus or combat, sure in all honesty it is great for duels, so what.

are you honestly saying a good dueling spec but crappy at 4v4 or 8v8 makes it viable for 4v4 or 8v8?

its not liek you can respec during warzones depending on your situation, so can you honestly say that at equal skill level, a watchmen sent is better then a focus spec overall for warzones and arenas?

obviously this is what you are saying, and thats fine, everybody is allowed to have their own opinion, even if it is wrong, but please realize that it is faulty arguments such as yours which might just contribute to bioware's lack of action on the spec.

In essence yes, based on my own testing 0 crit is not superior. Not sure what you're trying to prove with your analogy as alacrity does in fact speed up channel times, so it is right. Problem is you have to find the right balance between main stat/power and crit rating. If you think you're going to be doing more damage with 0 crit rating you're only deluding yourself.

Watchman isn't only great at duels, I gave examples of situations that it would be the most optimal in group pvp. Just because it isn't optimal in 4v4s or 8v8s where rng isn't a factor with team and class compositions doesn't mean its a weak spec. I said plenty of times that I use it in solo ranked all the time and come out with the best performance in comparison with those who use "superior" specs. I also use it n the regs, which correct me if I'm wrong, includes 4v4s and 8v8s.

Why don't you elaborate on what makes the spec "crappy" in your opinion rather than just leaving it at that?

You're putting words in my mouth. ( a common trend among people who feel they cannot adequately respond to an argument) I never once said watchman was overall for pvp. Maybe you should actually read what I wrote rather than blindly jumping into the conversation and offering a poorly constructed argument. If I would have to say a spec is better overall, it'd be Carnage due to the utility and burst combo. But to be honest, neither really is, as they are all suited for different purposes, and are optimal in certain warzone environments.

Obviously it is evident you didn't read a single word I said, so I would encourage you to do so before attempting to educate me on "faulty arguments", something you may be familiar with but not in the way you think. You act as if your opinion is fact, and yet unlike the people I've been discussing this with thus far, you haven't even offered a shred of a convincing argument to back up your claim, other than your personal feelings towards the spec. Read up what I said, you might also wan to educate yourself on the saber forms so you can see why what you're saying is wrong, not I. The way the sentinel/marauder specs are situated currently is supported by the lore, and obviously by Bioware. You have your opinion of what you want it to be, and thats fine. But remember at the the end of the day this is Star Wars, and its also an mmo.

Using 850 bonus damage as a basis for bonus damage, +92 bonus damage is 10.8235% more damage. Assuming a crit multiplier of 77%, +5% crit chance would be 3.85% extra damage, but annihilation spec has +30% crit damage for burns, so since burns are around 33% of annihilation spec's damage, (0.33*0.05*1.07) + (0.67*0.05*0.77) would be the damage increase of + 5% crit chance, which is 4.345% extra damage.

You can say that the world is a cube all day long, and be wrong. Mathematically, 0 crit rating is optimal for annihilation spec. If you want to argue that, then you have no place talking on the forums about annihilation spec. If something is mathematically proven, then the something is proven. 0-100 crit rating for annihilation spec is proven.

Its proven why? Because you say its proven? I hope you never have to debate someone to save your life because you're doing a poor job here. I do find it amusing that you sincerely think you're right, and I'm wrong. You couldn't be further from the truth.

You have NEVER said ANY evidence that you are right. All you do is say that you are right. You have not shown any proof at all that more than 100 crit rating works well for annihilation spec.

In case you do not know what proof is, go look at a dictionary.

I recommend people disregard Politeassassin's opinion about annihilation spec, since he will not admit that mathematical proof is proof.