Jump to content

Bloodthirst needs a Global Cooldown


Recommended Posts

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 man speaks good sense. I do think some of the other melee classes should be given some sort of similar utility. Maybe give the Shadow DPS classes a localized damage buff while phase walk is up, somewhat similar to how shadow shelter works now. This would incentivize bringing shadows, and since the ability has other utility and whatnot in PVP would not break them there. Putting a similar sort of totem buff (not to stack with shadows) for vanguards would also be useful. Theoretically then you could have one buff ranged, one buff melee, and then you have a reason to bring both. It's not the damage per se where the other melee classes are so far behind. From a DPS perspective I do feel all the classes are pretty close and equally viable for the most part, but the utility issue is valid, especially for melee DPS (ranged DPS is often a healing utility all its own).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In order to draw valid conclusions using statistics, I think you need good data. I don't think you can call uploaded logs from Torparse good data as it does not tell the entire story of a raid or boss kill. Further, you can not ensure it wasn't doctored. And, you don't have every raid member's data to analyze. Still, I believe it is directionally accurate. And directionally, it indicates that Marauders/Sentinels are the best melee DPS, and maybe the best DPS.

 

I come to this conclusion by examining the fights where enrage time is more challenging such as 8m HM Golden Fury and HM Dread Stryak. I think it makes sense to examine these fights only to figure out what the best DPS classes are because you need the best DPS in these fights. (Thinking back to my first paragraph, I would not say this conclusive, but you were the one who suggested that DPS rankings from boss fights was the appropriate measure.)

 

OK, so now we have established that Marauders/Sentinels offer the best damage in the fights where enrage is a real issue. How do they compare where enrage is not as tight? Using the same measurement, we see that they are not necessarily the best DPS option in these fights. But, the question is are the liability? The have sufficient defensive abilities and other utility such as Predation/Transcendence. Clearly they do not offer healing capabilities or taunts, but in theory your DPS should never have to do this even if it makes some fights/phases easier. The answer is no Marauders/Sentinels are not a liability in these other fights.

 

Given all of this, doesn't it make sense to stack four Marauders/Sentinels if your objective is to have the easiest time killing the hardest bosses?

 

You are still flawed. You are only examining the tightest enrage timer fights. I highly doubt any group doing these fights has their superuberpowered Marauders on the bench for the first 6 fights of the instance and then bring them out on the last one. Why would you do that? Not to mention the gearing issue of multiple toons (Get all the good UW pieces before final boss --> swap to undergeared Marauder = Win?!......)

 

Look at Dingy's log, he is the "Top Marauder" for Styrak on 8 man (Not trying to call him out or anything)....he would be a good example of why Maras should have Bloodthirst redesigned, right? Hmmm, Why doesn't he rank in the top 5 or 10 in the rest of the fights? Logic would dictate since he is sooo OP in the "tightest enrage" in the game that he should be doing top damage in the "Easy" fights, no?

 

Incidentally, you realize the vast majority of the logs you cited had their damage boosted by one if not two Bloodthirst/Inspiration during those fights?

 

Sure, no complain here. That does not disprove or prove anything. The OP was complaining about how stacking 4 Bloodthirsts in a single group creates an over-powered situation. In the examples I was given, there were not 4 Bloodthirsts.

 

Now if you guys WANT to argue OP, your "proper" argument SHOULD be:

 

Bloodthirst does too much damage.

It forces 16 man ops groups to invite 9 Marauders and 1 Sniper for dps.

Once the first Bloodthirst is done, the Marauder is rotated out of the group with the sniper.

A new Marauder is rotated in to provide buff.

This gives the Sniper more then 2 minutes of a 15 % damage increase.

If said sniper is running Engineering on a boss with a large hit box, he will be doing OP dps.

Please readjust this ability.

 

 

I think we can all agree that this is a unique case that falls on the outside of the data sets for groups. Looking at class balance as a whole, it is not any better to choose Marauders as the only mdps class. (Hell on our ALT imp side runs we have 3 Snipers and 1 Operative and we meet the dps check for Styrak.................we don't need no Marauder, or sorc for that matter.....but that is another story)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are still flawed....

How can I still be flawed - that was my first post since page #1? :)

 

I am absolutely only examining the fights with the tightest enrage timers intentionally. Again, I believe the goal is to clear ALL of the content. Your ability to clear all of the fights hinges on your ability to defeat the hardest bosses, right? Thus, these represent the fights where maximum DPS is most important. In every one of these fights, the suggestion has been made that 4 Marauders/Sentinels offer the best/easiest chance of defeating the boss. And, the Top 10 on Torparse indicates that Marauders/Sentinels are best at these fights.

 

Thus, I posed the question if 4 Marauders/Sentinels would be a liability in the other boss fights where enrage was not as tight. I believe I outlined reasons why they are not a liability. And, I did concede that other classes will out DPS them. As you point out gearing other DPS classes is inefficient. Thus, as long as 4 Marauders/Sentinels are not a liability in the other boss fights you are best served by employing them to make defeating the hardest or tightest enrage bosses easier.

 

To be clear, I am not proposing any change to Bloodthirst/Inspiration. But I do feel that The_Rye_Guy and Korse are accurate that stacking 4 Marauders/Sentinels is best. Individually, they appear to do the best damage on the hardest fights. And, stacking 4 of them provides even greater damage output through successive uses of Bloodthirst/Inspiration. Further, they provide enough damage and utility to clear the rest of the bosses with relative ease. (Admittedly, some of the other bosses could be even easier with other classes.)

 

In summary, Marauders/Sentinels perform best on the hardest bosses, and perform at a sufficient level to kill the other bosses. Thus, the easiest way to defeat the hardest bosses and the entire raid will be with 4 Marauders/Sentinels. If you disagree with the argument/logic can you explain why?

 

Note: I am not saying that other DPS can not defeat the hardest bosses. And, this is a separate argument/debate from whether Bloodthirst/Inspiration is over-powered.

Edited by oofalong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order to draw valid conclusions using statistics, I think you need good data. I don't think you can call uploaded logs from Torparse good data as it does not tell the entire story of a raid or boss kill. Further, you can not ensure it wasn't doctored. And, you don't have every raid member's data to analyze. Still, I believe it is directionally accurate. And directionally, it indicates that Marauders/Sentinels are the best melee DPS, and maybe the best DPS.

 

I come to this conclusion by examining the fights where enrage time is more challenging such as 8m HM Golden Fury and HM Dread Stryak. I think it makes sense to examine these fights only to figure out what the best DPS classes are because you need the best DPS in these fights. (Thinking back to my first paragraph, I would not this conclusive, but you were the one who suggested that DPS rankings from boss fights was the appropriate measure.)

 

OK, so now we have established that Marauders/Sentinels offer the best damage in the fights where enrage is a real issue. How do they compare where enrage is not as tight? Using the same measurement, we see that they are not necessarily the best DPS option in these fights. But, the question is are the liability? The have sufficient defensive abilities and other utility such as Predation/Transcendence. Clearly they do not offer healing capabilities or taunts, but in theory your DPS should never have to do this even if it makes some fights/phases easier. The answer is no Marauders/Sentinels are not a liability in these other fights.

 

Given all of this, doesn't it make sense to stack four Marauders/Sentinels if your objective is to have the easiest time killing the hardest bosses?

 

Incidentally, you realize the vast majority of the logs you cited had their damage boosted by one if not two Bloodthirst/Inspiration during those fights?

Not sure I entirely agree. I believe in Styrak and GF, the reason Marauders shine is that there's no way to pad meters with AoE, no real running around so very little disconnect, and little downtime, certainly not enough to make you lose out on keeping the stacks rolling. These two are essentially Patchwork fights and we've already seen how good Marauders parse on operation dummies (and how at 30% and lower their dps goes up higher with VT).

 

So, I'm going off the premise that DPS is fairly equal between all classes. In that case, the point is whether it's fair that Marauders (and Snipers) should have better utility. It depends how key those utility bonuses are. And this is comparing melee dps amongst melee dps since, if all things are equal, you might as well bring all ranged to every fight because there's never a detriment for a ranges standing 30 meters away... or 3 meters.

 

I'm okay with people saying it needs to be reworked, but not what the OP suggests. That swings the issue to far the other way and would turn into a "why would we need to bring more than one marauder" where he's asking, "why would we bring anyone besides a marauder".

 

So I'd suggest that BT still have it's 5 min cooldown, but only affects the Marauder. That way, stacking Marauder doesn't help and doesn't give them more utility beyond predation and a dot heal if they're Anni spec'd. You don't like our game, well, then we're taking our ball with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This man speaks good sense. I do think some of the other melee classes should be given some sort of similar utility. Maybe give the Shadow DPS classes a localized damage buff while phase walk is up, somewhat similar to how shadow shelter works now. This would incentivize bringing shadows, and since the ability has other utility and whatnot in PVP would not break them there. Putting a similar sort of totem buff (not to stack with shadows) for vanguards would also be useful. Theoretically then you could have one buff ranged, one buff melee, and then you have a reason to bring both. It's not the damage per se where the other melee classes are so far behind. From a DPS perspective I do feel all the classes are pretty close and equally viable for the most part, but the utility issue is valid, especially for melee DPS (ranged DPS is often a healing utility all its own).

I will repeat my statement: If other melee classes want more utility, then it's only fair you give Marauders the ability to have a spec for healing or tanking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can I still be flawed - that was my first post since page #1? :)

 

I am absolutely only examining the fights with the tightest enrage timers intentionally. Again, I believe the goal is to clear ALL of the content. Your ability to clear all of the fights hinges on your ability to defeat the hardest bosses, right? Thus, these represent the fights where maximum DPS is most important. In every one of these fights, the suggestion has been made that 4 Marauders/Sentinels offer the best/easiest chance of defeating the boss. And, the Top 10 on Torparse indicates that Marauders/Sentinels are best at these fights.

Actually, no. As I just stated, Marauders do such great dps because these are essentially Patchwerk fights with little downtime. And the other poster's point has merit: If Marauders do top dps in the hardest fights simply because they have the best dps, then they should have the best dps in other fights as well. The fact that they clearly do not means that they are top dps situationally.

Edited by Lostpenguins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, no. As I just stated, Marauders do such great dps because these are essentially Patchwerk fights with little downtime. And the other posters point has merit: If Marauders do top dps in the hardest fights simply because they have the best dps, then they should have the best dps in other fights as well. The fact that they clearly do not means that they are top dps situationally.

 

At present, the hardest fights or those with the tightest enrage times are where Marauders/Sentinels do best, right? So bringing 4 of them make these fights as easy as it possibly can be, right?

Edited by oofalong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At present, the hardest or tightest enrage times are where Marauders/Sentinels do best, right? So how does bringing 4 of them make that fight as easy as it possibly can be?

Because you're failing to account for what I said: These are patchwerk fights. On patchwerk fights Marauders are king of the hill.

 

If you have a class that did the worst dps on 9/10 bosses, but on that 1 boss they did 3 times the dps of anyone else... and it just happens that boss is the tighest enrage timer, does this mean that, that one class is king of the dps? Of course not. But that's what you're saying. You're only criteria is looking at the two bosses with the highest dps checks, but if they made a boss that had a super-tight enrage timer, but would have moments where he's only damageable from 15 yards away... would you still bring Marauders because they're king of the tight dps checks? Nope. So you're argument that they do the most dps is flawed because you have to look at when they excel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a class that did the worst dps on 9/10 bosses, but on that 1 boss they did 3 times the dps of anyone else... and it just happens that boss is the tighest enrage timer, does this mean that, that one class is king of the dps? Of course not.

 

In my last post, I never said they were the king of DPS. I simply said where enrage is tightest they do best. (EDIT: They do best based on the current design of these tight enrage fights.) Given this, at every possible gear/stat level 4 Marauders/Sentinels would have the easiest time defeating these fights, right? I will assume you agree with this logic (I don't see how you can't).

 

Once you accept this conclusion, the question becomes are 4 Marauders/Sentinels are a liability on the other boss fights? We'll discuss this question later, but let's reach consensus on the first topic first...

Edited by oofalong
clarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can I still be flawed - that was my first post since page #1? :)

 

I am absolutely only examining the fights with the tightest enrage timers intentionally. Again, I believe the goal is to clear ALL of the content. Your ability to clear all of the fights hinges on your ability to defeat the hardest bosses, right? Thus, these represent the fights where maximum DPS is most important. In every one of these fights, the suggestion has been made that 4 Marauders/Sentinels offer the best/easiest chance of defeating the boss. And, the Top 10 on Torparse indicates that Marauders/Sentinels are best at these fights.

 

Thus, I posed the question if 4 Marauders/Sentinels would be a liability in the other boss fights where enrage was not as tight. I believe I outlined reasons why they are not a liability. And, I did concede that other classes will out DPS them. As you point out gearing other DPS classes is inefficient. Thus, as long as 4 Marauders/Sentinels are not a liability in the other boss fights you are best served by employing them to make defeating the hardest or tightest enrage bosses easier.

 

To be clear, I am not proposing any change to Bloodthirst/Inspiration. But I do feel that The_Rye_Guy and Korse are accurate that stacking 4 Marauders/Sentinels is best. Individually, they appear to do the best damage on the hardest fights. And, stacking 4 of them provides even greater damage output through successive uses of Bloodthirst/Inspiration. Further, they provide enough damage and utility to clear the rest of the bosses with relative ease. (Admittedly, some of the other bosses could be even easier with other classes.)

 

In summary, Marauders/Sentinels perform best on the hardest bosses, and perform at a sufficient level to kill the other bosses. Thus, the easiest way to defeat the hardest bosses and the entire raid will be with 4 Marauders/Sentinels. If you disagree with the argument/logic can you explain why?

 

Note: I am not saying that other DPS can not defeat the hardest bosses. And, this is a separate argument/debate from whether Bloodthirst/Inspiration is over-powered.

 

Lostpenguins made my argument for me. I would like to point out, that this line of argument leads into a AC (All of them) utility and player skill line. The very fact that other class's will have desirable traits in specific encounters goes to prove that there is a balance between AC. I have said it in the past, I will say it again; when it comes to choosing one class over another the end argument goes to personal preference and not imbalance, in matters of damage vs. utility.

 

In my last post, I never said they were the king of DPS. I simply said where enrage is tightest they do best. (EDIT: They do best based on the current design of these tight enrage fights.) Given this, at every possible gear/stat level 4 Marauders/Sentinels would have the easiest time defeating these fights, right? I will assume you agree with this logic (I don't see how you can't).

 

Once you accept this conclusion, the question becomes are 4 Marauders/Sentinels are a liability on the other boss fights? We'll discuss this question later, but let's reach consensus on the first topic first...

 

............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............................

Edited by Grimsblood
Response to new post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

............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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Edited by Lostpenguins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 :rak_04::rak_04: with force lighting .

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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........ :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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........ :rolleyes:

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Whoa! Because you feel the operations are poorly designed, your solution is to make changes to the AC's!? Yeah, ok. Next Maras will be complaining because their utility in the other fights (where it was fine) has been nerfed. Big picture dude, think big picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Because you feel the operations are poorly designed, your solution is to make changes to the AC's!? Yeah, ok. Next Maras will be complaining because their utility in the other fights (where it was fine) has been nerfed. Big picture dude, think big picture.

 

if it's in the form of a Debuff for all who have been affected by BT in form of a 2min 30sec" debuff then there would be no nerf, unless you take more then 2 Mara's per group.

(well in the end phase you'd have only one BT so I can see a small "nerf",

but if your are raiding 8 people raids the tanks and healers would like a BT too I'm sure.)

 

but I can understand why any class with an Armour Debuff would think Maras have an unfair advantage since just one other class with an Armour Debuff in the whole Raid would makes Their Group Buff useless.

 

in the end I don't see a reason to change it because stacking Maros doesn't happen anyway, in my experience at least.

don't "fix" things that aren't broken.

Edited by DarthSpekulatius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Because you feel the operations are poorly designed, your solution is to make changes to the AC's!? Yeah, ok. Next Maras will be complaining because their utility in the other fights (where it was fine) has been nerfed. Big picture dude, think big picture.

 

Give one example where this global cooldown would this would nerf maras' "utility in the other fights".

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...