Hope I'll manage to hit the right tone of voice for this one as it is a hotly debated topic, and one that it's difficult to remain calm on.

When looking at the upcoming first batch of class changes, one can see that the preferred method to restore class balance seems to be swinging the nerf hammer. For instance, my beloved mercenary will do less damage in the future in addition to producing more heat for one of the most important skills, which means one would probably have to redistribute attributes away from stuff like critical and toward alacrity. This will probably lower overall damage in addition to the 5% damage reduction they are planning anyway.

Now, this might work. It might mean that fights in PvP will be more fair. Already, many are demanding for Bioware to swing the nerf hammer some more and take away trauma regulators, responsive safeguards and/or the energy shield, insisting that the merc/commando is way way overpowered. To be honest, as far as PvP is concerned, I have no idea if that is true or not as I never play it. I know I need my utilities and my damage for PvE, not because I'm a poor player, but because I very often have to carry people in PUGs. Not sure how well I can do that if all of my survivability is removed?

But seriously, wouldn't it be much better to BUFF other classes to give them the tools to deal with this?

I know I sure won't be sad if my compadres in an Op or FP have more power and more options in a fight, and if "weaker" classes got the tools to counter what merc/commandos throw at them, and that makes PvP more fair, that should be okay, too? At least it won't piss off all the PvE people in the process!

And just randomly swinging the nerf hammer - no matter how hard - will piss off people like me.

What do you all think?

I agree, I think the devs would meet with a lot more approval if they gave the under performing classes some buffs rather than nerfing people. I'm not entirely sure why they're going the negative route with this issue. Granted, I don't PvP, so I could be missing something that makes their choice more logical.

I just hope my sniper and gunslinger don't get nerfed. Neither is one of the builds people say are overpowered but I still worry.

Hope I'll manage to hit the right tone of voice for this one as it is a hotly debated topic, and one that it's difficult to remain calm on.

That's always a struggle.

When looking at the upcoming first batch of class changes, one can see that the preferred method to restore class balance seems to be swinging the nerf hammer. For instance, my beloved mercenary will do less damage in the future in addition to producing more heat for one of the most important skills, which means one would probably have to redistribute attributes away from stuff like critical and toward alacrity. This will probably lower overall damage in addition to the 5% damage reduction they are planning anyway.

 

But seriously, wouldn't it be much better to BUFF other classes to give them the tools to deal with this?

Analysis: Why We Should Buff More Than Nerf - YouTube

And

Across-the-board-nerfing-hurts-everybody

I have a solution... nerf every class and give us one attack, one defence and one self heal,.. then get Bio to key bind them into a macro so we only need to spam one button.

This nerf, nerf, nerf philosophy that happens as one class gets nerfed and the ones below it become the new nerf targets is ridiculous.

The answer is balance and that will only have a chance of being achieved if the current way the combat team tries to balance is changed.

Nerfs are to balance overpowered classes.

Buffs are to balance underpowered classes.

Balance.

Arsenal mercs and mercs in general have some ability that probably make them hard to fight in PvP, but they're nowhere near the top when it comes to raw damage output. While in comparison the output of a melee combatant who has to chase a merc around will be lower due to range downtime, when it comes to fighting PvE enemies, the melee will usually have a way higher output already. There's a thread somewhere with numbers. I agree that these numbers are meaningless in PvP, but I find it important to differentiate.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to just make some abilities that are hard on other players just not usable in PvP anymore? Like if you're in a PvP arena, countermeasures doesn't heal or trauma regulators don't work? These things could have a tooltip, same as some abilities have tooltips that they don't work on operation bosses.

What do you think of that?

Nerfs are to balance overpowered classes.

Buffs are to balance underpowered classes.

 

Balance.

Exactly!

Just because they've over buffed a class, that doesn't mean the bar needs to stay that high. Nerfs, while never welcomed, are a necessary tool.

The debate shouldn't be about nerfs or buffs, it needs to be about the correct nerfs or buffs.

. I know I need my utilities and my damage for PvE, not because I'm a poor player, but because I very often have to carry people in PUGs. Not sure how well I can do that if all of my survivability is removed?

 

 

And just randomly swinging the nerf hammer - no matter how hard - will piss off people like me.

 

What do you all think?

Are they 'Randomly' swinging the nerf hammer, though? You really think that?

And don't worry about being the swell guy and carrying Pug members. If all goes to plan those weaker classes will be buffed so you don't have to.

And i repeat.. if my merc does not PvP at all - my computer is a garbage and i prefer to invest money in my motorcycle than in my computer - why should she be nerfed? Let's face it, everyone like to be in a flashpoint with a lvl 70 merc..

(Almost) nobody wanted merc damage nerfed. PVE didn't care about mercs at all, and PVP have long been complaining about merc survivability - the DPS can act like a tank, and shouldn't be able to.

Tac FPs you should still be able to faceroll even if merc DCDs did get nerfed. HM FPs, you should be doing with a proper group that knows what they're doing anyway (including tank and healer).

You shouldn't get a character on par with the GSIus droid from Solo FPs just because you want to carry three scrubs, though. They should git gud, and you should lose Trauma Regulators, at least.

(Almost) nobody wanted merc damage nerfed. PVE didn't care about mercs at all, and PVP have long been complaining about merc survivability - the DPS can act like a tank, and shouldn't be able to.

 

Tac FPs you should still be able to faceroll even if merc DCDs did get nerfed. HM FPs, you should be doing with a proper group that knows what they're doing anyway (including tank and healer).

 

You shouldn't get a character on par with the GSIus droid from Solo FPs just because you want to carry three scrubs, though. They should git gud, and you should lose Trauma Regulators, at least.

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

Thank you Eric.

I would have thought this would be common sense after reading the initial post you linked, but thank you for spelling it out here for those that needed it.

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

I just want to comment on this...I think you guys have done remarkably well with this during the past 2 major updates (4.0 and 5.0). None of the Ops have "felt" that different in terms of difficulty.

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

Question, what is the "target"? It is a serious question. Cuz based on the info you guys provided, and talking purely from PvE perspective, the current gap between parsers is around 15%. Arsenal was around 8-9% behind top parsers (which would put them right were you guys said they should hypothetically be) then you nerfed the to the level of lightning and MM, even though these are 1) 15% behind top, 2) considered not viable for NiM mode.

So.. what is the "target"?

Thank you Eric.

 

I would have thought this would be common sense after reading the initial post you linked, but thank you for spelling it out here for those that needed it.

Unfortunately common sense isn't common.

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

Makes complete sense, but unfortunately even clear gold posts fall on deaf ears in this forum.

If every class balance change is only allowed via buffing... the characters quickly become over powered for content.... you know.. content many people already complain is too easy.

(Almost) nobody wanted merc damage nerfed. PVE didn't care about mercs at all, and PVP have long been complaining about merc survivability - the DPS can act like a tank, and shouldn't be able to.

Everyone I know in the PVE community, across 4 different guilds and raid groups, and anyone who's honest about it, pretty much agree that Arsenal needed a slight nerf..... Maybe not to the extent that it's getting, but it certainly could afford a hit to bring it in line with some of the other burst specs. MM and Lightning should have in turn been brought up, just a bit, for a middle ground on the burst specs.

Tac FPs you should still be able to faceroll even if merc DCDs did get nerfed. HM FPs, you should be doing with a proper group that knows what they're doing anyway (including tank and healer).

Tac FP's are already a faceroll on any class........ If you know the class.......

You shouldn't get a character on par with the GSIus droid from Solo FPs just because you want to carry three scrubs, though. They should git gud, and you should lose Trauma Regulators, at least.

Again, you can carry three scrubs through any tactical on almost any class..... Personally, I've done it on mara, sniper, merc, op, PT, and sin myself...... So not really sure how tactical FP's play into any of it.

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

Not even sure how to respond to that, as I can't think of a single class an experienced player wouldn't be able to easily clear those on..... Even with a LVL 1 companion.

Not even sure how to respond to that, as I can't think of a single class an experienced player wouldn't be able to easily clear those on..... Even with a LVL 1 companion.

i can clear them without a companion

he is doing something wrong........ realy wrong.....

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets.

There, you have the root reason why balance will never be any good.

You have to at least separate PvP and PvE skills somehow.

Until then you are wasting precious resources and will keep displeasing both type of players.

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

OMG stop being bad.

You can't beat heroics with the current godmode state of companions and the godmode state of mercenary???

Epic

Question, what is the "target"? It is a serious question. Cuz based on the info you guys provided, and talking purely from PvE perspective, the current gap between parsers is around 15%. Arsenal was around 8-9% behind top parsers (which would put them right were you guys said they should hypothetically be) then you nerfed the to the level of lightning and MM, even though these are 1) 15% behind top, 2) considered not viable for NiM mode.

 

So.. what is the "target"?

That is something that I don't blame them for not sharing.

Why?

Because when one of those major updates where the cap level gets raised happens, and they need to balance everything in the game again, that target MAY move. This is an MMO. Nothing is static. Giving the players a hard number here does both the devs and the players a disservice in terms of managing expectations.

However, if you look at the post Eric linked, it gives a pretty good guideline.

Look at the professions he listed at performing at expectations. Use that as your baseline when parsing. Now look at the professions he has as needing to be 2% and 5% below that baseline and parse those - are those professions performing at those levels? Of course, this is all dependent that you have someone competent doing the rotations, but let's say you do, you can see for yourself where these professions fall roughly by using the baseline as a guide.

And know because of the human element, you may not hit exactly at 2 or 5%, but so long as you are close, account for a margin of error.

That should be good enough.

Case in point - Innovative Ordinance Merc is someone who is at the level they want per that class balance list Eric had. Now, if you parse that, and then parse an Arsenal Merc, and the Arsenal Merc is performing somewhere between 3-7% less DPS overall than the IO Merc, that's where it should be. However, if the Arsenal Merc is actually keeping pace or outperforming IO Merc, per what the devs shared, that is something that needs to be rebalanced.

And keep in mind what Arsenal Merc is in this case - Burst DPS. So if you look at the Parse over time for Arsenal Merc compared to an IO Merc, Arsenal on average should perform at around 5% less DPS than IO, HOWEVER, if you look at small slices, Arsenal Merc should have peaks and valleys that average to that, and those PEAKS should be able to outperform IO Merc in the very SHORT term, yet on average the DPS should be 5% below IO over a longer stretch.

That's how to read that chart Eric linked. Don't be so obsessed with the hard number because it can change. However, what won't change is the relations of each profession to each other in the design document Eric linked, and so long as those ratios are maintained, then players will have an idea of where their profession should stand.