One Thing we definetely Need is a passive 30% AoE dmg reduction. Compared to marauders or powertechs juggernauts are sub-par again in every aspect of the game. as a heavy armor wearing class i see no sense in us taking more sustained dmg than a medium armor wearing class. uuuhm one Thing i'd like to know: is it forbidden to spread datamined stuff (not by myself but by a well known reddit user^^) in These Forums so we can talk about some 'facts'? to summerize things up: The datamined Facts render juggernauts as one of the worst (if not THE worst) dps classes in pve (again).

Definetely approved, this is one of the most important QoL functions in many other MMOs. Should have been implemented long ago.

Agreed but asking for nerfs for other classes can be considered problematic^^

This thread is about juggernaut dps, i don't Dispute that there are many other class Balance Problems but they should be discussed in seperate threads^^ If jugs do 3,65k and anni marauders do 3,7 i'd be absolutely Content with that lol. But sadly those values i've posted have been taken from the current PTS build and that includes the procc already being fixed afaik.

So with high crit luck we are doing as well as marauders will do average. Juggernaut (average): 3600. Marauder (average): 3900. Juggernaut (lucky): 3950 Marauder (lucky): 4200 Not cool.

You are comparing those classes' specific spec to a whole class. AP and Deception are doing bad? Well, they can still spec to pyro and madness and Keep their raid Slot / viability. Juggernaut will be subpar with either vengeance or rage. Just fix every class before you look into specific specs.

Metaphor for shutting SW:ToR down?

Ok let's finish the discussion^^ http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=7122422#edit7122422 you'll have to Change your guide^^ really nice that they do it with 2.6!

Yea, sadly only 25.76% crit. imagine 40% crit *slobbering*

Thx ssfish, im a Little undecicive if i should agree. if you priorize shatter/impale over fs you will often find yourself in a Situation where fs has only 1 stack or even no stack :/ personally i priorize FS(2 stacks)>shatter>impale>FS(less than 2 stacks and other abilities more that 1 GCD away). Just a few thoughts about jugger theorycrafting: When determining the optimal Rotation/priorization one can view it from two different Point of views: 1) resource Generation effectivenes 2) ability damage effectiveness (dot uptime, hardest hiting abilities priorization > soft hiters) The real optimal priorization should represent both aspects. But there is one Little Problem that makes theorycrafting or even Simulation next to impossible: The unpredictable proc behavior of ravage and vicious throw. Each ravage proc bridges the time until the next sundering assault, each vicious throw generates rage upon usage and (very importantly one stack for force scream). So from 1) Point of view ressource Generation is heavily reliant on our procs and thus not absolutely predictable for it matters WHEN we get the procs. Ability damage and Overall dps (2) are directly and mostly affected by ravage itself. => though dummy parsing is the (at least in my opinion) more viable method of determining the optimal ability priorization, it seems not to be a very reliable tool because not only do our procs affect our dmg done but also our Rotation. Example: Generally, from a simple ability dmg pov it should be shatter > force scream (2 stacks!) > impale. BUT this will often lead to a Situation where you are about to use FS next but only have 1 stack to buff it. So you want to priorize impale over it in order to get the 2nd stack. On the other Hand this doesnt come to be if you have a vicious throw proc that also creates the 2nd stack. So this proc heavily messes around with our priorization and ressource Generation what makes juggernaut dps a Little unsimulatable. Only Thing we have left is empirical testing which sorts out to be rng reliant aswell.

Hmmmmm recently did a 3413k dps parse (4:51 @ 1mio hp) with impale > shatter. 10min. later I had a 3419 dps parse (4:51 @1mio) with shatter > impale.... to be honest. it doesnt seem to matter. combined ravage proc+crit luck is everything. i'd favor shatter > impale in bossfights for the reasons i mentioned: if you have to move and only have time for applying one of the two dots you'll want the heavier ticking (=shatter) before moving. hopefully they'll rework juggernaut/Guardian next patch.. really tired of seeing this luck dependency

Níhlus - Sith-Juggernaut - Vengeance - 04/36/06 - 04'51.743 Torparse link: http://www.torparse.com/a/555758 AMR link: http://swtor.askmrrobot.com/character/643614b7-20e8-4a26-90a2-758077fad376

Right. Please correct your Rotation, impale on top is not the way to go in Boss fights for shatter cannot be mitigated by armor and leaves a heavy dot (dont know how to express that: if u have just 1 GCD left before moving you want your gcd to be used by shatter and not impale to leave the heavy ticking dot effect.) additionally whenever i priorize impale over shatter i do about 100dps less (dummy testing). Could you repeat it for me? I have never read anything about that on these forums!

Jep, right.

Really nice guide, about time that juggernaut theorycrafting revives ^^ now a serious dps buff is the only thing thats missing Personally I prioritize shatter > impale for its the harder hiting abilitiy and does very reliable dmg via its bleeds. impalte hits hard but its bleeds are a joke. the main issue I had with testing is the ridiculous dependency of combined proc+crit luck but average I think im getting slightly better results with shatter > impale. Additionally I'd recommend kicking Smash out once the execution phase begins and use assault instead, giving u one more rage for more VTs. Btw. when relying on dummy parses we should - in order to smooth rng out - only take parses that include at least 10 tries and take the average value.

Welcome Tait! I really appreciate that finally an experienced, passionate gamer is taking over the bug forum and patch notes, I think communication between the community and the development team in terms of reporting bugs to those in charge is one of the most important jobs outside the actual development team and thereby should be hold by somebody who actually knows the game from a gamers perspective.

Well I definetely intend this to reduce the skill cap for People. You are right, ravage is clipped at .3s, I personally Clip it when the channeling displays .5s left, didn't comprise my reaction times. (is there any way to disable this damn Auto correction in the Forum? really sucks when writing in english...) Exactly that is the reason for I want clipping being disabled. My sniper was the reason why I actually decided to make this post. If you clip SoS and the 1st cull properly you will gain another ~0,5s. In Addition to the ~1s delay after SoS you mentioned before, you will gain a full GCD every cycle of your Rotation. Compared to somebody who doesn't clip the channeling of SoS and cull, that is 15 GCDs more in a ~5min dummy try. I dont consider movement to be an ability and therefor it should of course! break the channeling. Movement should be able to clip everything. I'd be Content with this approach, too. The only reason I like the "locked channeling" more is, because i am a keysmasher. If the last tick of the ability would be placed at the end of the channel you would not be able to Smash your key and Queue your next ability without accidently clipping the channeling => new source of delay (every ex-wow-player who used to play an arcane mage and used a macro like "/cast [nochanneling] ability" knows what i'm talking about).

"Nothing can break a channelling ability except for heals and Interrupts" is not a too complicated rule imo, but i think it depends on personal taste. I really doubt that the mechanics / the handling of abilities is implemented for each individual class, so the cross-class Problem would not exist. I highly doubt that adding such a rule for channeled abilities would have such a big Impact on fluidity, I didnt suggest to alter the way client and server communicate or any other technical aspect that is related to ability activation/queueing. U could also argue against bioware making any changes at all or against releasing new content if u doubt that they are able to code without totally breaking the game... no valid point, just prejudices. That is why I made the Suggestion: Lag is something that cannot be monitored closely enough and even if u could no human being had the reactions to adapt to it. We're talking about some milliseconds here. And please leave comments like "go and brag on scoreboards", just accept that there are People who Play the game the way i do, as i accept your oppinion, too. I could imagine another way that would not result in new rules: just make the last hit/shot of channeled abilities Impact at 0,1 or 0,05 seconds of the channeling and nobody would ever get the idea to clip it => problem solved and everybody would be happy.

I currently Play a DPS Juggernaut and Lethality Sniper. Both classes rely on channeled abilities (Jugg: Ravage, Sniper: Cull and Series of Shots). The Subject: Both classes can be mastered by clipping the last few parts of a second of those abilities. Ravage channels for 3 seconds an hits three times. U can clip the last 0,5s without losing the 3rd and last hit. By doing so u gain a full global cooldown over 3 ravages. Same thing is with cull and series of shots. In case of both abilities the last 0,2s can be clipped. Especially when it comes to lethality spec u can squeeze in another GCD into your rotation cycle (discussing lethality rotation is offtopic, so i won't add further explanation). Why should this be removed? Clipping channeled abilities is mandatory for maximising your classes damage output and therefor mandatory for minmaxing players. The problem is, that clipping is very sensitive to lag, so it adds another element of rng to the gameplay and makes your rotation feel very hectic and unsmooth. Additionally it brings players to smashing their keys especially often and thereby create (unneccessary) client-server-communication and could thereby probably produce lag (not sure of this though). How can this be removed? Simply make channeled abilities not interruptable by other abilities except for those that are off-GCD like Interrupt, etc. (at least in case of dps abilities, healing might be a different thing). I a Player tries he could get the Status message "Ability has not yet finished channeling" or something like that. Sorry for my English and thanks for reading.

Issue still existent. Pls fix it for it decreases energy and dps significantly if u have to reapply a dot that has been reapplied 1 GCD before.

Hey Doc, u did a great job with providing this wonderful tool to the community! My whole guild has recently switched from torparse to parsec because of ist superiority in Terms of stability, Performance and professional Features like filtering Options! Here Comes some Feedback: a) Currenty the raid dmg popout list is sorted by DPS. I think it should be sorted by DMG done, we often had some weird results like RANK/Player Name DMG done DPS #1 PlayerA 100.000 3200 #2 PlayerB 122.000 2800 #3 PlayerC 95.000 2600 In this case playerB should be leading, not playerA b) Will there be those fancy bars to visualize the relative dmg done like torparse did? Sorry for my english, im no native Speaker and quite lazy when it Comes to thinking about formulations in foreign languages

That's exactly what i meant. I could also imagine some sort of thread indicator next to or above the nameplates, if ppl dont feel comfortable with different coloring.

I find tanking to be one of the least desirable roles in SWToR for there is no way to Keep an overview about your thread state on different Mobs without tabbing through them like a berserk and Keep your eyes on your target Frame. The tanking experience could be tremendously improved by making a Little Change to nameplates' Color, e.g.: Green Color = aggro safe, orange = losing aggro, red = mob attacking somebody else, blue = mob attacking another tank. Making nameplates fully customizable in Terms of scaling, Alpha and colouring would be best imo.

It's nothing to do with the engine. As Long as SWToR stores Information the conventional way (in a database), creating an API should be no Problem.

Well spoken. The fight is definetely overtuned. I want bosses to be hard by means of their mechanic and not by ridiculously tight enrage timers. Im not calling in question that both guilds who downed the boss deserve the kill, but its simply too luck dependant during the enrage phase: Does your tank parry/deflect everything long enough for your ranged dps to burn down the last 10%? Do u have some DPS/heals who can taunt during enrange and buy some time by doing so? As long as no guild (especially none of the best guilds around world wide) downs the boss without hiting the enrage, ill consider this encounter to be bad tuned - if enrage would meen the whole raid getting killed within one single cast like WoW does sometimes, it'd be another thing. On the other Hand no raid would have downed them this way. Well see if the guilds who downed it this ID will be able to repeat it easily (though it should be easier with the new loot, ok). In addition to that u have to ask another question: whats the sense behind the 2nd boss out of 5 being the hardest fight in the Operation? Shouldnt the endboss be the actual challenge? Thats even a good hint for bioware not balancing it well: 2nd boss is absolutely hard and takes several days while the following bosses are downed in nearly one single evening...