I wanted to say that I appreciate all the input. The depth of discussion and insight of many has been helpful. Having said that, I have a couple points I want to look at: 1. It's been mentioned several times that Combat/Carnage will lower over time, while Watchman/Annihilation will steadily rise. However, the OP's question for CC was one concerning the RNG factor of CC procs and abilities. While I agree that this is an issue, if the Devs came back with a solution to this RNG factor, and made it something more predictable/reliable, would that not even out CC's damage over time - and even it out on the higher end? Would this not cement CC above WA in sustained damage over time? 2. I appreciate the testing that has been done. Is there more to be done, is there still disagreement, or is there any consensus on where WA is at in relation to CC, and if something needs to be addressed here? If so, what/how?

To that first point, no. Or at least, you're confusing the concern we have with what they said. What they said is that they would give us assistance with ramp-up, sometime in the future, and add a second or two to annihilate to help maintain stacks. However, this does not fix the problem. Someone on here already did test parses and showed that, even beginning fully ramped, Carnage is out-performing annihilation. More testing should be done, but the general concern is that the ramp-up time of Annihilation is only -part- of the problem, not the entirety of it. Thus, the promises of giving an extra second or to to Annihilate and assisting with ramp-up time does not really fix the deeper troubles. This is especially true if the RNG factor of Carnage is brought under control (which should be done) which will only up DPS for that spec more. The ramp up time issues and the damage gap between Annihilation and Carnage are, to a degree, to separate issues.

Cheers. Pretty much the point I was making. This effort to try and make Annihilation a PVP spec is, as I said, attempting to fit a square peg in a round hole. It's just not going to happen without simply not making it a sustained DPS spec..which entirely ruins the point and their statements about intentions for it.

.... Is there someone in particular you're mocking, or are you just wasting space?

Yes, Tam addressed the Ramp-up time... For PVE. I do not think there is a way to 'fix' Annihilation's ramp-up time in a way that will make it effective in PVP without breaking/OPIng it. Let's take a solution Tam and I both like - using Valorous Call to instant build stacks. This is a 2 min cooldown, and it has other uses. Yes, it would...help.. but not often enough to keep your stacks up in PVP regularly. Maybe having them tick off instead of falling off completely would help enough.. but even then, a Watchman/Annihilation spec could -never- be a node guarder. In PVP, they'd always have to be out looking for a fight... and they could rarely be killed. The cleanse thing I get. No argument against that. As I mentioned briefly in the past, I quit PVP because of the stress/frustration it gave me, so while I understand this argument... for me personally, it's sort of mute. But I get it - more power to having it be uncleansable. To the first point - yes, that makes sense with burst. But you used a burst example - the opposite isn't true. Annihilation is a dot class - not a burst class. Let's say you have an enemy with X health. Then you have two marauders - one who can do X damage in 3 seconds, and the other who can do 2X over 7 seconds. The problem is, that double is meaningless, because the target will be dead at X. As a whole, it's more complicated than this, but the point is simple - if things die before your dots have full effect, then you would be better suited as a burst class. I understand that the concern here isn't topping the DPS charts, but being valuable in the match. However, I can't think of a situation where a class which has stronger damage, but in the form of DoTs, will have value over a burst unless those DoTs actually go off entirely. The only time I can think of this happening is if you're solo-attacking a single enemy that none of your teammates were attacking.. which I believe would be bad strategy in most situations. I just almost feel Watchman's poor performance in PVP is intentional. As was mentioned earlier, they took out the transcendence bonus. They stated that it's intended to be a single target, sustained DPS class. These are just not things conducive to PVP. It's just feels like we're -insisting- on jamming this square peg through a round hole.

... Is this sarcasm? That's impossibly silly without entirely redesigning the classes. Rage is a burst AOE spec. Because of the word 'AOE' in that, it's damage against Op bosses would be minimal. It is, and would be, a horrible PVE spec. So no. I'm sorry you don't enjoy rage. But the only way you'd get Annihilation to be a PVP spec is to -completely- redesign it. Same with getting rage to be PVE. They wouldn't be the same spec. Ultimately I don't think Annihilation will ever be a PVP spec. You're talking about a class that relies on two things that are impossible to rely on in PVP: Dots : If it's possible for things to die before all dots can both be applied and see their full damage, then the value of DOT-based DPS is pointless. If people are dying halfway through DOTs, then your damage is inefficient. Constant Fighting: There can be lulls in PVP. Guarding a node, waiting for enemies, death/respawning. Annihilation is -intended- to be a sustained damage spec - which means you have to stay fighting. Always. Extending Annihilate by a couple seconds, or giving marauders the ability to generate their stacks to full instantly every, say, 2 minutes... is not going to fix this problem. You're going to have extreme drops in damage because your stacks are going to fall off. Regularly. There's very few situations where you'll be able to get 4 stacks of annihilate and keep them.. and again, there's no way to really fix this without either redesigning the class entirely, or make it utterly OP by allowing permanent 4 stacks or giving Annihilation spec equal burst damage as well. They're not going to do either of these things. Pre 2.0, I had PVP'd Watchman a lot. I leveled Drayde through PVP. I always had the best PVP gear back to pre 1.2 Battlemaster, which I still have in my bank for memories. I know my class and what it can do in PVP very well, and pre 2.0 it was acceptable. Now, however, it hasn't kept pace... and I think there's some intention to that. My concern is that if we ask them how to make Watchman/Annihilation viable in PVP, they're either going to just say : 'It's not a PVP class. Get over it.' or 'Sure, we'll look into that...' .. And then Watchman gets Shadow'd (IE, they break it).

I admit I could be wrong at this, but I believe that, even ramp-up time is considered (6 Juyo and 4 Annihilate are presumed from the start), five minute parses would show Combat/Carnage being superior to Watchman/Annihilate. While the buildup is certainly frustrating, I'm not sure eliminating it entirely fixes the issue. Especially if the RNG factor is removed from Combat/Carnage, as that will severely up DPS due to the reliability of procs (unless some nerfs are put in place to balance the increased reliability). I'll agree Watchman is dysfunctional in PVP.. but given their stated goals for it, it's hard to imagine it ever being very good. 'Burst' is the name of the game in PVP (hence the abundance of 'smash monkeys') - sustained, long term damage (which, as stated, is the entire goal of the class) would seem counter productive. From experience, it sort of works.. I've got valor rank 86 and used to be a regular PVPer, until I realized it was just making me an angry, hateful person. But I wasn't -bad- as a Watchman.. I could still top the DPS back in the War Hero days. Perhaps it's changed now.

On the topic of Watchman/Annihilation... I know you seem very committed to reserving this for the PVP question..which I find disappointing, since I feel Tam did largely the same thing. I would note that, in discussing Carnage/Combat, it was stated that Watchman/Annihilation is intended to be the highest sustained damage in a long fight. ATM, this is not true. Watchman/Annihilation is underperforming, and the top DPS for the class are -all- Combat/Carnage - even over a sustained period of time. This is my largest concern - that the spec intended to be the highest sustained damage is not. I feel like we have plenty of utility in PVP (transcendence is massively valuable, even if it doesn't have the speed of Combat/Carnage. Pacify is still useful, as is our 6 second interrupt. Force Camo is insanely useful, not only to escape but also to deceive). That, despite underperforming compared to what is intended, Watchman/Annihilation is being reserved for PVP questions by both reps is a little disappointing. Also, based on recent reading, I'm beginning to think I'm the only one who still plays Watchman/Annihilation..

Bringing some points together here for discussion...: Alright, having quoted all that... You say you're reserving your PVP question for Annihilation. I find this someone urking, because I feel Tam already did that. It's disappointing to think that both the Sentinel and the Marauder rep are both going to only discuss Watchman/Annihilation in a PVP sense, and not address it's PVE issues. You call it a standard PVE class, but there's a problem - it's underperforming. Currently, the top Marauder/Sentinel DPS are all Combat/Carnage spec. These are from parses taken over sustained fights - exactly where the devs, in answering Tam, said Annihilation/Watchman should be superior. I feel like your concerns for Watchman were largely addressed in Tam's question, and thus I feel your annihilation question is redundant and largely unnecessary. You bring up some sense of utility, but I believe the devs made it rather clear what they expect this spec to be - I think it simply isn't performing in that intended manner, as it's parsing lower than a burst class that is intended to do less damage over time.

Obviously this was directed at me. I never said, nor do I think, Vanguard tanking is terrible. Please don't make my statements overly dramatic when it wasn't intended. Vanguard tanks do great. I'm actually not a main tank - I'm mostly a DPS Sent, and also do progression raiding as a Jugg tank. I do have a Vanguard tank - I simply don't find him as enjoyable or as 'good', when it comes to a class, and it mostly comes to DC's. I've said this several times, and so I'll say it again: My concern is that, because the OP's questions were given in such a way that the definition of 'DC" includes things such as Stealth Scan and other utility abilities, and because he posed the question in a PVP context of Vanguard's lack of utility in PVP, the devs might understand this as a lack of -utility- DC's, and add in more utility items similar to stealth scan or harpoon - and not things that PVPers would consider DC's. -That's- my concern. That we're working with a PVP definition of DC's, which includes utility items, and a PVE definition, which is strictly damage reduction. Yes, stealth scan and harpoon are very useful in PVE - but Vanguards don't need additional utility abilities in PVE. They need PVE definition DC's. That's where I find tension with that first question.

You'd have to change the name. I'm ripping it off of Saga Frontier, but I think it'd be an interesting idea. In response to the Sentinel questions, it was stated that there was no real intent for Knights/Warriors to be so weak in AOE's compared to other DPS classes, and options of fixing this would be explored in the future. So.. at the risk of finding myself lost in obscurity here, I thought I would throw my hat in the ring. Essentially what I'm suggesting is a placed AOE that would either work similar to force storm or freighter fly by. Its range would be thirty meters, and would either be instant and channeled like force storm, or have a cast time. Either would work. Visually, here is how I see it working. If instant/channeled : After selecting the skill, a casting circle must then be placed at the desired spot. Four to six 'smokey' copies of him would burst forth from the knight/warrior and appear at the edges of the circle (think akin to Styrak's apparitions, but stationary). They would then launch into a flurry of very quick attacks, before leaping up and meeting in the air, combining, and slamming down for a final blow., then disappearing Enemies inside would have a chance of being stunned for the duration, similar to how force storm works. The knight/warrior would not be moved during this, and could still be attacked, but must channel the apparitions during the cast time. Any action would cause the channel to end early. If casted : This would then work like freight flyby. A similar cast time would be taken, during which the knight/warrior would go through a 'preparation' pose. At the end of this the apparitions would appear and leap out to their points, and the knight/warrior could continue fighting just as a gunslinger/sniper would. Two things of note here : First, despite how 'vicious' this sounds, the damage inflicted would not be enough to have value on a single target. While it's meant to look really neat, it's not meant to be a 'super awesome bestest ever move of destruction'. It's an AOE, meant to fill a void for knights/warriors, and should behave as such. It shouldn't effect single target parsing or be used for it. Secondly, in my vision, that 'final' hit is where the biggest damage hit occurs - the prior attacks do significantly less. If channeled, this gives incentive to complete the channel fully. Comments/thoughts/flames?

If by 'primary' we're talking 'what am I best at', then I agree. Of course a tank isn't a good DPS while in tanking spec. However, I do believe players crosstrain. Our main vanguard tank of our progression group does a lot of PVP and PVE as a tank and DPS, and I think he's rather good at speaking to the needs of both. I feel like the needs of DPS and PVP are over-focused on, and I would like to see some focus on the needs of PVE tanking. As you mentioned, and as was mentioned to me before.. and as I noted in my original post.. The OP does mention the need for DC's. He does so, however, in the context of his PVP question. He also does so in the context of PVP imbalance, and includes in these 'DC's utility abilities such as stealth scan. The danger here is that this could be taken as a request for more utility in PVP, and not necessarily what PVE'ers would describe as DC's, or DC's that would be effective in PVE. As a PVEer, my definition of DC's doesn't include stealth scan. Based on the OP's post, as a PVPer, his does. This creates a concerning possibility of potential fixes that aren't dealing with a PVE problem - only a PVP one. While it's a lesser issue, Vanguard tanks do, from my experience, do far less damage than their Guardian/Shadow counterparts. In tight DPS fights (Styrak) this makes them a potential burden. I'm not writing these posts to simply whine/complain, and I do believe the OP addressed some thing that do need to be dealt with in the PVP realm. My concern is that there has been, thus far, a PVP bias in most of the class questions so far. The exception, imo, was the sentinel rep - who seemed to focus on both rather equally.

You know, if the PT questions address tanking more.. awesome. I'm aware that the PT questions are not in yet.. and I'm looking forward to them. My problem is that I'm seeing a trend. The marauder gave his 'qualifications' as 'I've PVP'ed over 1k matches and have X ranking'. That was his qualification to be our class rep. His -entire- listed qualifications. The sorcerer class rep clearly focused entirely on PVP, and ignored several extremely important PVE issues. This bias has become concerning to me. Yes, the questions brought up here are legitimate questions. They are things that need to be addressed in Vanguard PVP - but I think there's a legitimate concern that, thus far, the class reps have tended to be PVPers and focused on PVP issues.

It was talked about in an entirely PVP sense, and compared in a PVP manner within the context of utility abilities. The fact that it was addressed with an entirely PVP orientation could imply that all that is necessary are PVP DC's which are not effective in PVE - or simply more utility abilities for huttball. I agree, and I noted in my post, that DC's were addressed in his post... My problem was the manner in which they were addressed implies a singular sphere of need - PVP. Not PVE. Much like the sorcerer post (which was -purely- PVP oriented), it makes me feel the Vanguard class rep is a pure pvper and isn't really concerned with PVE.

I feel like nothing in these three questions addressed the concerns of PVE tanks. The first question could potentially apply to PVE needs as well, but the fact that it's framed in a PVP sphere makes that difficult. You have - a Tank PVP question. A PVE DPS question. A PVP DPS question. IMO, the last question should have been the PVP question. The first question should have been expanded to include the concerns of PVE tanks. Vanguard defensive abilities in PVE are crippling compared to Guardians/Shadows. Reactive shield is the only reliable, straight-froward damage reduction. Shadows and Guardians both have cooldowns that are as good, or better (guardians straight up have a 15% better damage reduction, even). Their only other defensive cooldown that's really a DC (and not just a utility) is smoke grenade, but it's an RNG cooldown, which lowers its value. Yes, lowered enemy accuracy may mean it doesn't hit you at all, making it a great cooldown. The enemy could also get lucky and hit you every time. Given that DC's are often used in emergency situations, having its reliability in question makes it a poor defensive cooldown. The fact that this question is focused on PVP, and the issues of Vanguard tanks weren't addressed in PVE (low quality DC's as well as low damage compared to the other tanks) makes me think that the OP is either a primary PVPer and/or primary DPS. The extreme focus on PVP DPS and lack of focus on PVE tanking is a little disappointing, in my view.