am i the only one who can't get their head around the rationale of comparing all dps to marauder as the benchmark for where it should be? As long as they're in melee range they have unlimited "energy/rage", they dont have to deal with a finite energy pool that regens. They hit things get rage, and hit things harder by spending that rage. There's nothing to regen, as long as you're in range, its constant dps. Why is this the benchmark for comparison? . Outside of mercs they're the only class that have their ability damage increased by both weapons. Everyone else may draw stats from mh/oh but never the weapon contribution of both. As for comparing operatives too them,the 5% comment in particular. -giving a % number is meaningless for comparison without looking at total damage numbers. if they do 100 damage and you do 95 that doesn't seem that big, if they do 1 million and you're behind by 50k thats the same % but is a bigger gap. -theres a number of side by side comparisons that seem to suggest the 5% is inaccurate. -Even if it is accurate it doesn't paint a complete picture If dps were measured like an eeg (heart rate) a marauder would be a flat line (more constant) an operative would look like they're having a heart attack, it spikes, then falls flat. It may end up at 5 % in the long run, but when you look at it through the course of a fight the operative has far more down time.

in a game where we're at war: -most of my pvp games are played against my same faction. i like "huttball" as a same faction thing, seems absolutely ridiculous in a faction v faction war setting. -flashpoints: the number of fp's where you're fighting the opposite faction are few. The overwhelming majority of flashpoints deal with "internal" matters or preventing your opponent an "advantage" in the war effort. Imperial side the only vs republic flashpoints boil down to black talon and boarding party. Max level flashpoints (unlocked at 50) are rhakgoul plague, and dealing with an "internal" matter: Malgus, imperial side. -operations: vs ancient aliens vs hutts -daily missions: i guess would count for the most "war effort" focused content wise. But they keep sending me after the guy i already killed, so im beginning to question their ability to lead.

the problem i see is that there's a huge disconnect between the perception of the class, and the reality of what it actually is, by all parties involved. Dev perspective/game perspective -Just by looking at tree set up, the class seems confused between what it wants to do and what it needs to be able to do it. -justification for nerfs could be a bit more concise, what we nerfed on last patch now seems to be the opposite of why we need to be nerfed this patch. While it may not have been by intent the comment given implies that small class population gives you less importance, and play experience trumps actuall mechanics. Lethality (shared tree) -Entirely ranged abilities save the 1 melee ability you need to make the entire thing work. -all skills that improve defense across the class are located in this tree, a tree that is 95 percent ranged, who's damage is ranged and passive. This is tree that needs the defense? Concealment -this tree and healing are the more coherent. -its melee its burst, but its controlled burst, rather then proc burst like with pyrotech etc. It doesn't center around procs like other spec do. -Burst is positional, requiring cc -makes the best use of stealth, but stealth still only has 2 specific abilities. -Energy management is the lowest, probably because of the burst set up. -when you nerf burst with a spec that has poor energy management you risk the ability to make that combat style sustainable enough. -Its melee, it needs burst. People who don't play the class: -Think operatives are stealth gods. In actuality we have 2 abilities to use from stealth, 1 sap, and hidden strike (knockdown+ damage) -You can see them while stealthed when they're close to you, even with improved stealth. -Being stealthed, even with move speed talents, doesn't make you move faster then anyone in combat and moving, or out of combat and sprinting. -too much cc: theres 2 in combat ccs that cause loss of control, both stuns, 1 is 45 s cd, the other on a a minute. When you get hit by it you will be stunned, but the deck isn't stacked for cc. And mathematically speaking multiple other classes can cc you for the same amount of time. -stealth does afford you the advantage of picking your fights, and i can't do squat about the guy who stays in stealth till his gcds are up in between picking fights. - i see an overwhelming majority of nerf posts directed at all classes, and very few post about "is it possible to counter this class and how' cause it can be done. People who play the class -some fail to realize how annoying it can be to have a guy consistently come out of stealth to attack you. -focus on what needs to be improved over whats imbalanced. There were/are imbalances but that doesn't mean the class doesn't need improving.

why not just allow people to exchange it for the "new" same piece of gear? A similar system is already in place for pvp, to get war hero you need to exchange coms+bm gear. I have to think modifying that system to allow people to trade columi for columi and etc, would be easier then trying to replace everyones gear in their inventory. you could even do a one time return to vendor and be rewarded with the coms it takes to buy it, so you could replace it with an items who's mods are removable. Either way something should be done. Most people dont want to redo something they've already done, and have no point in doing it, except to replace something they have with the exact same item (only with removable mods). Yet at the same time if nothing changes you'd be a fool not to. Orange gear+pve mods+augment > pve gear.

juggs do have a more sustained dps spec, it just has more limitations in pvp then rage.

i had the fortune of being in a game with 3 rage specced wars, and 2 lethality specced ops of all things, holy bajeezus. It was raining corpses.

every time they "adjust" this class they seem to depart from their earlier logic that required previous nerfs. -first we did to much damage, and too much cc (well not to much cc just to much of one cc, and by their words we should be able to use more forms instead of one really long knockdown). THey adjusted damage, reduced the cd on hidden strike, and we did less damage and could use our other forms of cc. Both these things needed to happen. -Now we're doing too much cc. Not by ourselves mind you but as a group, of just operatives, the least played class in the game. the least played class that has 2 in combat cc's that arent slows. here's the problem with this line of reasoning: -Any group of players of the same class can do this. All you need to know is what amount of resolve specific abilities contribute, and you can stack your cc to avoid building up resolve to full across multiple players. -It was specifically stated that "sages" have only so much tolerance for chain cc before they'll quit playing. whether by intent or by poor wording, you've set up the precedent that if you dont play a majority class, it gives the devs more license to adjust the class to keep the others happy. Yes its a business, you can't keep doing your job if you dont make money, but is your selling point really "your money's more important if you play a more populated class" -Majority takes precedent in nerfing the class, but not in improving it? The majority of players that play this class consistently raises question about class functionality issues, and other class improvements, that go ignored. So the operative majority just has it wrong? But the sage majority has it right? -then in regards to people who play the classes concerns, we get this "our dps is within 5 % of marauders." A: Percentage proves squat without context. 5% of 100 is 5, 5% of a million is 50k .Value wise thats a big difference, even though its still just 5%.. If you just state percentage it might look better on paper, but it doesnt give me any idea on what the average difference is in terms of damage done. B: we're within 5 % of a class that by all accounts, according to the patch notes, needed a buff. If the benchmark for comparing all dps too needs a buff, what does it say about those that are 5 % behind them?

hindsight is always 20/20 and people do make mistakes, but when with every patch we get a new explanation of why the class needs to be nerfed, that is antithetical (the opposite) of previous justifications for being nerfed, the question gets raised: "how many times of not getting it right are needed before you rethink the way you examine things?" operative patch timeline: -hidden strike applies its cc too long allowing you to kill people with out their control, and it additionally hinders operatives from applying cc later in the fight due to resolve limitations. dev's state they want operatives to be able to use more then one form of cc. -hidden strike reduced to 2s kb, other forms of cc become available. armor penetration reduced on acid blade. -1.2 rolls around and now we're doing to much cc.... that too much cc consists of 2 stuns: 1 on a 30 to 45 second cooldown, the other on a 1 minute cd. -a day or two passes, and its not that the operative by themselves that's doing too much cc, its groups of the least played class chain cc'ing that is too much. no mention that any group of one ac/spec that all knows their cc resolve values can do the same.

the problem with saying hidden strike needed to have its cd adjusted to avoid back to back use is that you could still only do it once every 2 minutes at best. oddly enough you can still use hidden strike +backstab (both with acid blade) and its a 500 damage loss vs 2 hidden strikes. So the 500 damage was the problem? is it a cc problem? with 2 2s stuns? cause hidden strike used to be a 4s knockdown and we were told that was too long, but that it also limited us from being able to use other cc forms down the line (this was the selling point for tweaking it last patch). Again this can only be done every 2 minutes. hindsight is always 20/20 and people do make mistakes, but when with every patch we get a new explanation of why the class needs to be nerfed, that is antithetical (the opposite) of previous justifications for being nerfed, the question gets raised: "how many times of not getting it right are needed before you rethink the way you examine things?" -hidden strike applies its cc to long allowing you to kill people with out their control, and it additionally hinders operatives from applying cc later in the fight due to resolve limitations. dev's state they want operatives to be able to use more then one form of cc. -hidden strike reduced to 2s kb, other forms of cc become available. armor penetration reduced on acid blade. -1.2 rolls around and now we're doing to much cc.... that too much cc consists of 2 stuns: 1 on a 30 to 45 second cooldown, the other on a 1 minute cd. -a day or two passes, and its not that the operative by themselves that's doing too much cc, its groups of the least played class chain cc'ing that is too much. no mention that any group of one ac/spec that all knows their cc resolve values can do the same.

it varies from class to class, as some tank specs have better dps skills (guaranteed crits), but the way i would describe it is: either your defense isn't substantial enough to buy you time for your damage to do its job, or your damage isn't substantial enough to do its jobs before your defense wears off. This is perhaps most noticeable on juggs, relative to any other tanking class. Of the 3 tanking ac's per faction, it is the only ac that actually has its damage handicapped by being in tank stance. A jugg will generate less rage per rage generating ability while in tank stance, while a bh generates no more heat from using their tank ammo vs dps ammo(and still have heat venting talents in the tree), same with assassin (and a sin can buff their force regen from tank talents). The trade off i suppose is that juggs get a 40 percent damage reduction on a 3 minute cd that lasts for 10 seconds, which the other tank trees dont have, but its hardly a reasonable trade off. The other issue is defense vs pvp, and the attacks that don't apply to defense being rather numerous. Now for solutions: if it were me, i could understand not wanting to mess around with their damage or their defense due to fears of imbalance in and outside of pvp. one possible fix would be to give tanks a damage debuff to apply to targets, that doesnt stack and is cancelled out by the use of taunts (or simply have taunts reduce damage against the tank, but by a smaller % then the damage reduction against other players from taunt). right now tanks are very good about being damage spunges, but they lack in the ability to actually draw the damage dealer off their target.

that's ridiculous and i say that as an operative. Now having to turn off stealth, then start to cap, instead of popping out of stealth when you start to interact seems like a weird change. Was it really that 1/2 of a second that was the linch pin in capping?

so we're within 5 percent of marauders? are these the same marauders that are getting completely overhauled in the patch because of deficiencies? the same patch where those operatives who are 5 percent behind now got nerfed? -for starters why are we comparing a class with a finite energy pool (operatives) to a class that does damage to do more damage, and doesn't run out of energy? -Rage is more sustainable then energy but rage is the higher damage? - ranged vs melee question, and the response is about bringing an operative healer (who operates at ranged mind you.) lets talk melee vs melee for raids using the interview. -marauders do 5 % more damage -marauders have an "energy pool" (rage) that doesn't run out, it just has to be build up. There's no severe gcd limitations on it (theres only one big rage building ability on a long cd) -marauders have a constant 20 percent armor penetration once stacked, with the potential for an additional 20 which is always up vs operatives 30. -marauders dual wield contributes more to their attacks vs operatives which just increase based off stats (operatives knife isn't the primary contributor to melee attacks its tech power). Marauders get the weapon damage increase from 2 weapons plus the stat increases. -marauders: buffed this patch, Operatives: i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say we'll be able to achieve the same damage we have now, but through talents and not base ability strength. Marauders are 5 percent better now, will get better with the patch, operatives dont change now to the patch=marauders are even better then 5% post patch. why bring an operative dps for melee over marauder? i wont say that operatives dont need a nerf, i dont have access to the information that bioware has. What i will say is that the way they present their argument for nerfing this class seems to historically be presented in a rather confounding manner. Which is only made worse when the complaints of the community seem largely unnoticed in terms of the classes issues for being improved.

focusing on crit vs other melee classes doesn't exactly paint the clearest picture. Given that the rage mechanic is more about doing damage to do more damage, rather then taking away from a finite pool, gives their damage more sustainability (as long as their in melee range). vengeance vs rage spec -vengeance has a 1 ability to crit set up (15s cd and 9s cd to crit) vs rages (21s cd or 55s cd) 5 stacks to increase damage +1 ability to make it crit (9s cd). Vengeance may not crit as hard but it crits more often from proc mechanics. rage will crit harder however with 5 stacks on smash (brings it up to 1200 damage) + crit vs vengeances (1k damage scream before crit). -vengeance seems to me at least, to be a bit more of a rage dump then rage spec, as well as compensatory to rage generation down time with reseting the cd on ravage. But seeing as ravage is more utilized in vengeance the non interrupt talent in rage seems out of place. thats not to say there aren't some screwey things with vengeance spec, like the damage increase to your next attack you receive from being slowed (can stack up to 50%) often ends up being used on a rage builder.

by the very logic used the nerf the class, i should never play anything else other then what the majority of players play otherwise my payment once a month doesn't hold equal weight.

my two cents "im going to nerf you for a situation that MIGHT happen." Ever get stun locked? its called being focused fired, and having a bs resolve system that takes to long to fill relative to the damage you take. Guess what people catch people and kill them, it happens. realize that they use thier cc cause they suck outside of 10m, and their the only melee class without a gap closer. what's the metric on how many nerfs a class will take before they quit? or does it matter cause im not the majority? thought he was there to balance classes and pvp not to balance the check book. Rather then look at why this class in particular favors blowing all their cc's to kill one person, i get some bs percentage comment about how my damage is sustainable and we're all doing it wrong. Everyone who plays the class Either rationality isn't thier strong suit, who would of though for a company started by doctors, or they don't play the class. Guess what mathematically the average age of death in the middle ages was 30. In actuality if you died of old age you died when you were 60, or 70, however if you died young it was usually before the age two. So the average becomes 30, doesnt mean you were old when you were 30. Math on being 5 percent within marauders, which nead a complete dps overhaul according to this patch? riddle me that boy wonder. 1 dps tree blows so bad i can't even begin to tell you wear to start, actually i can i'm sure theres just a number that better explains how hardy its level of blow is. The other one is fine until someone gets outside of your range, or theres healing. So 2/3rds of the class trees work and we're in need of being nerfed?

the more i hear georg talk about the class the more im concerned.

i like that his quote explaining why operatives need to be nerfed is: A: conditional. the least played class has to find multiple people of that same class in a game to accomplish what he's talking about. how long before another class gets tweaked because they all have interrupts and when the stack on casters they can't cast? better yet find me a situation where a group of players, the same class, aren't going to wreck someone, ever been in a game of huttball vs multiple sorcs? you're gonna nerf based on luck of the draw? instead of looking into avoiding that draw happening in the first place? just tell me this sounds rational and ill shut up: "im going to nerf you based on a situation that may or may not happen." B: the problem he states is cc related, not damage related. It wasn't that the group of operatives kills you, its that they kill you while you can do nothing. yet the only cc change in the notes is the cooldown on an ability that can only be used from stealth and knocks you down for 2 seconds... if thats the problem why isnt it addressed? more importantly isn't that why you have resolve, to avoid this kind of thing? if the attacks aren't contributing adequately to resolve up the value they contribute. C: Other thoughts -whats the statistic on how many games you'll play feeling you can't adequately contribute due to terrain/class difference before you'll stop playing? or does that not matter cause its the least played class? -what's the statistic on how many outside-in (from other classes perspective) nerfs you'll tolerate without getting any inside out (from the perspective of the class itself) buffs before quiting the game? is stun locking an issue, probably, but whats of equal issue is the reason why the class favors stun locking. Which is that if anyone gets outside of your melee range you are suddenly the only melee class without an in combat gap closer; and thats without getting into the fact that the longer a fight last the less affective you become due to energy regen. bh/commando: grapple assassin:sprint warriors: charge, shared tree gap closer. operative:? * all of those classes with gap closers also have, with almost equal distribution, the same cc's an operative has. with the exception of marauder who trounces agents on sustainability. Stealth is only a gap closer when A: you're not in combat ( a 2 minute cd on an in combat stealth is not a gap closer), and B: if the target is standing still or moving towards you, or hanging around in the same area. Even if you nerf all ranged classes you're still left with a situation where every melee class but one has a gap closer. riddle me that. of course the funny thing is all of these issues were pointed out numerous times in beta dating back to 7+ builds before the launch version of the game. But every time it was brought up it was ignored. Even when people who loved the class pointed out that no one is going to like a class that has to kill you way faster then any other class cause they don't have sustainability, and run into huge issues with ranged, unless they blow all their cc's consecutively.

never had an issue with sorc healers, at least the pure healers, healing mercs on the other hand... and i believe both got the shaft.

class quests wont be affected by xp modification from legacy. the set up is that you get an xp boost to one specific area, so you only have to do that one thing plus your class quests to level. Not that you have to do your class quests to level, you just need to do the class quests for companions. There's no bonus xp to quests from legacy, theres a bonus to xp from pvp,space missions, and flashpoints. the way they explained it was, that they wanted you to be able to experience the unique things about the class and not have to repeat world quests etc.

the patch opens up other specs for marauder, while operative dps still really only has 1 spec.

so how exactly are they going to acquire all the gear necessary as soon as they hit 50, when there's a cap for the amount of commendations they can have at one time?

so you've traveled to the future and seen how the patch went, or are you just presuming to know something prior to it occurring?

what jugg has going for it, is that fact that even while dps spec, they bring far more utility and group related abilities to the table. they're the only dps that is going to return to the scaffolding after getting knocked off with any predictability. They have 2 inherent gap closers, one to an enemy, one to a friend, one of which can have its cd reset by another ability; you can also potentially have 3 but its spec specific. The 2nd gap closer also reduces damage of the target you jumped to by 20 percent. -they can still use both single and aoe taunts while dps spec to reduce damage on focused targets. -they can switch from dps to tank form without cast time (but lose rage) and be able to guard some one far faster then a bh can. -the inherent defense allows them to make better use of the shared tree, which centers on building stacks to buff attacks (5 stacks for one in particular), which allows them to be aoe wrecking balls. marauder wins on flat damage, but when does flat damage, and not damage +utility decide games?

Its not the way it works, well it is, in that the way the system values abilities adversely affects some classes far more then others. For melee the ability to move is the same thing as the ability to act. When you take away movement from ranged, their still ranged, their ability to not take damage is severely compromised but their ability to do damage remains largely unchanged (yes there are some minimum distance things for certain ranged abilities.) When you take a way the ability to move from melee, you affect their damage far more severely. Yet movement impairment is valued far less then inactivity impairment.

we speak the emperor's english here stranger, and their called stims, not potions. good day sir.