Expertise - the Debate Thread, Place your Vote!

[Khoraji]

Ideal solution:

Removal of all stats from gear while in Warzones, then receive a bolster effect.

 

 

Acceptable solution keeping Expertise:

Removal of healing and damage boosts from Expertise (leaving only the damage reduction boost).

 

You would have to make mitigation like 30%(if not more) to make it better than PvE gear

[Darth_Philar]

You would have to make mitigation like 30%(if not more) to make it better than PvE gear

 

I'd be ok with that.

This would also fix the TTK issue as people wouldn't be exploding you anymore and would require them to tactically use their abilities (CC, kiting, etc.)

[LarryRow]

There are 2 endgame progressions right now, pve and pvp. Expertise makes it so you can't use use progression from one to skip having to progress in the other. Totally sensible, especially from the perspective of an mmo business model.

 

Since I enjoy both progressions, I am in favor of expertise.

 

Making all pvp gear, regardless of tier, have the same expertise level so that pvp is more about skill is also something I would probably favor, but that is another argument.

[Rolzhard]

Not needed.

[DarthKhaos]

There are 2 endgame progressions right now, pve and pvp. Expertise makes it so you can't use use progression from one to skip having to progress in the other. Totally sensible, especially from the perspective of an mmo business model.

 

Since I enjoy both progressions, I am in favor of expertise.

 

Making all pvp gear, regardless of tier, have the same expertise level so that pvp is more about skill is also something I would probably favor, but that is another argument.

I like the idea that guy gave with a whole new set of stats for PvP. Stats that govern dmg, stats that cover defense, stats that govern healing, etc etc etc.

[Rannox]

not needed.

[DarkHelsing]

updated

[DarkHelsing]

Hmm, with as close as the votes are, I wonder if they did get rid of Expertise and replaced it with a different type of system that didn't throw of the balance between raiding and pvping and allowed them to intermingle without giving one a huge advantage over the other.... I wonder how many of those for Expertise would be crushed...?

[Doomsdaycomes]

Hmm, with as close as the votes are, I wonder if they did get rid of Expertise and replaced it with a different type of system that didn't throw of the balance between raiding and pvping and allowed them to intermingle without giving one a huge advantage over the other.... I wonder how many of those for Expertise would be crushed...?

 

^_^ we'd know if anyone would respond to my thread. <.< I think I made it too long and people can't be bothered to read.

 

A Suggestion for End-Game Progression.

 

That being said, i think I voted in this thread already (there was another similiar thread yesterday) so I won't try and revote. Thanks for all your work.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Doomsdaycomes

[DarkHelsing]

Yes, you did vote. I remember the name. I'll head over to your thread now.

[DarkHelsing]

(Quote from http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=4172516)

(Before I begin, This suggestion covers both PvP and PvE issues, but frankly I wasn't sure which forum to put it in. When pieces were discussed before, it seemed most of the obection were from the PvP section, and thus I have placed it here. If anyone has a better, proper place, I will make a post there.)

 

A little about me:

I am both a PvE and PvP player, and have run HM's, Operations, PuG'ed PvP, Premade PvP, and even participated in Ilum operation battles of 32+ people. I have 3 level 50's of each role, and have played almost every class till 30.

 

The amount of time I can or will play varies from week to week, and thus I have been the kind of player who can only play a few hours, or who can play many hours on end.

 

The suggestion:

 

At the current moment, post 50 sees a divide in progression. Rather than moving foward towards end-game content and gear, players divide into end game PvE or PvP. Their gear is different, as is the time to obtain such gear. This causes a rift in the number of players, given that everyone has a limit of time, doing either activity.

 

My suggestion, in it's simpliest form, is to equalize and balance the two "sides" of end game content so that each side is interchangeable, even and fair.

 

Below will be detailed suggestions on how to do this. There will be a few basic and points that must be understood before making an argument before or against the suggestion.

 

Basic Terms:

 

In order for this to work, a few assumptions/ideas need to be considered.

 

The first being we must assume Majority Completion. Majority completion means when balancing rates of gear progression, it must be balanced around the idea that the player is able to beat the majority of the tasks given. In PvE, this means downing bosses and clearing operations. In PvP, this will mean winning the majority of your games, thus receiving the higher rewards. If progression is not balanced around this, than a PvP player will have the advantage of being able to lose repeatedly and still progress as fast as a PvE player who can not clear a boss.

 

Secondly, we must understand the concept of End-game Content/Goals. End game content, in this definition, refers to anything post 50. Whether this is 50 Warzones, Hard Modes, Operations, or World Events. End-game Goals are the things you strive for once leveling is complete. Pre-50, the goal is to reach max level, and you are presented a number of paths to reach it. Post-50, your goals then shift to gearing, as that is the only way to "progress."

 

Thirdly, the term Equal will be used often. This is defined as the number of (X) hours one must spend, as well as the amount of (Y) effort. This ties heavily into the Majority Completion term, and thus, any argument of; "Such and Such activity is hard, or takes more skill" is a moot point. Equal work means the two paths will be balanced around taking the same amount of time and the same amount of completion to achieve (Z) the same goal.

 

In-depth Suggestion:

 

(1.) The Tiers of PvP and PvE gear must be made equal stat wise. A Tier 2 PvP player could then participate in Tier 2 end game content as easily as a player who obtained Tier 2 PvE gear. This includes getting rid of the PvP only stat, Expertise. The difference between the two could be cosmetic, to allow a PvP or PvE player to set themselves apart, without being unable to participate in all the End-game content they are paying for.

 

(2.) The work to gain either PvP or PvE must be equalized. It would then take (X) hours to receive a piece of gear, as long as you complete (Y) a majority of the content within that time. This would require an overhaul of the way in which gear would be acquired, and would either see PvP gear returning to a chance rate, or PvE rewards switching to a more steady progression. This could include bosses dropping tokens, which would need to be saved up (much like the current daily/weekly PvE system) to purchase gear. The exact method is irrelevant at this time, though suggestions are welcome. The core idea is Equal Work is needed to obtian Tier 1, 2, or 3 gear, no matter which path you take.

 

(3.) A new buff when entering 50's pvp (both world and warzones) would be required to allow PvP balance without shattering PvE balance. Like bolster, this buff would essential give PvP players +Expertise, and an equal amount of expertise. Then +%Dmg, +%Healing, +%Mitigation could be balanced without needing specific "PvP gear.

(I lost the forum where this was first suggested, but I want to note the PvP buff was not entirely my idea, and this wish I could acredit it properly.)

 

The End Result:

 

Just like how Pre-50 gives you several paths to reach the end goal (max level), the combining and equalizing of end-game gear and progression would give you multiple paths of reaching the End-game goal. There would be an increase in both PvP and PvE cross-play. There would be a system to balance PvP play outside of PvE play. Over all, I feel the health of the game would increase.

 

Discussion:

 

Please feel free to discuss, suggest, or offer insight into specific, unseen problems. I encourage everyone to remember the terms/concepts defined in this post when discussing to avoid confusion over the "suggested" progression and the "current ingame" progression. Finally, I happily invite discussion over these points, but non-constructive "bashing" in either direction, will either be ignored or reported if warranted. Thank you all for your time!

 

This is a well worded sum-up of a lot that has been discussed in this thread. Several times things like this have been stated as responses for why to get rid of Expertise, and at the same time things stated above have been used as reasons why to keep Expertise. Several of us may actually all be on the exact same page, just not clearly communicating that point across.

 

Anyway, good post, thumbs up.

[Doomsdaycomes]

(Quote from http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=4172516)

 

 

This is a well worded sum-up of a lot that has been discussed in this thread. Several times things like this have been stated as responses for why to get rid of Expertise, and at the same time things stated above have been used as reasons why to keep Expertise. Several of us may actually all be on the exact same page, just not clearly communicating that point across.

 

Anyway, good post, thumbs up.

 

^_^ Oh, thank you. On a side not, I just realized one of my over sights and edit my thread slightly, to give broader credit to the community who helped build several of the ideas compiled. Off to do that. Good luck on all the votes.

[Dzhokhar]

The official count didn't quite sit right with me. I specifically noticed the "needed" count increasing significantly slower than the number of "needed" votes. Because of this, I decided to redo the count myself.

 

I counted pretty carefully (and intentionally favored "Not Needed" in my tally). Whenever I suspected a post was somebody's second vote (I didn't write down all of the names and cross-reference), I counted it if they voted "not needed" and didn't count it if they voted "needed". For people who stated an opinion without a specific vote, I counted it as "needed" if it was a clear defense of Expertise as a stat or if it was a defense of completely separate PvE and PvP progression, otherwise I counted the vote as "not needed" (even if their response was pretty neutral). My count is as follows:

 

"Needed": 82

"Not Needed": 55

 

Edit: At this time the "Official" count is 68 "Needed" and 51 "Not Needed".

Edited April 27, 2012 by Dzhokhar

[DarkHelsing]

The official count didn't quite sit right with me. I specifically noticed the "needed" count increasing significantly slower than the number of "needed" votes. Because of this, I decided to redo the count myself.

 

I counted pretty carefully (and intentionally favored "Not Needed" in my tally). Whenever I suspected a post was somebody's second vote (I didn't write down all of the names and cross-reference), I counted it if they voted "not needed" and didn't count it if they voted "needed". For people who stated an opinion without a specific vote, I counted it as "needed" if it was a clear defense of Expertise as a stat or if it was a defense of completely separate PvE and PvP progression, otherwise I counted the vote as "not needed" (even if their response was pretty neutral). My count is as follows:

 

"Needed": 82

"Not Needed": 55

 

Edit: At this time the "Official" count is 68 "Needed" and 51 "Not Needed".

 

That is why the numbers are different. For people that didn't clearly state one or the other, I didn't count them at all. If the poster did not clearly state one or the other, it is not up to anyone else to assume which way they wanted to vote, they might not have been voting at all just wanting to chat about it, so they don't go in the tally no matter if they were pro or con. I've gotten a chance to ask some to clarify from their original post, but not everyone.

The instructions were very simple on how to vote.

 

No different than a poll, if you don't select one of the given options, then you didn't vote for that particular poll.

 

I also have everyone's name in an Excel list that voted to make sure double votes wouldn't take place.

 

The count is still pretty accurate as is.

Edited April 28, 2012 by DarkHelsing

[Blloodbane]

It's needed

[JeramieCrowe]

Posted this in the other thread, but I'll post it here, too:

 

Last week, the majority of PvPers chose "PvPvE" as the preferred method of open-world PvP. How in the world does Expertise fit into that without making the PvE part of PvPvE skewed?

[DarkHelsing]

xxdragonragexx and Dzhokhar, more new best friends. Let's keep this trend of intelligent beings going people.

 

 

EDIT: Obviously the "needed" side has won. We have more votes and it looks a lot like you inflated the "not needed" numbers.

 

Your last sentence there contradicts your desire to keep a trend of intelligence.

[DarkHelsing]

updated

[JeramieCrowe]

Looks like I'll still long for the days of actual PvP. And I'll have to get used to this "new" GvG, instead. I really hoped it would die with WoW, but I was hoping against all odds. Edited April 28, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[DarkHelsing]

Looks like I'll still long for the days of actual PvP. And I'll have to get used to this "new" GvG, instead. I really hoped it would die with WoW, but I was hoping against all odds.

 

People defend it I think because they think those against are trying to break the system, or uneven a balance. People attacking it are trying to request a better form of balance and a less broken system.

 

No matter what, it certainly is counter productive to argue points with people on here... the majority of everyone on this thread are all on the same page (sure some posters are not, but the majority are), the majority wants two ways to progress in gear, the majority wants equal and fair treatment, and the majority wants something special for the time they dedicate into an event. But they argue the other side is not doing that, when both sides are... it's weird.

Edited April 28, 2012 by DarkHelsing

[JeramieCrowe]

People defend it I think because they think those against are trying to break the system, or uneven a balance. People attacking it are trying to request a better form of balance and a less broken system.

 

No matter what, it certainly is counter productive to argue points with people on here... the majority of everyone on this thread are all on the same page (sure some posters are not, but the majority are), the majority wants two ways to progress in gear, the majority wants equal and fair treatment, and the majority wants something special for the time they dedicate into an event. But they argue the other side is not doing that, when both sides are... it's weird.

 

I call it "the new breed of QQ PvP", those that will fight other players only if they're rewarded, and if they don't get shinies for fighting other players, they QQ non-stop. I hate GvG with a deep, dark, purple passion. Always have and always will. But if this is the direction of PvP in MMOs, count me out.

Edited April 28, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[sugewise]

It is not needed.

[Stavroz]

get rid of it

[Drayoc]

After playing hundreds of level 50 Warzones and then playing below level 50 Warzones for the past week, I can say that the later feels much more balanced and in more enjoyable.

 

Expertise needs to go.

[ShannaRZ]

I think expertise is needed ...

 

However, i don't agree with the current implementation of expertise. ...

 

Post 50, all pvp sets should have a fixed amount of expertise, say 1000. So, recruit set has 1000 total, WH has 1000 total. This prevents pve players pvping in pve gear, but it also stops expertise being another inflated stat that widens the gear gap. Keep normal stat progression on pvp gear, just not expertise progression.

 

If we keep expertise, this is the simplest and best idea I've heard so far.

 

Alternately, we could transform any piece of PVE gear into Recruit gear upon entry to a warzone. Of course, those 25k health tanks would whine and complain that their health was reduced to 16k... so I suppose that while it would work, people would still throw a fit about the design.

Edited April 28, 2012 by ShannaRZ
added a thought