I dare you to retort this argument

[Belpheghor]

that maurader gave me cancer

 

 

LOL

 

I was calmly reading through your mara post when I hit this and damn near spit out my drink all over my computer.

[ArchangelLBC]

Pre 1.2

 

player #1: man marauders are so underpowered

player #2: yeah man i never want to play as these guys

player #3: i pity the fool who chose marauder as his AC

 

1.2 patch, makes ravage uninterruptable and a 15% boost of damage

 

player #1: man i hate playing against marauders they're so OP

player #2: those guys are completely untouchable

player #3: these classes are unbelievable

player #4: that maurader gave me cancer

 

the only logical answer is that

If your enemy was beaten badly last week and very little has changed about him and he comes and BEATS YOU DOWN this week then your enemy has clearly bested you in a matter of skill

 

if you so happen to disagree and say that marauders are always "at the top of the leaderboards" and deal "incredible burst damage" please bring in some video evidence of you playing against a marauder and F.Y.I. your argument is completely invalid if that marauder has stims and war hero gear on

 

if you're wondering why im asking for video evidence is because I have no hope in the community's credibility after this post

 

 

I'm sorry, but what is your argument again? I'm really confused.

 

First, you say that before 1.2 people didn't complain about Sents/Maras but after Masterstrike got a nice buff they DID complain about Sents/Maras. This part seems to have been refuted by people familiar with good sents/maras pre-1.2.

 

THEN you say that if your enemy beats you when he didn't beat you before, and all that's happened is a minor change then you clearly just got outplayed. Is this supposed to relate to the first part of your argument because it isn't clear.

 

Assuming it is then first of all you should realize that a 15% buff to Master Strike/Ravage along with making it uninterruptable is a pretty big freaking change. As a Combat Sent (admittedly pre-50) going into a fight with this ability up along with Precision Slash and Blade Storm means that my target is about to die unless they are quick with a knockback/knockdown/stun. If I have a full resolve bar that's it. Game Over, man. And THAT'S in a vacuum of the change to Master Strike being the only change. The other changes in and around 1.2 also were kinda non-nontrivial, and until your argument looks at them in their entirety it's invalid on it's face (whatever that argument is. I'm still somewhat unclear on the thesis).

 

 

Finally, you say if we disagree go get videos of us losing to Maras, but not well geared maras using stims, oh and also we might be saying Maras have really good burst damage. Are you kidding me? Maras have GREAT burst damage. Whatever else your point may be lets not act like they don't have great burst damage. That's just silly on its face. Combat/Carnage especially the burst is just sickeningly good. Next you're gonna tell me PTs/Vanguards don't have great burst damage.

[Valorman]

This, just like in the case of people whining about grav/tracer spam, people were just to bad to interrups.

Was a L2P issue the firsst month after the game came out.And now of course commando/mercenery dps is

useless and crap in any competetive pvp even random pugs for the most part.How they could make it so ravage could not be interrupted or moved away from is beyond braindead btw.

 

then you must have never been hit with an 6.5k tracer missile have you? anyway you can move away from ravage unless they're carnage specced in any case YOU ARE GOING TO GET SOME DAMAGE but after that he has nothing much except slash and a somewhat effective force scream

Edited August 24, 2012 by Valorman

[Jalal]

I would say that post 1.2 Mara/Send did take some skill. I made one before the fotm because a really good one kept owning me in a warzone and I wanted to check it out. I learned the class and was pwning people , it was my first 50. I didn't really feel powerful until the 40's when you get guarded by the force and invis escape thing. I even took ravage off my skill bar because the damage was a joke and it always got interrupted.

 

After 1.2 even low levels are pwning. Just wait till they are stunned (which is all the time) ravage and profit.

[foxmob]

refute?

[Darth_Philar]

Marauders are OP, which is why I leveled one.

 

My main is still my Sorc Healer, but playing my Mara is so much easier.

[Xerain]

Only thing you took from that? Oh and btw now it only takes a PT and a Marauder.

 

Lolk. Takes more then that but ok there guy.

[SinnedWill]

All these people are going to blame stupid things like:

 

1. Because expertise got a buff and makes it so damage is massive now.

 

Which is a lie they just made the +damage and + mitigation higher to outweigh pve gear in pvp and they fixed expertise so it works the way they want it to work. Now 1000 damage against an opponent with the same expertise = 1000 damage.

 

Stopped reading right there. Campaign has more stats on it than War Hero, right? Then explain to me why my deception assassin (or any other class with high significantly high tooltip damage abilities for that matter) can go in to a warzone where I end up on the opposing team from a guildmate (controlled experiment time!); we're both stealthy classes; we duel in both campaign and war hero gear -making sure that our expertise values are identical- and, well, needless to say: all of the high tooltip value abilities (procced mauls, shock, assassinate) are actually dealing more damage in pvp gear duels, yet the weaker tooltip abilities (force slow, voltaic slash, saber charge damage values, etc.) deal less.

 

In my experience, expertise has a more significant impact on these high tooltip damage abilities (until ~1100, then you begin to notice more from stats/power, though I've heard people say they figured out the math behind combat rolls and claim that expertise is best for damage increase until you have 700 -after which power gives more- and 1000 -after which primary stat gives more-) compared to stat/power stacking and lower tooltip value abilities seem to be more heavily influenced by stats/power compared to expertise.

 

What it boils down to is talents from skill trees that increase damage/surge value with specific abilities (rage warriors with smash, pyro PT with railshot/TD/CGC, decept-assin with shock/discharge) reap significantly higher ACTUAL damage value modifiers from expertise compared to abilities that aren't (you're tacking on a flat % modifier which will outweigh the abilitiy's tooltip valued gain from power and primary stats).

 

Now, I can't say I disagree (pretty sure they have expertise how they want it now) but some MINOR (reducing railshot tooltip damage by 100 points, for example, would result in it dealing ~350 less crit damage in pvp due to compounding variables from talents and the expertise modifier -that's a rough estimate, btw; too many variables in combat rolls for me to bother) nerfs to these consistantly big damage abilities, would be feasible.

 

Lastly, I don't think any class needs significant changes to their abilities' natural tooltip values, but some talent modifier values could use some potential toning down.

Edited August 24, 2012 by SinnedWill

[L-RANDLE]

Learn to counter one, and get back to playing

Which is why I rerolled a hybrid tank spec guardian...

 

Game on FOTM peeps...

Edited August 24, 2012 by L-RANDLE

[DarthOvertone]

Pre 1.2

 

As an aside, Patch 1.1.5 was the best PvP this game has seen. TTK was reasonable, classes were better balanced, and players had choices on how to grind (WZs or Ilum).

 

 

From full BM pre 1.2 to full augmented war hero gear i gained 4k hp. Sorry to say but I didn't gain 25% more damage in the upgrades. Of course damage went up but so did mitigation.

 

Sort of. The Expertise formula assumes equal amounts of Expertise. However, in live there is too much Expertise variation, and the contrasts are causing the funk in TTK. The math says marginal differences in Expertise shouldn't really matter, but they do in live gameplay. The formula is not working correctly and hasn't since 1.2.

[Pvtcarnage]

I play a sentinel along with a sage and vanguard. Each has it's uses and when I get rolled by a mara on my sage I don't cry nerf! I yell at my tank! and when one get's the upper hand on my vanguard I yell at my healer. And when I don't yell I'm thinking that Mara has some skills.

 

Point being it's a TEAM game not a SOLO game. Learn to make friends (that can play) and most of your troubles will go away.

[Wayshuba]

Here is my argument. The PvP is so good and balanced the game has to go free to play if it hopes to survive. More than 2/3rds of the player base left because PvP is too good. It's so good and balanced that no one wants to play it.

 

Haven't had a good laugh reading something in a while. So true, and written so funny. Thanks.

[Xerain]

As an aside, Patch 1.1.5 was the best PvP this game has seen. TTK was reasonable, classes were better balanced, and players had choices on how to grind (WZs or Ilum).

 

 

 

 

Sort of. The Expertise formula assumes equal amounts of Expertise. However, in live there is too much Expertise variation, and the contrasts are causing the funk in TTK. The math says marginal differences in Expertise shouldn't really matter, but they do in live gameplay. The formula is not working correctly and hasn't since 1.2.

 

At full war hero even if I went double expertise crystals to get that boost expertise over a player that wasn't able to get the extra expertise, it'd still only be like .4% damage which is not huge at all.

[Xerain]

Stopped reading right there. Campaign has more stats on it than War Hero, right? Then explain to me why my deception assassin (or any other class with high significantly high tooltip damage abilities for that matter) can go in to a warzone where I end up on the opposing team from a guildmate (controlled experiment time!); we're both stealthy classes; we duel in both campaign and war hero gear -making sure that our expertise values are identical- and, well, needless to say: all of the high tooltip value abilities (procced mauls, shock, assassinate) are actually dealing more damage in pvp gear duels, yet the weaker tooltip abilities (force slow, voltaic slash, saber charge damage values, etc.) deal less.

 

In my experience, expertise has a more significant impact on these high tooltip damage abilities (until ~1100, then you begin to notice more from stats/power, though I've heard people say they figured out the math behind combat rolls and claim that expertise is best for damage increase until you have 700 -after which power gives more- and 1000 -after which primary stat gives more-) compared to stat/power stacking and lower tooltip value abilities seem to be more heavily influenced by stats/power compared to expertise.

 

What it boils down to is talents from skill trees that increase damage/surge value with specific abilities (rage warriors with smash, pyro PT with railshot/TD/CGC, decept-assin with shock/discharge) reap significantly higher ACTUAL damage value modifiers from expertise compared to abilities that aren't (you're tacking on a flat % modifier which will outweigh the abilitiy's tooltip valued gain from power and primary stats).

 

Now, I can't say I disagree (pretty sure they have expertise how they want it now) but some MINOR (reducing railshot tooltip damage by 100 points, for example, would result in it dealing ~350 less crit damage in pvp due to compounding variables from talents and the expertise modifier -that's a rough estimate, btw; too many variables in combat rolls for me to bother) nerfs to these consistantly big damage abilities, would be feasible.

 

Lastly, I don't think any class needs significant changes to their abilities' natural tooltip values, but some talent modifier values could use some potential toning down.

 

I stopped reading at the highlighted part. Both have equal expertise you say? So you're both sitting at the same exact number and percent in your char sheets huh? I guess you didn't look at the math in a previous post, or see many of the threads, showing how expertise works at all huh?

[Easpeak]

Lolk. Takes more then that but ok there guy.

 

Incendiary Round - Explosive Fuel - Explosive Dart - Rail Shot - Electro Dart - Mara leap + Ravage - Rocket Punch - Rail Shot

 

That's going to be a dead person like it or not unless they have some good outside interference.

[Xerain]

Incendiary Round - Explosive Fuel - Explosive Dart - Rail Shot - Electro Dart - Mara leap + Ravage - Rocket Punch - Rail Shot

 

That's going to be a dead person like it or not unless they have some good outside interference.

 

... And that's over how long of a period? the leap>ravage time is 4.5 seconds alone... <enough time right there for a healer to get a heal off.

[criminalheretic]

If you could be bothered to incorporate grammar and spelling into your argument... I'd say something. But no, you've already made it clear that you're a QQ mara. OP or not, your nerf is coming, juuuust like mine. Remember, TM spam was always interruptable

 

There should be a period after "interruptable". You know, if "interruptable" were an actual word. Next time try "TM spam was always able to be interrupted".

 

Sorry; you opened the grammar door.

[SinnedWill]

I stopped reading at the highlighted part. Both have equal expertise you say? So you're both sitting at the same exact number and percent in your char sheets huh? I guess you didn't look at the math in a previous post, or see many of the threads, showing how expertise works at all huh?

 

My point was that we should be getting higher valued hits with pve gear vs. pve gear (due to significantly better stats) based upon all the math that I've seen thrown about from a plethora of posts/threads detailing expertise's overall effects on damage. If you continued to read what I wrote (particularly the text in bold), you'd recognise that I actually pointed out what happens to be causing the discrepancies with actual values over theory-crafted values - you'll realise that the current expertise system actually IS responsible for causing exactly what I'm trying to point out.

Not that the current system is broken, but it certainly appears as though they didn't heavily consider all the potentially compounding variables associated with certain abilities that can be talented (significant damage increments and crit/surge bonus talents for such abilities).

 

That said, you ARE absolutely correct about a 1k (non-crit, non situationally boosted damage increase -i.e. pyro PT on burning target-) value being mitigated via expertise directly proportionate to the expertise damage bonus from someone with the same exact expertise value despite the deceptively higher %-value.

[Xerain]

My point was that we should be getting higher valued hits with pve gear vs. pve gear (due to significantly better stats) based upon all the math that I've seen thrown about from a plethora of posts/threads detailing expertise's overall effects on damage. If you continued to read what I wrote (particularly the text in bold), you'd recognise that I actually pointed out what happens to be causing the discrepancies with actual values over theory-crafted values - you'll realise that the current expertise system actually IS responsible for causing exactly what I'm trying to point out.

Not that the current system is broken, but it certainly appears as though they didn't heavily consider all the potentially compounding variables associated with certain abilities that can be talented (significant damage increments and crit/surge bonus talents for such abilities).

 

That said, you ARE absolutely correct about a 1k (non-crit, non situationally boosted damage increase -i.e. pyro PT on burning target-) value being mitigated via expertise directly proportionate to the expertise damage bonus from someone with the same exact expertise value despite the deceptively higher %-value.

 

From what a dev said rolls go Hit? y/n> Crit y/n > damage. So if expertise is calculated after the damage step... What is your argument?

[Easpeak]

... And that's over how long of a period? the leap>ravage time is 4.5 seconds alone... <enough time right there for a healer to get a heal off.

 

The healer won't see the health dropping until the first Rails Shot, after that it is pretty much a done deal in 3 seconds. Healer might get one heal off but the DPS output is more than enough to go through that too, unless you are saying that you as a Marauder cannot pull that kind of a damage off?

[Xerain]

The healer won't see the health dropping until the first Rails Shot, after that it is pretty much a done deal in 3 seconds. Healer might get one heal off but the DPS output is more than enough to go through that too, unless you are saying that you as a Marauder cannot pull that kind of a damage off?

 

Hey you said in the time it takes to get a heal off. 4.5 seconds is longer then any heal cast.

[Easpeak]

Hey you said in the time it takes to get a heal off. 4.5 seconds is longer then any heal cast.

 

I said 3 seconds. My point still stands, wouldn't really call that as effective healing.

[Xerain]

I said 3 seconds. My point still stands, wouldn't really call that as effective healing.

 

you said faster then they can get a heal off yo. your argument just went out the window.

[Easpeak]

you said faster then they can get a heal off yo. your argument just went out the window.

 

You've sidetracked so bad from your own initial arguments and are focused on unimportant parts of the discussion because you have no other input, but good luck yo.

[Xerain]

You've sidetracked so bad from your own initial arguments and are focused on unimportant parts of the discussion because you have no other input, but good luck yo.

 

No the initial part of our argument was that a PT and marauder can kill someone quicker then a healer can get off a heal. Then you went on to give an example where you gave a situation of a pt and mara doing damage to someone and the amount of time was a lot longer then a healers longest heal.