So What *Are* We Going To Ask? July

[Kelsicle]

I have a few concerns with the way this discussion seems to be going, although i dont envy your position in having to sort through all this and choose three questions.

 

Firstly, the main focus seems to be on Shadow tanks and balance spec. While i understand that there are huge issues with these specs, it would be unfair for all us infil spec'd players to be left out. The main issue I have for my infil dps is that outside of the 30sec-1min max high burst that we can put out when breaking stealth, we have little to no utility in either PvE or PvP (i play both), and we have very low sustainable damage and no useful AoE.

 

In my experience any good PvP player can easily disrupt our burst phase with their own defensive abilities (jugs/maras/sorcs). However i feel that as a melee class who can only attack within 10m range and when the target is in front of us our biggest weakness is our extreme lack of mobility that leaves us open to being kited around/stun locked endlessly, effectively gimping our damage output all together (mercs/op/sniper).

 

I know i am fairly biased towards infil spec, since i've played it since launch, i just dont want to see it forgotten and have all the questions focus on balance/kinetic specs.

 

My other issue is that you seem to be addressing this as a shadow only issue with only 3 questions and forgetting that we also have a mirror class over on the imp side that also gets 3 questions. More than this, the questions are delivered a month or so apart (right?). This should be giving us an opportunity to ask 6 questions in total, and also an opportunity to ask a follow up question if one of the first 3 isn't answered to our satisfaction.

 

Please dont make the mistake of not coordinating this properly with the imperial representative (whoever that is....?).

[Kelsicle]

 

My other issue is that you seem to be addressing this as a shadow only issue with only 3 questions and forgetting that we also have a mirror class over on the imp side that also gets 3 questions. More than this, the questions are delivered a month or so apart (right?). This should be giving us an opportunity to ask 6 questions in total, and also an opportunity to ask a follow up question if one of the first 3 isn't answered to our satisfaction.

 

Please dont make the mistake of not coordinating this properly with the imperial representative (whoever that is....?).

 

 

An after thought of this is that Balance spec is also shared between shadow/sage sin/sorc classes, so perhaps there is also an opportunity here to coordinate with those reps to save us asking the same questions repeatedly and allow us to deal with some of the other issues with shadows.

[Kitru]

Please dont make the mistake of not coordinating this properly with the imperial representative (whoever that is....?).

 

Xinika and I are coordinating like crazy. Don't worry. Pretty much everything we're talking about is getting passed from one to the other.

[ArchangelLBC]

An after thought of this is that Balance spec is also shared between shadow/sage sin/sorc classes, so perhaps there is also an opportunity here to coordinate with those reps to save us asking the same questions repeatedly and allow us to deal with some of the other issues with shadows.

 

I'm given to understand that Sage Balance is in a much better place than Shadow balance though. Many sage DPS spec balance for PVE and put up very competitive numbers. It's not like the shared trooper spec (assault) where the full spec is kinda awful for both ACs.

 

My other issue is that you seem to be addressing this as a shadow only issue with only 3 questions and forgetting that we also have a mirror class over on the imp side that also gets 3 questions. More than this, the questions are delivered a month or so apart (right?). This should be giving us an opportunity to ask 6 questions in total, and also an opportunity to ask a follow up question if one of the first 3 isn't answered to our satisfaction.

 

 

Kitru and Xinika have stated multiple times that they are in communication. However you should know that there is an 8 week separation between the questions.

[SandsS]

I'm willing to do some work on the phrasing for Shadow questions if you PM me a shortlist. I filled a similar advisory/support role for Paowee in the Sniper forums.

 

My specialty is language rather than class mechanics.

[AngelFluttershy]

I'm willing to do some work on the phrasing for Shadow questions if you PM me a shortlist. I filled a similar advisory/support role for Paowee in the Sniper forums.

 

My specialty is language rather than class mechanics.

 

I'd take SandsS up on their offer, they did a great job with the Sniper questions. Even if what they come up with isn't 100% perfect you can always follow their model to fit in what else you'd like to say.

[Missandei]

I'm willing to do some work on the phrasing for Shadow questions if you PM me a shortlist. I filled a similar advisory/support role for Paowee in the Sniper forums.

 

My specialty is language rather than class mechanics.

 

lol... The problem is that Bioware also have language specialists rather than class balance professionals. So we will get just another reply like: «Oh! Our metrics are not showing anything you are talking about... that is something for us to really look into! We will definattely look in to it soon! Thanks for feedback guys! [Ok! Done with this questions. We are free to ignore the community for another half a year.]»

 

Maybe the best idea is to just ask devs plain and simple: «So, when was it first you had come to idea to kill the Shadow class?»

Edited August 8, 2013 by Missandei

[Ancaglon]

An after thought of this is that Balance spec is also shared between shadow/sage sin/sorc classes, so perhaps there is also an opportunity here to coordinate with those reps to save us asking the same questions repeatedly and allow us to deal with some of the other issues with shadows.

"Shared" trees really aren't the same thing at all, they are actually entirely different sets of abilities, some of which have the same names and use the same mechanics. This may appear to you to be semantics, but it really isn't: it's a total non-issue to be concerned about breaking the "other AC" abilities.

 

Example: Both the Trooper ACs have an "Assault" tree, but for the Vanguard, Incendiary Round has 10m range, the Commando version is 30m range.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Ancaglon

[paowee]

I'm looking for a second "main" and have my sights on sin/shadow. specifically their PVE DPS. I hope you guys ask some very nice question(s) about Sin PVE DPS. And i hope BW sees this issues and repsonds with "we are working to make changes to this soon".

 

Looking at the Sniper responses, any changes that they plan on doing to our class is going to take a "while". I can only imagine that snipers are low on their "priority list while sin and pt pve dps "should" be close to the top.

 

can't wait for your class' turn on the BW Q&A.

Edited August 10, 2013 by paowee

[Kitru]

I can only imagine that snipers are low on their "priority list while sin and pt pve dps "should" be close to the top.

 

If Shad/Sins *aren't* at the top of their class fix priority list, I *seriously* have to wonder what the hell they think they're doing. The same is true if GS/Snipers or Sent/Maras are *anywhere* near the top. My guess would be that the "don't expect the fixes anytime soon" answers for the Sent/Mara and GS/Sniper questions were based upon the fact that both of those ACs are in pretty much the *best* spot at the moment.

Edited August 10, 2013 by Kitru

[Rahizm]

If Shad/Sins *aren't* at the top of their class fix priority list, I *seriously* have to wonder what the hell they think they're doing. The same is true if GS/Snipers or Sent/Maras are *anywhere* near the top. My guess would be that the "don't expect the fixes anytime soon" answers for the Sent/Mara and GS/Sniper questions were based upon the fact that both of those ACs are in pretty much the *best* spot at the moment.

 

Dear Kitru, don't even wonder. You pretty much gave the answer.

 

They'll still try to improve those DPS classes (mainly slingers) to let them do more DPS. They could've fixed the quick shot Sab talent/Hightail It bug but instead they "buffed" it by added 4 stacks with a longer duration, which was sort of unnecessary because they'll still top the DPS in any raid group without that talent. Sorry but it pisses me off, we shadows (both DPS and tanks) have been complaining for months. The minute a Sniper complaint comes in it's being dealt with.

 

I don't mean to be mean, but it's the truth.

 

I've put my Shadow aside since NIM came out. All I do with him is rarely tank HMs, and craft some enhancements.

[Bilirubin]

hey so maybe the solution is to have some gunslingers complain about how their guild's shadow tanks are getting RNGed and leading them to wipes

[thejollygreenone]

someone earlier questioned whether assassin rep (xinika) and shadow rep (kitru) were coordinating as to the questions being asked. kitru quickly responded saying they have been in frequent communication. that's all well and good, but i'd like to put forward a concept if this isn't already something our two reps have thought of. since shadows get their question answered in roughly a month, and then assassin all the way in november i say that we have the oppurtunity to ask 6 unique questions instead of 3. since theres such a large gap between the answers i think it'd be best to add as much variety to the questions as possible and have each one from each rep touch on something different since we all know we need a lot of work. so basically i'm wondering if kitru and xinika have already taken this sort of concept into consideration, as it will likely happen naturally anyway. i guess i'd just like to put forth that we should capitalize on these large gaps of time before our questions are even considered/answered to see how things play out and end up having completely different questions for each AC covering a much broader set of subjects. this will much increase our chance of getting all the issues that we believe as necessary to fit in to this event.

[Missandei]

someone earlier questioned whether assassin rep (xinika) and shadow rep (kitru) were coordinating as to the questions being asked. kitru quickly responded saying they have been in frequent communication. that's all well and good, but i'd like to put forward a concept if this isn't already something our two reps have thought of. since shadows get their question answered in roughly a month, and then assassin all the way in november i say that we have the oppurtunity to ask 6 unique questions instead of 3. since theres such a large gap between the answers i think it'd be best to add as much variety to the questions as possible and have each one from each rep touch on something different since we all know we need a lot of work. so basically i'm wondering if kitru and xinika have already taken this sort of concept into consideration, as it will likely happen naturally anyway. i guess i'd just like to put forth that we should capitalize on these large gaps of time before our questions are even considered/answered to see how things play out and end up having completely different questions for each AC covering a much broader set of subjects. this will much increase our chance of getting all the issues that we believe as necessary to fit in to this event.

 

I dont know about you but the whole this concept of 3 questions that basically had no obligations for devs and we should wait for 3 months to be able to hear the answers is insults me deeply.

 

Let it be one question but on weekly basis.

And even then all this communication effort resembles the usual situation when common people are have faith that their Leader/King/Tzar/Emperor are good and it is his advisors are giving him wrong description of the what is happening in the country.... He just dont know the real situation! All is needed is to tell him the truth about life of the simple people and he will change the things for better!

[GrovesK]

As my main is a shadow I just want to thank Kitru and Xinika for going to bat for this class. I still love playing my shadow. I love the style and the stealth and everything about the class. I just hope it can be brought back into line with the other classes.

 

I read through the questions and I have to say that Kitru's first 3 questions seem like the most pressing issues that we should ask about. However, all of the questions by both Kitru and Xinika are very well throught out and relevant to our interests.

 

Thanks for guys for everything!

[Keegan-vol]

:sy_lightside:Hi everyone great to see the shadow/assassin debate getting some love. My question is about PVE tanking, Phase walk and Mitigation.

Would it be possible to have this ability activate as a targeting reticle, where you can place it where you want within the range of effect. instead of having to move to the location then use the three second cast. It is very difficult to use in this manner.

Also would it be easier to just up the DR now till a permenant fix for tanks can be found? This would really help as I believe a class redesign is in order.

[SandsS]

And even then all this communication effort resembles the usual situation when common people are have faith that their Leader/King/Tzar/Emperor are good and it is his advisors are giving him wrong description of the what is happening in the country.... He just dont know the real situation! All is needed is to tell him the truth about life of the simple people and he will change the things for better!

 

I understand your skepticism about the process. It's a far-off bet and -- as you pointed out -- there are no guarantees that the developers will do anything. It's easy to see the questions as a "sop" or a pittance for a population who feels otherwise ignored. While I fully support your right to be offended by the gesture, I suggest attempting to make the most of the opportunity rather than either (a)scoffing at or (b) squandering it.

 

Both approaches are unproductive.

 

Making an analogy between players-serfs and developers/emperors is also misstating the situation. We are customers and they are professionals providing a service. Nothing more. This is our opportunity to collaborate on a list of "top three concerns" and to restate what we believe are the most glaring issues.

Edited August 12, 2013 by SandsS

[Altheran]

There is a new question that I'd like you to consider to add somewhere into list. I don't hope to be responded soon considering all the other Shadows have, but as you're in contact with Xinika, and as Xinika comes here too, maybe it could be in the Assassin questions later :

 

Like Knights or Bounty Hunters, Shadows and Assassins are Advanced Classes who are based upon the choice of a "stance", in our case Techniques and Charges. But unlike others, all these stances include a proc with an internal cooldown. This internal cooldown match the duration of one or several General Cooldowns... when the duration of the GCD hasn't changed.

With usual GCD, a Technique/Charge with a 4.5s ICD is virtually able to proc once every 3 GCD, meaning that after you made it proc once, your third ability coming after is likely to make it proc once more. But if your gear has Alacrity, your GCD will lower, and unless your execution speed is slower than the GCD (making alacrity quite pointless), your third attack after having procced your Technique/Charge once will be unable to make it proc one more time, delaying the "first chance" of a new proc to the fourth ability coming after. It means that if we consider a GCD lowered to 1.4s and a 4.5s ICD on the Technique/Charge, instead of having a minimal proc rate of 4.5s, procs will have a minimal proc rate of 5.6s (4 times 1.4s).

As a result, using Alacrity lowers the DPS provided by Techniques and Charges, and delays all what can result from these procs : healing for Kinetic Combat/Darkness, Breaching Shadows/Static Charges for Infiltration/Deception, Rippling Force/Lightning Burns for Balance/Madness and Force regenerations for any DPS spec.

Did you consider these side effects before adding Alacrity to Shadows' and Assassins' gear ? Are these side effects considered "acceptable" or do you intend to adress these (like making the Technique/Charge ICD lowered by Alacrity) ?

[thejollygreenone]

There is a new question that I'd like you to consider to add somewhere into list. I don't hope to be responded soon considering all the other Shadows have, but as you're in contact with Xinika, and as Xinika comes here too, maybe it could be in the Assassin questions later :

 

Like Knights or Bounty Hunters, Shadows and Assassins are Advanced Classes who are based upon the choice of a "stance", in our case Techniques and Charges. But unlike others, all these stances include a proc with an internal cooldown. This internal cooldown match the duration of one or several General Cooldowns... when the duration of the GCD hasn't changed.

With usual GCD, a Technique/Charge with a 4.5s ICD is virtually able to proc once every 3 GCD, meaning that after you made it proc once, your third ability coming after is likely to make it proc once more. But if your gear has Alacrity, your GCD will lower, and unless your execution speed is slower than the GCD (making alacrity quite pointless), your third attack after having procced your Technique/Charge once will be unable to make it proc one more time, delaying the "first chance" of a new proc to the fourth ability coming after. It means that if we consider a GCD lowered to 1.4s and a 4.5s ICD on the Technique/Charge, instead of having a minimal proc rate of 4.5s, procs will have a minimal proc rate of 5.6s (4 times 1.4s).

As a result, using Alacrity lowers the DPS provided by Techniques and Charges, and delays all what can result from these procs : healing for Kinetic Combat/Darkness, Breaching Shadows/Static Charges for Infiltration/Deception, Rippling Force/Lightning Burns for Balance/Madness and Force regenerations for any DPS spec.

Did you consider these side effects before adding Alacrity to Shadows' and Assassins' gear ? Are these side effects considered "acceptable" or do you intend to adress these (like making the Technique/Charge ICD lowered by Alacrity) ?

 

this is an interesting concept, i had always wondered why there was alacrity on stalker gear but never thought to look into it or capitalize on it. reducing thee ICD of a damage on proc mechanic would have to go to all classes that have similar mechanics that have internal cooldowns. and there would have to be a line drawn as to how exclusive this benefit will be.

 

i do like the idea though, it would possibly allow infiltration/deception specifically an interesting alternative. it does seem to be a problem already however with shadow technique/surging charge that it has such a low chance to proc and such a high internal cooldown it becomes very inconsistent. meaning i can't ever rely on it to proc exactly after the 3rd global cooldown anyway unless its from project/shock. so this ends up leading to lots big gaps where the ICD is free to proc but the mechanic refuses to do so (see RNG), this abnormal flow of procs tends to lead double stacking and overstacking of breaching shadows/static charge that happens with project/shock and even more from force breach/discharge since it's bugged.

 

my point being that while i like this idea and may work in the future, but a spec like deception needs a better % chance first (i made a suggestion about changing the rapid recover talent in kinetic combat to include all techniques) before we think about changing the stat layout that everyone's already used to. beyond that combat technique isn't necessary enough to be proccing exactly on cooldown and has a 50% chance already, and force technique has a 1.5 second ICD so lowering that may be slightly beneficial but a bit futile. its damn low already (the scaling is not something i can predict).

 

but again i do like the direction you're going in, and it may be worth it to throw this in as a wild card question.

[Altheran]

Yeah, that's clearly a wild card question. I don't see my question becoming a PvE or PvP one.

 

But you know, I wouldn't underestimate the impact of adapting Techniques to become Alacrity friendly and futile...

 

---

 

At first, when I posted that it was only a feeling going through my head. But I decided to try to simulate Alacrity in order to see if I was spot on. I'd like have others' opinion on my approach (open spoiler to read)

 

 

I used this parse as a base.

First of all, I sorted hits in three categories : Direct Damage, DoTs and Procs. Direct Damage will contain Saber Strike, Double Strike, Force in Balance and Mind Crush direct damage. DoTs will contain Sever Force and both Crushed. Procs will contain Force Technique and Rippling Force.

 

The initial parse can be detailed as following :

Direct : 1438.72

DoTs : 1051.47

Procs : 281.7

Total : 2771.89

 

Now, I try to simulate to add 5% alacrity considering it to be originally at 0%, and without considering any loss of crit/surge/power.

 

Due to DoT's nature to damage periodically at a fixed rate, I consider the DoT DPS to be left unchanged.

 

As for direct damage, because the execution speed is increased by the same percentage granted by alacrity, I increase its vale by the same percentage, here 5%.

Direct : 1438.72 + 5% = 1510.656 (+71.936)

 

As for Procs, now I assume that the first ability after a first proc is now unable to make the Technique (and so the Rippling Force) lengthing the average proc rate by one GCD. For rounding purpose, I'll consider it to still be 1.5s.

Force Technique activated 110 over the 7min52s of the parse length, meaning it had an average proc rate of once every ~4.3s (472 s /110 procs). This proc rate isn't accurate as abilities like Force Breach and Sever Force aren't able to make it proc in the first place, lengthing the proc rate.

So the proc rate with Alacrity (considering that delayed damage of second strike of Double strike or second and third stike of Saber Attack wouldn't be able to proc the technique either) will be ~5.8s (472/110 + 1.5)

The average DPS done by Procs so will be the "old" DPS * "old proc rate" / "new proc rate"

281.7 * (472/110) / (472/110 + 1.5) = ~208.732 (-72.968)

 

Following this approach the average DPs will sums up to :

Direct : 1510.656 (+71.936)

DoTs : 1051.47 (+0)

Procs : 208.732 (-72.968)

Total : 2770.858 (-1.032)

 

We have to note that the loss on Procs due to Alacrity is a flat loss, while the gain depends on the percentage. It means that with this model, any Alacrity under 5% will harm the Shadow more than it will benefits him.

 

Now, if we try to be a bit more realistic, considering that all abilities that have a second/third hit will be able to make the Technique proc we can consider the flat loss to procs to be only a half of what the model said (~ -36). But it will still mean that Alacrity will have to be higher than 2.50% to be beneficial, and not detrimental.

As a result, unless Alacrity reach a rather high cap (200 Alacrity => ~2.8%), the stat is detrimental, and if we consider that Alacrity will take place of Surge, the cap will be higher and it's possible that it isn't reasonably reach-able (cutting 200 Surge to someone with 300 Surge means +17% on crits down to +7% on crits).

Alacrity fails to be a "all purpose stat" at least in Balance Shadow's case as it can't be used as a filler stat. The amount given on Shadow gear is only a pure hindrance.

 

Concerning Infiltration spec it's harder to foresee what Alacrity will do, because a part of Shadow Technique damage is off ICD (Project under Clairvoyant Strike effect) and will have more complex side-effects (Breach Shadows generation)

 

This problem would also concern Combat Sentinels with Ataru Form, but in their case Zen wouldn't be a problem because the gain provided to damaging abilities from 30% Alacrity is higher than the loss in Ataru it would cause.

 

 

Edited August 14, 2013 by Altheran

[mmerry]

Yeah, that's clearly a wild card question. I don't see my question becoming a PvE or PvP one.

 

But you know, I wouldn't underestimate the impact of adapting Techniques to become Alacrity friendly and futile...

 

---

 

At first, when I posted that it was only a feeling going through my head. But I decided to try to simulate Alacrity in order to see if I was spot on. I'd like have others' opinion on my approach (open spoiler to read)

 

 

I used this parse as a base.

First of all, I sorted hits in three categories : Direct Damage, DoTs and Procs. Direct Damage will contain Saber Strike, Double Strike, Force in Balance and Mind Crush direct damage. DoTs will contain Sever Force and both Crushed. Procs will contain Force Technique and Rippling Force.

 

The initial parse can be detailed as following :

Direct : 1438.72

DoTs : 1051.47

Procs : 281.7

Total : 2771.89

 

Now, I try to simulate to add 5% alacrity considering it to be originally at 0%, and without considering any loss of crit/surge/power.

 

Due to DoT's nature to damage periodically at a fixed rate, I consider the DoT DPS to be left unchanged.

 

As for direct damage, because the execution speed is increased by the same percentage granted by alacrity, I increase its vale by the same percentage, here 5%.

Direct : 1438.72 + 5% = 1510.656 (+71.936)

 

As for Procs, now I assume that the first ability after a first proc is now unable to make the Technique (and so the Rippling Force) lengthing the average proc rate by one GCD. For rounding purpose, I'll consider it to still be 1.5s.

Force Technique activated 110 over the 7min52s of the parse length, meaning it had an average proc rate of once every ~4.3s (472 s /110 procs). This proc rate isn't accurate as abilities like Force Breach and Sever Force aren't able to make it proc in the first place, lengthing the proc rate.

So the proc rate with Alacrity (considering that delayed damage of second strike of Double strike or second and third stike of Saber Attack wouldn't be able to proc the technique either) will be ~5.8s (472/110 + 1.5)

The average DPS done by Procs so will be the "old" DPS * "old proc rate" / "new proc rate"

281.7 * (472/110) / (472/110 + 1.5) = ~208.732 (-72.968)

 

Following this approach the average DPs will sums up to :

Direct : 1510.656 (+71.936)

DoTs : 1051.47 (+0)

Procs : 208.732 (-72.968)

Total : 2770.858 (-1.032)

 

We have to note that the loss on Procs due to Alacrity is a flat loss, while the gain depends on the percentage. It means that with this model, any Alacrity under 5% will harm the Shadow more than it will benefits him.

 

Now, if we try to be a bit more realistic, considering that all abilities that have a second/third hit will be able to make the Technique proc we can consider the flat loss to procs to be only a half of what the model said (~ -36). But it will still mean that Alacrity will have to be higher than 2.50% to be beneficial, and not detrimental.

As a result, unless Alacrity reach a rather high cap (200 Alacrity => ~2.8%), the stat is detrimental, and if we consider that Alacrity will take place of Surge, the cap will be higher and it's possible that it isn't reasonably reach-able (cutting 200 Surge to someone with 300 Surge means +17% on crits down to +7% on crits).

Alacrity fails to be a "all purpose stat" at least in Balance Shadow's case as it can't be used as a filler stat. The amount given on Shadow gear is only a pure hindrance.

 

Concerning Infiltration spec it's harder to foresee what Alacrity will do, because a part of Shadow Technique damage is off ICD (Project under Clairvoyant Strike effect) and will have more complex side-effects (Breach Shadows generation)

 

This problem would also concern Combat Sentinels with Ataru Form, but in their case Zen wouldn't be a problem because the gain provided to damaging abilities from 30% Alacrity is higher than the loss in Ataru it would cause.

 

 

It a 300s (5 min) parse. Which means the technique proc'd every 2.72 seconds which is still below the 1.5s tooltip value for force technique.

 

Figured I would throw that in there since I didn't know if that would throw off the rest of your calculations.

Edited August 14, 2013 by mmerry

[Altheran]

It a 300s (5 min) parse. Which means the technique proc'd every 2.72 seconds which is still below the 1.5s tooltip value for force technique.

 

Figured I would throw that in there since I didn't know if that would throw off the rest of your calculations.

 

True, I've been in error because the line saying "Log Length: 7m 52s" in the header.

But it doesn't throw off the rest of calculation, on the contrary it strengthen it. For the proc DPS, I assumed that the new DPS after adding Alacrity was : "old DPS" * "old proc rate" / "new proc rate", with the new proc rate being "old proc rate" + 1 GCD

And lower the "old proc rate" is, higher will be the impact of the additional GCD, increasing the DPS loss.

It means that if I correct my calculations, it will show that Alacrity is even more detrimental to a Balance Shadow that I first predicted.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Altheran

[MobileCover]

At this point I really wonder if one of the questions should be:

"Does the internal testing/combat team have any plans to play the Shadow Advanced Class at all for testing upcoming PVE and PVP content? They have previously admitted that the class wasn't tested in more recent PVE content, do they intend to rectify this grievous oversight when it has been clearly demonstrated that their theory and metrics are flawed and incapable providing a balanced and enjoyable AC compared to ones they actually test in person? At present the current approach with their metrics and theorizing have repeatedly proven insufficient to bring all 3 specs of the AC up to standard."

[MandFlurry]

Excellent questions from both of you. I will tackle Xinika's last question as I do not think it will weigh much to a developer. Change it as you wish but as long as we have cloak and the current skills, shadows will always be the no. 1 pick to guard a node. It is the way the class was designed at the core that relegates us there. If you would remove cloak then the guarding nodes part will fall mostly to scoundrels and operatives. You know clearly well that stealth guarders provide and advantage. Xinika, I see your premise on which you ask this question and in my view, making shadows viable as smashers so to say will not put smashers to guard nodes. Again, the cloak factor comes into play.

 

 

Question 1 : From a PVE perspective, what are the criteria employed to measure shadow tank viability in top tier progression raids?

 

 

Question 2 : Given the new game direction where content promotes spike damage, what is being done in terms of class balance to allow roughly the same level of confidence when a guild chooses to take a Shadow tank?

 

 

 

Question 3 : As a PVP-er, I notice that DPS and survivability wise, I am behind most classes. Will the gap be addressed or this is a reshaping of the class that promotes the lone wolf attitude where Shadows need to be opportunists and engage weak targets for success?

 

When i Pvp, which is mostly on the Weekends of course, I notice that as just getting to Shadow as a Class, I have always noticed that we need the Shadows on the nodes, just as the Sorcs are needed to be an invisible line to guard their nodes to. Nowadays I notice too much that the Shadows usually do not guard the nodes anymore.

 

We may not like it, but every class has it's jobs in this MMO realm. I can also understand why the Shadows don't want to guard the nodes, and that's usually because no 1 person wants to just sit at a node over and over again. I do also notice that some Shadows can do good 1v1, or defend nodes almost long enough for help to arrive, or just get killed too fast. I think a lot of ppl know how to play their Shadows right are very powerful and can reduce ppl to rubble, or if they might not know how to play their Shadows, then they go "Nowhere fast".

 

Me, i'll be doing a hybrid build, and some ppl have said to put some abilities from the past back into the game at a higher tier so ppl can't do hybrids. That would be a very stupid mistake in my view as usually only hybrids do good usually, while ppl using 1 tree can get smashed fast if they don't get that 3 or 4 skills from another tree to make the Shadows that much more useful and powerful as well. I know what I say because i'm grinding 4 characters at different times and know what skill are usually better to have than others.

 

I think the Shadow community as a whole should help more ppl with what skills may help. Yes, i know we already do that, but and get sick of the same questions being asked every day, but also must remember that we were in their shoes once.

 

Sorry for the Poster I quoted, I agree with most of what u said, but it usually comes down to who knows how to play their Shadow, and what skill set did they get. I makes a Huge difference in knowing where to put ur Class pts in.

Edited August 18, 2013 by MandFlurry

[thejollygreenone]

honestly, i'm a little frustrated with how little a lot of people give notice to the serious lack of dps for this AC. both specs are afflicted, both need a minor boost to be at least on par with guardians, if balance could be on par with vigilance, and deception be on par with focus, even in raw dps, i'd be happy. i really hope this gets addressed and both dps specs get love.

 

beyond that i also equally hope tanks will get their minor flaws balanced out, which to me seems as simple as looking at the specific incidents that are giving our tanks trouble (resilience), and it might help to give them better access to damage reduction or defense to reduce spikiness altogether. however me speaking about tanking is all speculative, i don't play tank on a nightmare operations level.

 

my point in this post is i want to bring attention to the fact that most people who have suggested a list of questions have either completely neglected to bring up dps in pve, and even if they do it's minimal and/or one-sided toward a particular build. most posts i see of this nature involve questions for 1. tanking, 2. pvp, and 3. more pvp or phase walk. (notice i say most instead of all)

 

now i know the changes that may or may not be made to our class aren't solely based off of these questions but i think we shed some more light on our pve niche players. i'd hate to have 2.4 pass without at least one of our dps builds on par with other classes, or to see our tanks are suffering one shots in the highest levels of content. i may be pve biased in this, but i sincerely feel these are the issues that need to be talked about, and would be mighty disappointed if they didn't get resolved.

 

on a side note, i've brought this up before, but i really think we should be work under the impression that we have 6 available questions rather than 3. because in reality we can have 6 different questions split between assassin in shadow. if we didn't i'd feel pretty foolish seeing the same question twice on assassin and shadow. so with all that being said if any of you are about to suggest 3 questions, do 6 instead, and try to involve everything we need to talk about, because there's a lot. please and thank you (kitru posted like 5 questions, i want more of this)

(i would gladly offer 6 questions if i thought anyone was paying attention)