Marauder class representative: Sample questions!

[countpopeula]

#

#3 = that wont work, if timed right, you could stack deadly saber on someone til the end of time... it would be op.. imagine

 

They do not allow for this. Maintaining the DS bleeds until a new DS buff is applied to the player does nothing, new stacks of DS are not applied until the currently applied DS bleed has expired from the target. Then and only then can the new DS stacks be applied. They changed this with 2.0, previously maximal Anni spec damage resulted from skipping 2 GCD's at some point during the first two applications of DS and allowing the player to maintain 3 stacks of DS on the target until a mistake was made or phase didn't allow it.

Edited February 28, 2014 by countpopeula

[Lafay]

They do not allow for this. Maintaining the DS bleeds until a new DS buff is applied to the player does nothing, new stacks of DS are not applied until the currently applied DS bleed has expired from the target. Then and only then can the new DS stacks be applied. They changed this with 2.0, previously maximal Anni spec damage resulted from skipping 2 GCD's at some point during the first two applications of DS and allowing the player to maintain 3 stacks of DS on the target until a mistake was made or phase didn't allow it.

 

Yes i know, i was assuming they would removed that if they enabled a 4th+ stack or a 4th charge (useless with only 3 stacking). They would have to to make the addition of a 4th stack or 4th charge a dps gain.

 

edit: if i remember right, it was incredibly hard to maintain a 3 stack on your target and keep your rage up, 2.0 seems like so long ago.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Lafay

[cs_zoltan]

I don't really like the Aniihilation question, it's been said a lot of times that this class representative program is not play Dev for a day. I suggest to look at odawgg's Mercenery questions, I think he did a great job with wording/formating.

[Emperor-Norton]

I don't really like the Aniihilation question, it's been said a lot of times that this class representative program is not play Dev for a day. I suggest to look at odawgg's Mercenery questions, I think he did a great job with wording/formating.

I would have to agree. Class questions that have revolved around asking about a specific issue and asking for the dev opinion and philosophy on it seem to have worked out the best.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Emperor-Norton

[Gudarzz]

Then please list what the issue is instead of saying you don't like the question. I personally feel that I am explicitly listing what the problem is: Anni doesn't have the capacity for burst and target switches. It is clearly stated throughout and I have given community generated suggestions for specific abilities that offer solutions to overall problem.

[cs_zoltan]

What I don't like about it is this part:

"For example, Annihilate could be improved to do bonus damage on bleeding targets or apply a separate bleed. Furthermore, Annihilation DoTs could feature better protection against cleanses and/or provide better options for application/reapplication, such as a bonus effect added to the Pulverize/Rupture reset mechanic (i.e. Annihilate stacks, cooldown reduction, reduced rage costs, crit rating boost etc)."

They said they don't want suggestion, they want questions (suggestions are for the brainstorming thread).

 

What I think you could add to the Anni question is that even on dummy Anni is barely ahead of Carnage (and it's with a broken relic, that's the very important part) which should be a clear win for Anni. So if anni is barely better on the most suited fight for it, and the fact that carnage has stupidly superior burst + no setuptime + no ramp up time, why would anyone play Anni EVER (other than personal preference).

 

It's a melee sustained spec with setup time (it's only 1 GCD though contrary to other dot spec's 2-3 gcd, but it's countered by the fact that you have no spammable dot) and the only one with ramp up time, it should be the 2nd highest parsing spec on a dummy behind vengeance juggs (3second melee channel is a pain).

[Emperor-Norton]

Then please list what the issue is instead of saying you don't like the question. I personally feel that I am explicitly listing what the problem is: Anni doesn't have the capacity for burst and target switches. It is clearly stated throughout and I have given community generated suggestions for specific abilities that offer solutions to overall problem.

One thing is that unless they changed the format, the Annihilation one has to be about PvE. So asking about cleanse protection seems out of place. There is also a lot of suggested changes that seem a bit clunky and could be seen as us telling the devs what to do. But that is my opinion.

 

A better way of putting things could be saying what the issues that Annihilation has in the first paragraph, then asking if the devs believe that Annihilation is performing where they want it relevant to Carnage and the other specs (a way to work in the dotsmash hybrid) in the second. I could say more or do a mock write up, but I would prefer to do it in the Morning (Eastern time), when my brain should be working properly.

[znihilist]

I don't see why the questions must have the PvE/PvP/Custom tag. Eric made that suggestion to make sure that the representative of the class wouldn't hijack the questions for his preferred play mode. With that in mind I have two suggestions:

1) Separate the questions based on specs, but re-write in a more elegant way.

2) Simply adhere to the PvE/PvP/Custom blueprint. And this means taking any major PvP reference from any question and move them to the PvP question, and vice versa (this should not be true for Carnage as the RNG is both in PvE and PvP and could be the custom question).

 

 

I am leaning toward suggestion 2, as it allows us to present a more coherent image to the devs.

(Example ahead and a not real suggestion)

Question 1: In the last Q&A, your answers to the sentinel questions indicated that you see Annihilation/Watchman as the supposed top single target dps spec of the class.

However, at this moment it is not true for the following reasons:

Evidence 1 (Operation parses)

Evidence 2 (bugged relic)

Evidence 3 (dotsmash, and what are they going to do about it)

Evidence 4 (nature of the fights)

etc etc

 

Are you satisfied with the spec at his moment ? What is your vision for the spec in 2.7 and beyond ?

If you wish to improve the spec, would you be willing to look at some of the suggestions presented by the community ? (list them at the end of the 3 questions.)

 

This allows us to focus on the whole class in the PvP question and create a more thought out question for the class.

Edited February 28, 2014 by znihilist

[oofalong]

I like the current form of the Annihilation question better than the last version. I would specifically call out the dotsmash spec as well. The issue isn't nerf the dotsmash but increase the viability of Annihilation (although I expected a nerf to dotsmash as BW doesn't like hybrids.)

 

Carnage question seems good. And, based on the elimination of RNG in other specs I imagine we'll see some beneficial changes here hopefully soon.

 

The PvP questions seems leading, which I think is a good thing. Given the known changes in 2.7 as well as other already implemented nerfs, it is unclear what role Marauders will have in PvP. (Obviously, they will have a role but it is yet to be seen how severe the 2.7 Smash nerfs are in PvP. I don't think we'll know until the PTS is up and people can play test it.)

 

TLDR; the questions seem good now let's hope for comprehensive answers even if we don't agree with them.

[TheCourier-]

Annihilation spec isn't behind carnage spec because of burst. Annihilation spec is behind carnage spec because annihilation spec is losing at its own game: sustained DPS. Boss fights favoring burst isn't actually true, especially for the new ops. Ever since annihilate stacks were swapped to 24 seconds instead of 15 seconds, annihiltion spec has no problem maintaining stacks (there are 1 or two fights in older ops that it still does, but not many).

 

The main thing is: carnage spec is doing about 5% more damage on a training target than annihilation spec (excluding the relic glitch), and a training target is literally a best case scenario for annihilation spec to be attacking.

 

I recommend changing the part:

 

"Does the development team believe that the design of Annihilation as a sustained DPS spec is performing as expected, especially in a PVE/PVP environment that favors burst damage and target switches?"

 

to be:

"Does the development team believe that the design of Annihilation as a sustained DPS spec is performing as expected, especially compared carnage spec, since annihilation spec has no burst at all?" .

 

I'm concerned that if you don't point blank ask the Bioware devs "why is annihilation spec parsing less that carnage spec on virtually every boss fight, and on training targets", they'll dance around some bushes, and not give a real answer.

 

On a side note, the carnage question looks nice.

 

I still recommend dropping the ranked 8 versus 8 question. It has no relevance in the marauder class representative questions, and detracts from the other questions that you are asking. For the record, I loved ranked WZs and played a lot of them (I had a 150-75ish win/loss ratio at them). I still recommend that you drop the ranked 8 versus 8 question.

Edited February 28, 2014 by TheCourier-

[Emperor-Norton]

~snip~

Carnage doesn't parse 5% higher than Annihilation without bugged relics. As is they give about 80 DPS to Annihilation and if I managed to get some real good RNG I could probably push near 3900. I also imagine that if the best Carnage Marauders parsed (Ranick, Beastfury, Noodles, etc) they could pull off 3800. The only question with Annihilation we can ask is whether the real lack of DPS difference is intentional, and Annihilation is held back due to its utility or what is the dilemma.

 

It is worth noting that we are talking about short dummy parses, where a burst spec like Carnage will punch above it's weight class relative to a sustained one like Annihilation. Then again most Boss fights are pretty short.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Emperor-Norton

[CellPerfect]

One thing is that unless they changed the format, the Annihilation one has to be about PvE. So asking about cleanse protection seems out of place. There is also a lot of suggested changes that seem a bit clunky and could be seen as us telling the devs what to do. But that is my opinion.

 

This is why I dislike calling things the "PvP" or "PvE" or "custom" question. All questions will have implications in PvP and PvE. It would be better to call it the Annihilation question or the Carnage question rather than call it the PvP or PvE question because a question about a spec can tackle both the PvP and PvE issues. I find the whole "PvP" and "PvE" question format to be silly, and from what I have seen, most (if not all) of the "PvE" questions from all classes have had parts to it the affect PvP as well. Same with the "PvP" questions having things that affect PvE in them, so there really has been no "this is for PvP or PvE only" questions.

[Emperor-Norton]

This is why I dislike calling things the "PvP" or "PvE" or "custom" question. All questions will have implications in PvP and PvE. It would be better to call it the Annihilation question or the Carnage question rather than call it the PvP or PvE question because a question about a spec can tackle both the PvP and PvE issues. I find the whole "PvP" and "PvE" question format to be silly, and from what I have seen, most (if not all) of the "PvE" questions from all classes have had parts to it the affect PvP as well. Same with the "PvP" questions having things that affect PvE in them, so there really has been no "this is for PvP or PvE only" questions.

Well that is the format Bioware chose, however I looked back at some of the questions and you are correct. Disregard that bit.

[znihilist]

Well that is the format Bioware chose, however I looked back at some of the questions and you are correct. Disregard that bit.

 

I repeat what I said earlier, that format was chosen to make sure the representative didn't abuse his position to pass questions about his preferred play style. We don't have that issue here, and I don't think Eric is going to have a problem with us presenting a different format for the questions.

This is his reply on this issue:

 

Hey guys,

 

After seeing a lot of the feedback you guys are giving here in this thread we are going to add an addendum to one of the rules. As you guys have mentioned some folks have some concerns about a Class Representative not doing a good job of representing both PvP and PvE concerns. I can definitely see the validity of this concern and although I don't really want to put too many rules in place, we agree this may be needed. So...

 

When a Class Representative posts his top 3 questions/issues to go to the Combat team, 1 question must be PvE related and 1 must be PvP. That will allow the 3rd question to be a wildcard and cover any other issue they feel is necessary. We will allow exceptions if needed, like if there are clearly 3 PvE issues which overshadow PvP, we can talk with the Representative about exceptions. However, as a general rule, 1 PvP, 1 PvE, 1 whatever you want!

 

Keep the feedback coming guys and make sure you are nominating reps!

 

-eric

 

Key sentence is : We will allow exceptions if needed. I suppose we can afford an exception in our case. Perhaps our class representative can contact Eric and discuss this issue with him.

[Emperor-Norton]

The Questions as is do a good enough job of describing the issues the Community feels are important. Unless Gudarzz wants to do some quick edits based on what was said I say just post them as is. After all they were supposed to be posted on Friday.

[EricMusco]

Hey folks,

 

Apologies for the delay on posting in the thread as I was out of the office on Friday for the Atlanta Cantina Event. I am passing your questions on to the Combat team now. I will make a new thread once I have the answers.

 

Thanks

 

-eric

[Projawa]

Updated on 2/28/14.

 

1. Custom Question:

 

Carnage revolves around the ability to anticipate, plan, and execute periods of burst damage. However, carnage suffers from an inability to fully capitalize on Gore windows due to two distinct issues: Slaughter RNG and the excessive susceptibility to stuns/knockbacks. Due to the RNG design of Slaughter, any unplanned Ataru strikes (i.e those not originating from Massacre) have the potential to replace an available Gore with a Gore from Slaughter, essentially denying a second burst DPS window. Allowing the Gore from Slaughter to activate only when Gore is on cooldown, for instance, would resolve some of the negative aspects of RNG. Second, Gore windows are exceedingly vulnerable to stuns and knockbacks, especially in PVP where these counters are more readily available than Gore itself. Adding a level of protection to Gore windows would further encourage the use of Carnage in competitive PVP and, subsequently, would require a more skillful use of stuns and knockback counters. For example, Gore could be altered so that it remains as a temporary static buff until direct damage is initiated, at which point the 4.5 second window would commence. This would increase the damage potential of carnage and would require players to use stuns and knockbacks more skillfully.

 

Is this inability to fully capitalize on Gore windows intentional and, if so, what is the reasoning behind this decision?

 

 

1. They'll probably change it so that Slaughter procs are no longer triggered by Ataru hits. Rather, Massacre will have a 100% chance to proc Slaughter, outside of the 20sec rate limit. Similar to Tracer Missile > Unload and Rampage > Ravage and the end of RNG.

 

Even if any such changes boost carnage's dps potential, I'll be disappointed in the removal of carnage RNG or any attempts to simplify/dumbdown what makes it the most fun dps spec in the game imo.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Projawa

[Ycoga]

 

Given the recent changes to the Undying Rage mechanic and the future plans to tone down the AOE damage output of Rage, Marauders are potentially faced with limited options for competitive gameplay.

I urge you to consider scrapping this question because BW refute it handily. Ask them something else instead.

[JediMasterSLC]

I urge you to consider scrapping this question because BW refute it handily. Ask them something else instead.

 

Nah, it's fine.

[Altheran]

Nah, it's fine.

 

And too late anyway.

[Gudarzz]

I hope people realize that it is incredibly hard to encompass everyone's ideas and opinions. When the class rep system was reinitiated, the problems were no longer limited to specs. We suddenly had to address the radical redesigns to smash and undying rage, and the prevalence of hybrid specs. To top it off, we had very limited time.

 

Overall, I am pleased with the questions. I received a lot of help from the forums, in game conversations, and discussions in streams. Thanks to everyone who helped out! <3 Hopefully, we get some good answers from the combat team.

[EricMusco]

Hey folks,

 

I spoke to the combat team around timing of the answers. Right now, although I hope to get them to you Friday, it is much, much more likely that you will get them back next week. I just wanted to give you a heads up on timing, it will most likely be Monday or Tuesday.

 

Thanks!

 

-eric

[znihilist]

Hey folks,

 

I spoke to the combat team around timing of the answers. Right now, although I hope to get them to you Friday, it is much, much more likely that you will get them back next week. I just wanted to give you a heads up on timing, it will most likely be Monday or Tuesday.

 

Thanks!

 

-eric

 

Thank you eric for the heads up!

[Ardarell_Solo]

I hope people realize that it is incredibly hard to encompass everyone's ideas and opinions. When the class rep system was reinitiated, the problems were no longer limited to specs. We suddenly had to address the radical redesigns to smash and undying rage, and the prevalence of hybrid specs. To top it off, we had very limited time.

 

Overall, I am pleased with the questions. I received a lot of help from the forums, in game conversations, and discussions in streams. Thanks to everyone who helped out! <3 Hopefully, we get some good answers from the combat team.

 

Good job and thank you for your effort, mate! :-)

[ronniehenlau]

Yeah, because posting those answers on a friday worked out superb when you did so last time