Marauder class representative: Sample questions!

[Gudarzz]

3rd question is up.

 

I presented the idea that Rage needs to be toned in PVP so that there is greater variability in marauder gameplay when arenas are released. I also ask for the justification behind the removal of ranked 8v8.

[kennethdale]

3rd question is up.

 

I presented the idea that Rage needs to be toned in PVP so that there is greater variability in marauder gameplay when arenas are released. I also ask for the justification behind the removal of ranked 8v8.

 

Fair compromise imo.

[Gudarzz]

Fair compromise imo.

 

Good to hear. Although I am the first to admit the question needs a bit of improvement.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Gudarzz

[kennethdale]

Good to hear. Although I am the first to admit the question needs a bit of improvement.

 

To be honest the wording is rather clunky and the rwz thing feels thrown in. I'll spend some time tonight and try to come up with another possibility.

[kennethdale]

Since the inception of ranked warzones, Rage has been the specialization of choice for Marauders in competitive PVP. Even in its current incarnation, Rage continues to offer the most reliable burst and sustained DPS when combined with Marauder defensive abilities. Rage features ease of use and the potential for unchecked DPS output. Altering Smash so that only the target player is affected by Shockwave/Dominate, for instance, would tone down the dominance of Rage Marauders in PVP. With the introduction of arenas, a balance to Rage would provide greater variability to Marauder gameplay.

 

Taking the overwhelming community support (Petition to Keep Ranked 8v8) into consideration, does Bioware believe that the removal of ranked 8v8 warzones is justified and, if so, does the development team believe that the current design of Rage threatens the future variability of Marauder gameplay in the arena setting?

 

I'm going to take what I see as the themes of this question (RWZ removal and Rage being OP) and run with them. Here goes:

 

As was acknowledged by the Development team in the Sentinel questions, Rage Marauders currently possess some of (if not the) highest area of effect damage of any class in the game. Given that this burst is highly controllable and has a decently sized area of effect, the Rage Marauder has become a pivotal member of any ranked warzone team. While we as a community appreciate that we can so easily find ourselves a place in high-end PvP, we also recognize that in its current incarnation Rage is innately imbalanced. In essence, the upsides specific to Rage (massive on-demand AoE burst damage paired with very potent defensive cooldowns) far outstrip the downsides (low single-target damage compared to other classes and specs). We also feel that this will be magnified in 4v4 arenas due simply to the massive amount of damage a Rage Marauder can put out in such a short period of time and adding to that that now all of that damage can be applied to the entire opposing team if grouped. As a result of this, the Rage Marauder will become an absolute necessity for any high-end PvP team leading to the exclusion of other classes and subsequently to a lack of true game balance in PvP. On top of the lack of diversity in team make-up, the removal of ranked Warzones will increase the blandness of high-end PvP and the community as a whole feels that this is a change that should be reversed.

 

In light of all of that, does the combat team feel that Rage is currently performing above its expectations in PvP and what is the development team's opinion on the homogeneity of end-game PvP given the upcoming removal of ranked Warzones? Is there any sense that the lack of any variation in terms of play-styles in end-game PvP will lead those players to leave for so-called "greener pastures"?

 

I tried to tie in the rwz bit as well as kind of hit them in the gut with the last bit. Thoughts?

[Megatfx]

Even if I had submitted early, it wouldn't have guaranteed early responses. All we can do is continue as normal.

 

Remember, they are the ones that look bad...not us for trying. Not phased in the least. Anyways, I'll get the 3rd question out by tomorrow so we have a solid week of discussion. I haven't heard too much criticism beyond minor tweaks so I assume we are good on the other two.

 

In other news, I got the job I interviewed for when people were worried I got abducted by aliens and disappeared.

 

Welp gotta make some quick apologies. Thankfully the second or third person to reply educated me on what I had failed to grasp for the last 2 months about the questions.

 

Gudarzzz the questions look fantastic, and you know this as I've already told you in-game on the PTS. They do even look more polished than the ones I told you looked great back then. I was telling you to hurry up, and I was in a rush about the class rep thing in August because I didn't realize that you were scheduled a date to submit the class questions and get a reply and if you had submitted earlier that nothing would have happened. When people kept saying "he has until october", I was thinking the deadline to have those submitted was october, not that he can't submit early and get a response upon being submitted. I had missed the dev post about it and I thought time was ticking away.

 

You can tell you have put a lot of effort into the questions and I really do like them a lot, especially for Carnage. Thanks for not blowing up on me and calling me out for being a complete idiot when reading this, and since you didn't, I'm here to call myself out first. I am a loudmouth, I don't even know how this account still has forum access after all my infractions, nor could I do the job of being class rep, from my point of view I honestly thought we had a deadline and I wanted to be early so we could get a response sooner rather than later.

 

Glad you were picked as class rep, he is a fantastic Marauder and I know this from playing with him.

[znihilist]

I am aware that they essentially delayed our questions by 2 month, and perhaps nullified them with whatever changes they are bringing in 2.5 but here is what I think:

 

 

Updated on 9/20/13.

 

Custom Question:

snip

The question seems to be okay.

 

 

PVE Question:

 

According to the response given in the Jedi Sentinel forums, the development team stated that Annihilation was intended to be the superior spec for sustained DPS. However, this does not hold true when comparing current Annihilation and Carnage DPS parses. This discrepancy is due to two distinct issues: lack of on demand DPS on target switches and the limited application/reapplication of bleeds. By design, PVE operation bosses will often disappear/cleanse or require DPS to be done in short phases. In PVP, target switches are mandatory to counter guards and defensive cooldowns. In both these cases, the sustained DPS of Annihilation is limited while Carnage provides the superior DPS options. The developer response in the Jedi Sentinel forums regarding Annihilator stacks and buff duration promises to resolve some of these issues. However, by providing a bonus to annihilate damage on bleed targets or changing the limited application/reapplication of bleeds, for example, Annihilation will be better able to close the DPS gap with Carnage, especially in PVE. Furthermore, a healing debuff talent in Agonizing Sabers would better compliment the utility value of Annihilation in PVP.

 

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?

 

This question seems bloated and goes on and on.

Few suggestions on my part:

This sentence can be modified like this on the end: However, this does not hold true when comparing current Annihilation and Carnage DPS OPs parses. (I think it is better that we talk about real examples.)

 

This sentence can be removed without affecting the intended purpose : This discrepancy is due to two distinct issues: lack of on demand DPS on target switches and the limited application/reapplication of bleeds. By design, PVE operation bosses will often disappear/cleanse or require DPS to be done in short phases.

 

This sentence is out of place, I thought the question was about PvE: In PVP, target switches are mandatory to counter guards and defensive cooldowns. In both these cases, the sustained DPS of Annihilation is limited while Carnage provides the superior DPS options. (It can be removed as well without affecting the intention behind the question)

 

 

PVP Question:

 

Since the inception of ranked warzones, Rage has been the specialization of choice for Marauders in competitive PVP. Even in its current incarnation, Rage continues to offer the most reliable burst and sustained DPS when combined with Marauder defensive abilities. Rage features ease of use and the potential for unchecked DPS output. Altering Smash so that only the target player is affected by Shockwave/Dominate, for instance, would tone down the dominance of Rage Marauders in PVP. With the introduction of arenas, a balance to Rage would provide greater variability to Marauder gameplay.

 

Taking the overwhelming community support (Petition to Keep Ranked 8v8) into consideration, does Bioware believe that the removal of ranked 8v8 warzones is justified and, if so, does the development team believe that the current design of Rage threatens the future variability of Marauder gameplay in the arena setting?

As for the PvP question, I don't think that is a valid one for two reasons.

One, they already said in the sentinel questions that rage/focus is supposed to be an AOE spec, your suggested change will essentially ruin the spec in PvE and make it a very bad single target spec. Beside not everyone agree that rage/focus is an overpowered spec.

Second, as I said before and I will continue to say, the marauder questions are no place to wage your war against the removal of 8v8 ranked.

These two things will guarantee a reply of the following: L2P and none of your business.

Edited September 22, 2013 by znihilist

[countpopeula]

As for the PvP question, I don't think that is a valid one for two reasons.

One, they already said in the sentinel questions that rage/focus is supposed to be an AOE spec, your suggested change will essentially ruin the spec in PvE and make it a very bad single target spec. Beside not everyone agree that rage/focus is an overpowered spec.

Second, as I said before and I will continue to say, the marauder questions are no place to wage your war against the removal of 8v8 ranked.

These two things will guarantee a reply of the following: L2P and none of your business.

 

He already stated his focus will be on PvP since the Sent questions were PvE based. If anyone thinks Rage isn't broken then you clearly don't play top end ranked with players who know that spec to it's fullest. Smash is overpowered, end of discussion. I agree with asking about 8v8 ranked warzones because PvP kind of revolves around the focus of balance. If they're taking ranked 8v's out of the game, then there's no reason to worry about balancing the classes for them and it changes the nature of the question. Arena balancing will be significantly different if they are not concerned with 8v ranked at the same time.

[kennethdale]

As for the PvP question, I don't think that is a valid one for two reasons.

One, they already said in the sentinel questions that rage/focus is supposed to be an AOE spec, your suggested change will essentially ruin the spec in PvE and make it a very bad single target spec. Beside not everyone agree that rage/focus is an overpowered spec.

Second, as I said before and I will continue to say, the marauder questions are no place to wage your war against the removal of 8v8 ranked.

These two things will guarantee a reply of the following: L2P and none of your business.

 

1) Rage, in its current form is not valid for PvE save for in situations where we must AoE and even in those fights, there are better choices.

2) What the developers said was:

If Rage/Focus had the best burst damage, the best AoE damage, and the best sustained damage; then there would be very little to no incentive for a Marauder/Sentinel to ever spec anything else. Rage/Focus is the top burst spec for a Marauder/Sentinel, and that is by design. Right now, it is also the top AoE damage spec for Marauders/Sentinels (by design) – but that is something we would like to get away from in the future.

 

There are a few take-away things here: First, they claim that Rage is the top Burst spec which it is not. Carnage can beat it every day of the week hitting a single-target by a large margin, the problem is the burst of Carnage cannot be controlled except by saving abilities or procs which hurts overall DPS. Second, they admit that Rage is the top AoE spec (while skirting the fact that outside of rage, Marauder AoE is piss poor) and state that they intend to fix that. Whether or not they take our solution, we can still offer an example of a way we, the people who actually play Marauders, would like to see Rage nerfed. Yes, nerfed.

3) Rage is stupidly over-powered in PvP. They can say this is by design all they want, but the truth is they probably just didn't get the effects of some of their changes until they were too late. In PvE, Rage is so consistent that many Juggs prefer it over Vengeance just to get some semblance of consistency in their DPS even in purely single-target fights. That is a massive design flaw. In every conceivable way, shape, and form Rage is broken. No other spec is as narrowly focused and that is a huge issue to both our own AC balance and game balance as a whole.

4) I'm not certain how you think asking them to nerf one of our specs would get us a L2P answer because that doesn't make sense. Will they tell us that because we're playing it so well we need to L2P and play it worse? Its nonsense.

5) Go back and check my post history. I made an entire thread calling Gudarzz out on wanting to make one of our questions about the removal of Ranked without first bringing it to the community to discuss. There weren't a whole lot of other impassioned people, and in the end if we can honestly make a question asking why one of our specs is TOO powerful, we can spare a question.

 

PS: I forgot to mention your issue with the Anni question (that we shouldn't mention PvP). If it were two completely separate issues in PvE and PvP, I'd agree that we were trying to throw too much into the question but the fact is that what makes Annihilation bad in PvP is the same as the problems it faces in PvE. Why not at least try to kill two birds with one stone?

[znihilist]

1) Rage, in its current form is not valid for PvE save for in situations where we must AoE and even in those fights, there are better choices.

I have to disagree here. Valid is a very vague term, I would say that rage is not "optimal" for most scenarios but that doesn't mean it doesn't have its uses. The same can be said of Annihilation and Carnage, everything have its optimal use.

There are a few take-away things here: First, they claim that Rage is the top Burst spec which it is not. Carnage can beat it every day of the week hitting a single-target by a large margin, the problem is the burst of Carnage cannot be controlled except by saving abilities or procs which hurts overall DPS.

Rage burst is more or less limited to one GCD, Carnage's burst is around 3 ~4 GCDs <--- Rage is more bursty

Second, they admit that Rage is the top AoE spec (while skirting the fact that outside of rage, Marauder AoE is piss poor) and state that they intend to fix that. Whether or not they take our solution, we can still offer an example of a way we, the people who actually play Marauders, would like to see Rage nerfed. Yes, nerfed.

But not everyone is agreeing. I don't want to see rage nerfed, not because I play rage in PvP (I don't) but because the problem isn't with that spec, the problem is with the other Marauder/Jugg dps specs.

In PvE, Rage is so consistent that many Juggs prefer it over Vengeance just to get some semblance of consistency in their DPS even in purely single-target fights. That is a massive design flaw. In every conceivable way, shape, and form Rage is broken. No other spec is as narrowly focused and that is a huge issue to both our own AC balance and game balance as a whole.

I am sorry you see it as a problem with rage, and I see it as a spec very well built. As I said in my preivous comment, isn't the problem in the other specs then with rage ?

4) I'm not certain how you think asking them to nerf one of our specs would get us a L2P answer because that doesn't make sense. Will they tell us that because we're playing it so well we need to L2P and play it worse? Its nonsense.

I should have clarified what I meant by that, I meant it as countering the spec.

My thought was like this:

Us: Smash is overpowered

Devs: Learn how to counter it, not OP

I know it is silly, but considering how the Sorcs asked their questions, I would very much expect an answer like that.

PS: I forgot to mention your issue with the Anni question (that we shouldn't mention PvP). If it were two completely separate issues in PvE and PvP, I'd agree that we were trying to throw too much into the question but the fact is that what makes Annihilation bad in PvP is the same as the problems it faces in PvE. Why not at least try to kill two birds with one stone?

That is completely fair, my focus was on making the question as short and concise as possible.

 

Anyway let me clarify my point, the way I see it from all the classes discussions in the last 2 months, is that there are some specs that are performing very well to what is expected from them. However, the problem is that most specs are not performing well to what is expected from them. And here lies the problem, I see the "let's nerf smash" as "let's break down something working well" in order to make it conform to the other broken (and I am using this term loosely) specs.

 

If anyone thinks Rage isn't broken then you clearly don't play top end ranked with players who know that spec to it's fullest. Smash is overpowered, end of discussion. .

No it is not end of discussion, and that's faulty logic (no true scottsman ), just because there is someone who doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they don't have the same level of experience. And before the usual accusations start dropping, no I don't play rage on my marauder in ranked PvP, I am not so eager to keep it to myself, in fact out of 5 JK/SW only one have rage and for PvE reasons. I actually main a tank and a healer in ranked. So I am usually on the receiving end of the smashes. So I am speaking from the other side of the discussion.

Edited September 23, 2013 by znihilist

[kennethdale]

I have to disagree here. Valid is a very vague term, I would say that rage is not "optimal" for most scenarios but that doesn't mean it doesn't have its uses. The same can be said of Annihilation and Carnage, everything have its optimal use.

 

Then let me clarify: In any fight in which a Marauder is focusing on a boss and not dealing with adds, Rage will perform approximately 10% lower than the other two specs. As it stands, the difference between Annihilation and Carnage is very small (though it is difficult to say whether this is down to more players for Carnage or more difficulty getting those top end numbers for Annihilation). I did a comparison a couple weeks back because a guildie was trying to tell me that I was gimping our raid by playing Annihilation 100% of the time and while I don't have the spreadsheet anymore, the take away was that save for I think 1 fight (and in the end, the length of that parse was suspect) There was less than a 3% gap between the top Anni parse and the top Carnage parse. This is simply not true for Rage (Except for Juggernauts, which I will touch on later).

 

Rage burst is more or less limited to one GCD, Carnage's burst is around 3 ~4 GCDs <--- Rage is more bursty

 

Again, you're using faulty logic here. On a boss, a good smash will be ~8k (give or take a bit based on buffs) and if you follow it with a scream (~6.5k) you can hit for a total of 14.5k in 3 seconds. A good Gore window (Berserk>VT [9k]>Gore[2k]>Scream[9k]>Massacre[6k]>Massacre[6k]) will hit for 33k in one extra GCD. Comparing the DPS of those individual burst windows we get (33000/4.5=) 7333.33 DPS for Carnage and (14500/3=) 4833.33 DPS for Rage. That is a huge difference. The simple fact is that Carnage is the MOST bursty spec for Marauders. As I stated though, the issue is that you can easily time the burst for Rage because its all based around using specific abilities which give you specific buffs which then directly boost the damage of Smash. Carnage on the other hand requires the use of abilities to proc Ataru form hits, which then in turn proc Slaughter, Massacre, and Execute. None of this is guaranteed and it becomes difficult to "hold" that burst for long periods of time.

 

But not everyone is agreeing. I don't want to see rage nerfed, not because I play rage in PvP (I don't) but because the problem isn't with that spec, the problem is with the other Marauder/Jugg dps specs. I am sorry you see it as a problem with rage, and I see it as a spec very well built. As I said in my preivous comment, isn't the problem in the other specs then with rage ?

 

The only issue with Marauder DPS is that aside from Rage we do not have viable AoE (comparative to other classes). The solution they gave us for this was to give us the most powerful AoE spec in the game, its just completely unaccessible unless you use a completely different spec. That's inherently bad design. Its akin to saying "My car gets terrible fuel economy, I'll go buy another car to use for when I need to be economical." We can't use it without stopping what we are doing and changing specs.

 

As for Jugg DPS... I'm not sure if you have a Juggernaut so I apologize if you do but I'm going to say this as if you don't: On a dummy, in perfect conditions Vengeance will out perform Rage any day of the week. The issue arises when you take that onto a boss that requires a certain level of DPS consistently (I've seen this on NiM DG with a Jugg DPS friend) and because of the insanity that is the Rampage proc (or more often the lack of the Rampage procs) you cannot sustain that DPS. I've seen parses from the same day that drop between 300 and 400 DPS simply because Rampage was not proccing or was proccing at bad times. As a result of this, many Juggs use Rage for single-target simply because it has some utility and it is EXTREMELY consistent DPS. That is in spite of the ~10% difference between the top-end for the two. Again, that is inherently bad design.

 

I should have clarified what I meant by that, I meant it as countering the spec.

My thought was like this:

Us: Smash is overpowered

Devs: Learn how to counter it, not OP

I know it is silly, but considering how the Sorcs asked their questions, I would very much expect an answer like that.

 

I highly doubt that that would happen because it just doesn't make sense. Frankly, I said this in the Sorc questions while they were coming up with them: You're making a lot of accusations and a lot of claims without any evidence. The devs shouldn't have responded that way but I can't honestly say I would have done any different in their situation. Those questions were whiny and just sounded selfish. There is simply no comparison between "We need more DCDs. Give us more DCDs. When will you be giving us more DCDs?" and "We think Rage is over-powered, how does the development team see it?"

 

Anyway let me clarify my point, the way I see it from all the classes discussions in the last 2 months, is that there are some specs that are performing very well to what is expected from them. However, the problem is that most specs are not performing well to what is expected from them. And here lies the problem, I see the "let's nerf smash" as "let's break down something working well" in order to make it conform to the other broken (and I am using this term loosely) specs.

 

The issue is that Rage is not "working well". It is the only spec in the game that is so narrowly focused and as a result it does its job far too well to be balanced. I think there is a perception issue on your part (yes, I realize the irony) that a lot of classes are not functioning well when that is simply not the case. Shadow/Sin dps sucks? Explain why some of the top guilds run Shadow/Sin DPS and those people are putting out massive numbers. Dummy parses, as the devs indicated, do not accurately reflect the execute phases. Merc/Mando DPS is broken? The world first NiM DG (pre-nerf) included Aerroh, a merc DPS. PTs just can't compete? I've seen PTs in hybrid wrecking stuff and with the changes coming they are going to be even better. Shadow/Sin Tanks get one shot? Now this is where there is a legitimate problem, but one that is highly over-stated. I've watched my Sin co-tank die all of one time in NiM due to RNG. It absolutely sucked, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't stop us or any other guild from bringing Sin/Shad tanks.

 

But that is all PvE. In PvP, how is it fair or balanced that every team MUST include a Smasher? Thats at least one spot on a ranked team that is gone, unable to be filled by any other class. So that leaves 3 others? Nope we have to have a tank and healer. So any ranked team really has 1 open DPS spot and why would you take a class that is going to be tough to play when you can just bring smashers who are easy and put up a LOT of damage and a lot of pressure? This is, again, where it becomes clear that the Rage/Focus spec is COMPLETELY broken and unbalanced. Sure, there are teams that are doing really well without a Smasher, just like there are guilds with Concealment Ops who do great the issue is that the number of people who can do that is so low that they become the exception that proves the rules as opposed to the damning evidence of it.

[znihilist]

Then let me clarify: In any fight in which a Marauder is focusing on a boss and not dealing with adds, Rage will perform approximately 10% lower than the other two specs. As it stands, the difference between Annihilation and Carnage is very small (though it is difficult to say whether this is down to more players for Carnage or more difficulty getting those top end numbers for Annihilation). I did a comparison a couple weeks back because a guildie was trying to tell me that I was gimping our raid by playing Annihilation 100% of the time and while I don't have the spreadsheet anymore, the take away was that save for I think 1 fight (and in the end, the length of that parse was suspect) There was less than a 3% gap between the top Anni parse and the top Carnage parse. This is simply not true for Rage (Except for Juggernauts, which I will touch on later).

Ok you make a valid and convincing argument. I have more to say about this in the context of don't break things yet but later in my reply.

Again, you're using faulty logic here. On a boss, a good smash will be ~8k (give or take a bit based on buffs) and if you follow it with a scream (~6.5k) you can hit for a total of 14.5k in 3 seconds. A good Gore window (Berserk>VT [9k]>Gore[2k]>Scream[9k]>Massacre[6k]>Massacre[6k]) will hit for 33k in one extra GCD. Comparing the DPS of those individual burst windows we get (33000/4.5=) 7333.33 DPS for Carnage and (14500/3=) 4833.33 DPS for Rage.

Free force scream it might be, but it is still not what makes rage bursty, rage is about one single ability hitting between 8 and 9 k (consistently) there are no crits to worry about, there is no accuracy issue, there is an ability hitting for that amount every single time. On average rage will outburst carnage.

 

 

 

(For the rest I will not quote your reply, as it is all covered in what I am about to say)

My argument about other specs performing badly was not in the context of best delivered dps in PvE, for example from a pure numbers point of view the best thing to do in a WZ is to bring a full team of carnage marauders. But we both know that is a failed team because you can't capitalize on the dps (for various reasons), yes that is a bad design and I agree. A Veng jugg does indeed have a RNG issue (I even posted on the thread there) and that is bad design as well. So on one hand you have specs not performing as they should, and on the other hand specs that are performing well. So why break something that is working well - too well when compared to other dps spec, I am not disputing that- just to bring them in line with the other broken ones just to demand later to fix them?

Just don't break things that are working now, wait till whatever is broken is fixed and then we can logically talk about whether or not rage is still (or not) overpowered.

 

 

Now I am not opposed to asking the devs if they think the spec is overpowered (and that was not my problem with the question), for all we know it might very well be and I am 100% wrong on all accounts (I have to take this into consideration or else I won't be a good scientist).

My problem with the question is, while it is seemingly asking an honest question it is not leaving any room for disagreement with the intended answer in mind, and if any of the devs agrees with me the answer to that question won't be pleasing at all for anyone who thinks rage needs a nerf.

Second of all, the suggested nerf (with all due respect to Guardzz) is seriously stupid (and I am sorry for using that word). We had god know how long of a discussion on how to nerf rage and the one he comes up with is the one that breaks the whole spec (whether or not rage is OP that nerf is a spec breaking one) ?

Third of all, the question seemed fluid until suddenly and out of nowhere you get this:

 

Taking the overwhelming community support (Petition to Keep Ranked 8v8) into consideration, does Bioware believe that the removal of ranked 8v8 warzones is justified and, if so, does the development team believe that the current design of Rage threatens the future variability of Marauder gameplay in the arena setting?

I do understand that a spec could be OP and perform differently from 8v8 to 4v4. But can you explain to me how one goes from:

this spec is probably overpowered to oh we have a petition here that we are implicitly asking you to address here and then to do you think this spec is still going to be OP in the new context ?

I do understand that he feels obligated to address 8v8, but the context of the question and how he address it is not the way to go. (That is even if I am going to concede the point of agreeing of including the petition in the question)

 

ps, if I missed any of your points tell me to address them.

Edited September 24, 2013 by znihilist

[kennethdale]

Ok you make a valid and convincing argument. I have more to say about this in the context of don't break things yet but later in my reply.

 

Free force scream it might be, but it is still not what makes rage bursty, rage is about one single ability hitting between 8 and 9 k (consistently) there are no crits to worry about, there is no accuracy issue, there is an ability hitting for that amount every single time. On average rage will outburst carnage.

 

Rage is centered around one ability that hits for 9k about every 10 seconds. Carnage is centered around using a myriad of abilities (that hit from ~6k to ~10K) within 4.5 second window every 11 seconds. While the single ability burst of Rage is higher (in that you must use Gore before an ability to achieve the high burst), the overall burst of Carnage will win out every time. Force Scream itself may only hit for 9-10K but add to that the off-GCD 2k damage of Gore and its higher. There is simply no comparison. Carnage has lower Surge but due to higher provided Accuracy, allows for more allocation of Power/Strength. This is a moot comparison though, Carnage is better for burst which is why it is used in high-end raiding and Rage is not (save for special AoE situations).

 

 

 

(For the rest I will not quote your reply, as it is all covered in what I am about to say)

My argument about other specs performing badly was not in the context of best delivered dps in PvE, for example from a pure numbers point of view the best thing to do in a WZ is to bring a full team of carnage marauders. But we both know that is a failed team because you can't capitalize on the dps (for various reasons), yes that is a bad design and I agree. A Veng jugg does indeed have a RNG issue (I even posted on the thread there) and that is bad design as well. So on one hand you have specs not performing as they should, and on the other hand specs that are performing well. So why break something that is working well - too well when compared to other dps spec, I am not disputing that- just to bring them in line with the other broken ones just to demand later to fix them?

Just don't break things that are working now, wait till whatever is broken is fixed and then we can logically talk about whether or not rage is still (or not) overpowered.

 

Now I am not opposed to asking the devs if they think the spec is overpowered (and that was not my problem with the question), for all we know it might very well be and I am 100% wrong on all accounts (I have to take this into consideration or else I won't be a good scientist).

My problem with the question is, while it is seemingly asking an honest question it is not leaving any room for disagreement with the intended answer in mind, and if any of the devs agrees with me the answer to that question won't be pleasing at all for anyone who thinks rage needs a nerf.

Second of all, the suggested nerf (with all due respect to Guardzz) is seriously stupid (and I am sorry for using that word). We had god know how long of a discussion on how to nerf rage and the one he comes up with is the one that breaks the whole spec (whether or not rage is OP that nerf is a spec breaking one) ?

Third of all, the question seemed fluid until suddenly and out of nowhere you get this:

 

I do understand that a spec could be OP and perform differently from 8v8 to 4v4. But can you explain to me how one goes from:

this spec is probably overpowered to oh we have a petition here that we are implicitly asking you to address here and then to do you think this spec is still going to be OP in the new context ?

I do understand that he feels obligated to address 8v8, but the context of the question and how he address it is not the way to go. (That is even if I am going to concede the point of agreeing of including the petition in the question)

 

ps, if I missed any of your points tell me to address them.

 

Now, I see your point a bit more clearly. I still think there is a major flaw in your reasoning claiming that Rage is in a good spot when its not (except for in PvP). As to your other point, I proposed another variation on the previous page:

 

I'm going to take what I see as the themes of this question (RWZ removal and Rage being OP) and run with them. Here goes:

 

As was acknowledged by the Development team in the Sentinel questions, Rage Marauders currently possess some of (if not the) highest area of effect damage of any class in the game. Given that this burst is highly controllable and has a decently sized area of effect, the Rage Marauder has become a pivotal member of any ranked warzone team. While we as a community appreciate that we can so easily find ourselves a place in high-end PvP, we also recognize that in its current incarnation Rage is innately imbalanced. In essence, the upsides specific to Rage (massive on-demand AoE burst damage paired with very potent defensive cooldowns) far outstrip the downsides (low single-target damage compared to other classes and specs). We also feel that this will be magnified in 4v4 arenas due simply to the massive amount of damage a Rage Marauder can put out in such a short period of time and adding to that that now all of that damage can be applied to the entire opposing team if grouped. As a result of this, the Rage Marauder will become an absolute necessity for any high-end PvP team leading to the exclusion of other classes and subsequently to a lack of true game balance in PvP. On top of the lack of diversity in team make-up, the removal of ranked Warzones will increase the blandness of high-end PvP and the community as a whole feels that this is a change that should be reversed.

 

In light of all of that, does the combat team feel that Rage is currently performing above its expectations in PvP and what is the development team's opinion on the homogeneity of end-game PvP given the upcoming removal of ranked Warzones? Is there any sense that the lack of any variation in terms of play-styles in end-game PvP will lead those players to leave for so-called "greener pastures"?

 

I tried to tie in the rwz bit as well as kind of hit them in the gut with the last bit. Thoughts?

 

Perhaps that better covers it?

[Gudarzz]

Few suggestions on my part:

This sentence can be modified like this on the end: However, this does not hold true when comparing current Annihilation and Carnage DPS OPs parses. (I think it is better that we talk about real examples.)

 

Well said. I will make this change.

 

This sentence can be removed without affecting the intended purpose : This discrepancy is due to two distinct issues: lack of on demand DPS on target switches and the limited application/reapplication of bleeds. By design, PVE operation bosses will often disappear/cleanse or require DPS to be done in short phases.

 

We can negotiate on this. I feel like it is important to identify what problems we were addressing. Perhaps some rewording?

 

This sentence is out of place, I thought the question was about PvE: In PVP, target switches are mandatory to counter guards and defensive cooldowns. In both these cases, the sustained DPS of Annihilation is limited while Carnage provides the superior DPS options. (It can be removed as well without affecting the intention behind the question)

 

I have stated before that these "PVP/PVE" designations are merely placeholders by Bioware. It doesn't hurt to reference how a PVE problem also affects PVP.

 

As for the PvP question, I don't think that is a valid one for two reasons.

One, they already said in the sentinel questions that rage/focus is supposed to be an AOE spec, your suggested change will essentially ruin the spec in PvE and make it a very bad single target spec. Beside not everyone agree that rage/focus is an overpowered spec.

Second, as I said before and I will continue to say, the marauder questions are no place to wage your war against the removal of 8v8 ranked.

These two things will guarantee a reply of the following: L2P and none of your business.

 

Sure, the overpowered nature of rage could be a matter of opinion. However, you can't argue that it essentially discourages the use of Annihilation and Carnage in PVP. Altering the smash damage to collateral targets would still leave it as the dominant AOE spec. Furthermore, I did not suggest any changes to its single target capacity as I wanted to maintain some consistency with the sentinel concerns about Rage/Focus.

 

As far as the controversial ranked question, I do feel it is a place to "wage war". The petition I linked has over 100 pages, and views ranging in the tens of thousands. Yet it has gone unnoticed. If Bioware had announced the removal of PVE content (high end nightmare progression, or even story mode operations), I would have used this opportunity to address it as well.

 

Anyways, I was the first to admit that the PVP question needed some tweaking. I will take some of your suggestions into consideration and reword the questions (after I watch the Raiders get killed muhahahah).

[znihilist]

I don't have time to reply to everything as I have to go to sleep (almost 7 AM and still awake so I will respond in detail tomorrow), but I want to say one thing.

 

Let me first say this, and I think you might already know this (and I might look like am repeating myself with no end). I am 100% undoubtedly behind the petition and I do think it was a wrong decision. But, you can't really be serious when you say the petition has gone "unnoticed". They have decided to not answer it, even if the thread gets 1000 replies and 1 million views that is not going to change anything. Nothing will change that actually, nothing short of massive unsubbing that is income damaging.

 

Attempting to outsmart them by placing it in a question going to the combat team responsible for making sure the Jugg vs Sin fight is balanced is not really outsmarting because you are not really catching them out of place, they know this question is coming and they see it a mile away. You will not force them to acknowledge the issue, because an answer of this kind: "This is not the place to discuss this issue" will be quite logical and they would be right.

 

I am asking you this do you honestly think they will give you any answer ?

 

We both know that is extremely improbable, and that's why I think it is a futile attempt. So with risks outweighing the no-gain scenario on one hand and the off chance they do answer on the other hand, do you really think it is worth it and that it will change anything ?

 

 

In all cases if we are still going ahead with that question, a re-write is still in order.

 

 

 

 

Edit: Edited, so make sure to read again.

Edited September 24, 2013 by znihilist

[CellPerfect]

As far as the controversial ranked question, I do feel it is a place to "wage war". The petition I linked has over 100 pages, and views ranging in the tens of thousands. Yet it has gone unnoticed. If Bioware had announced the removal of PVE content (high end nightmare progression, or even story mode operations), I would have used this opportunity to address it as well.

 

As I have said before, the questions go to the combat team. They do not decide on what kind of content to put into the game, only how the classes work in the content that is there. Asking them why ranked is being removed won't really help at all because they have nothing to do with the removal of ranked. If you can weave that in with the final question then awesome, but make sure it does not take away from the question itself seeing as asking them about the removal of ranked will be, for the most part, pointless. I love / loved playing ranked just as much as anyone else, but I don't think this is the place to ask about it.

Edited September 24, 2013 by CellPerfect

[Gudarzz]

9/23: Updated Annihilation question.

 

I am asking you this do you honestly think they will give you any answer ?

 

I think this is applicable to any question we ask them. Everyone here is hoping that Bioware will answer our questions. I do feel that pvp the question is "clunky" and needs to be rewritten.

 

I am honestly grateful that you are in support of the petition so let me ask/propose this (in the interest of time):

 

Ignoring the question about ranked 8v8, do we think the Rage question is legit? I personally feel that Rage needs to be toned down in order to promote the other Marauder specs, especially when arenas come out.

 

I can then add the ranked 8v8 question after the initial question. Bioware can choose to answer it or ignore it. Either way, the question about rage in pvp/arenas will be there.

 

Edit: Znihilist, thanks for the annihilation suggestion. I modified the question to specifically include "OP'" or operations. I made the overall question more compact. I also felt it was somewhat dragging on.

Edited September 24, 2013 by Gudarzz

[countpopeula]

Ok you make a valid and convincing argument. I have more to say about this in the context of don't break things yet but later in my reply.

 

Free force scream it might be, but it is still not what makes rage bursty, rage is about one single ability hitting between 8 and 9 k (consistently) there are no crits to worry about, there is no accuracy issue, there is an ability hitting for that amount every single time. On average rage will outburst carnage.

 

This is 100% wrong. Burst is not about who's highest damage attack hits harder, and it's not about who does the most damage in 4 globals. Burst damage is about targeting a mob and instantly doing high levels of damage instead of having to apply DOTs or wait for a ramp up time. Saying that using Berserk during 2 stacks of Deadly Saber warrants burst damage is incorrect, it is a spike in damage, not burst. If you have to apply abilities to tick for damage or ramp up to reach maximum efficiency, it is not burst at all. Sustainable burst is about being able to do that instant on demand damage without losing significant levels of DPS over an extended fight. Your argument for Rage having higher burst because of 1 GCD damage is invalid, my Berserked Force Screams hit for 8-11k at the cost of 1 second. I can also follow it up with 18k damage in 2.3 seconds. I can also do this once every 10 seconds on average, substituting 12k-15k for the 18k every other armor pen window (Beserked Ravage vs Proc Vicious Throw + Massacre). In Rage, I have only 1 ability that hits for over 6k consistently, as you have to roll a crit on Obliterate for it to eclipse 5k. All of these abilities cost 1.5 seconds, so even the DPS of one GCD of any single ability in the Rage tree doesn't match Carnage. My Rage Smashes don't hit as hard as my Carnage non-Berserked Force Screams anyways, I don't see how you can reason otherwise. The only way to maximize Rage's burst damage is to get a bleed/Crush/Oblit/Smash combo off, and that's just for one instantaneous spike in damage, which is only repeatable once every 18 seconds at best but at the same time is a significant overall DPS loss as you're not focusing on a proper rotation in favor of getting the highest damage spikes.

 

People make the egregious mistake of thinking that because in PvP, Smash specs can destroy someone's face that it is a burst class. It is anything but. Rage/Focus is a 100% sustainable AoE spec with limited if any burst capabilities. It all rotates on one ability's autocrit and that ability is only available every 7 seconds. The only way to get high burst damage with Rage/Focus is to set up your bleed/burn and your Exhaust/Crush to both tick at the same time you Smash. The follow-on DPS boost is nice as well, but you will not get a huge return as your biggest hitting abilities are already on cooldown. The ability to use Smash/Sweep as an instant finishing move or to remove a third of a player's health in one GCD does not denote burst damage. I have a much harder time killing Operative healers in Rage than I do Carnage because Rage lacks the burst damage to counter the instant cast quick heals of the Operative.

 

Again, you're using faulty logic here. On a boss, a good smash will be ~8k (give or take a bit based on buffs) and if you follow it with a scream (~6.5k) you can hit for a total of 14.5k in 3 seconds. A good Gore window (Berserk>VT [9k]>Gore[2k]>Scream[9k]>Massacre[6k]>Massacre[6k]) will hit for 33k in one extra GCD. Comparing the DPS of those individual burst windows we get (33000/4.5=) 7333.33 DPS for Carnage and (14500/3=) 4833.33 DPS for Rage. That is a huge difference. The simple fact is that Carnage is the MOST bursty spec for Marauders. As I stated though, the issue is that you can easily time the burst for Rage because its all based around using specific abilities which give you specific buffs which then directly boost the damage of Smash. Carnage on the other hand requires the use of abilities to proc Ataru form hits, which then in turn proc Slaughter, Massacre, and Execute. None of this is guaranteed and it becomes difficult to "hold" that burst for long periods of time.

 

 

The only issue with Marauder DPS is that aside from Rage we do not have viable AoE (comparative to other classes). The solution they gave us for this was to give us the most powerful AoE spec in the game, its just completely unaccessible unless you use a completely different spec. That's inherently bad design. Its akin to saying "My car gets terrible fuel economy, I'll go buy another car to use for when I need to be economical." We can't use it without stopping what we are doing and changing specs.

 

While we agree on the point that Carnage is more of a burst spec than Rage, you are completely incorrect in saying that Carnage's burst cannot be controlled and that it doesn't have viable AoE. On the controllable burst side, you have 100% control of when you apply your burst via Berserked Ravages, Autocrit Screams, Berserked Massacre spam, and when to 100% armor pen. Will you possibly lose a Slaughter proc by doing this? Yes, but the extra armor pen is not what makes or breaks this spec's rotation. It is a nice boost, nothing more. The reason is that in order to gain the most effectiveness of even the best timed Slaughter proc, you often have to delay Gore activation to sync it with Scream's cooldown. Even a 3 second delay in activation is a 5% DPS loss over an extended period of time if it is repeated every time, unless you make up for that within the armor pen window. If you were to not wait however, you'd suffer a full 8% overall DPS loss by not fitting every one of your Screams into armor pen. Armor pen is a boost to your abilities' damage, it's not what defines the class's burst. It increases the burst damage done, it does not define it. It is also very simple to maintain proper timing alignment for the procs, once you have mastered the timings and you know how to make proper decisions with the rotation, you can go an entire 5 minute parse and never miss a Slaughter proc or an autocrit Scream. This is also highly repeatable, considering it's more rare for me to go the other direction nowadays when I parse. Boss fights are different, but nothing ever goes perfect for any spec in a real fight.

 

On the AoE viability issue, DST has no upper target limit, we still have Smash and Sweeping Slash is completely under utilized. On a pure resource - damage aspect, any more than 3 mobs makes it completely worth using over any single target ability that requires resource to activate. I significantly outdamage our Sorc, Sniper, and Merc in every trash pull despite the fact they all have on demand AoE abilities that don't cripple their resource and they are all top 1% players. Our group noticed no differences on the NiM Trenchgutters when I was spec'd Rage or Carnage, the only reason I went with Rage was because I could use it as a multi-target execution ability in order to cut down on incoming raid damage once the Trandos got low on health. There isn't an adds phase in any fight that last long enough for Rage to overtake Carnage by a margin wide enough to warrant running it when you factor the STDPS time on the boss for each spec.

Edited September 24, 2013 by countpopeula

[znihilist]

Now, I see your point a bit more clearly. I still think there is a major flaw in your reasoning claiming that Rage is in a good spot when its not (except for in PvP). As to your other point, I proposed another variation on the previous page:

Perhaps that better covers it?

1) I don't think it is a flaw, we are having a differences of opinions. (For all its worth, only the combat team can settle that)

2)Your question about the rage is actually quite good, check my answer to guardzz on that.

[znihilist]

9/23: Updated Annihilation question.

 

 

 

I think this is applicable to any question we ask them. Everyone here is hoping that Bioware will answer our questions. I do feel that pvp the question is "clunky" and needs to be rewritten.

 

I am honestly grateful that you are in support of the petition so let me ask/propose this (in the interest of time):

 

Ignoring the question about ranked 8v8, do we think the Rage question is legit? I personally feel that Rage needs to be toned down in order to promote the other Marauder specs, especially when arenas come out.

 

I can then add the ranked 8v8 question after the initial question. Bioware can choose to answer it or ignore it. Either way, the question about rage in pvp/arenas will be there.

 

Edit: Znihilist, thanks for the annihilation suggestion. I modified the question to specifically include "OP'" or operations. I made the overall question more compact. I also felt it was somewhat dragging on.

 

Yes, that is true. But we both know that there is a difference between those questions as most of them are something the combat team can answer, while the other one is not something they can answer themselves.

 

As for the rage question I would approach it like this:

 

There have been an extensive debate on the position of Rage/Focus in PvP for the last year. Almost half of the PvP community considers Rage an overpowered spec that needs to be toned down, while the other half does not and consider it a matter of class balance.

With your answers to sentinel questions in mind , does the development team consider rage overpowered in its current state? If yes, can you shed a light on why you consider it so ? (we could elaborate here if it is a consequence of the meta, or because it is the other classes that are broken as I was hinting at in my discussion with kennethdale )

If you do not share this opinion, can you elaborate on the reasons why you do not consider it as such ?

Finally can you shed a light on how you view your intended role for rage's in 4x4 Arenas ?

 

I will add later some suggestions to the Annihilation question.

Edited September 24, 2013 by znihilist

[kennethdale]

This is 100% wrong. Burst is not about who's highest damage attack hits harder, and it's not about who does the most damage in 4 globals. Burst damage is about targeting a mob and instantly doing high levels of damage instead of having to apply DOTs or wait for a ramp up time. Saying that using Berserk during 2 stacks of Deadly Saber warrants burst damage is incorrect, it is a spike in damage, not burst. If you have to apply abilities to tick for damage or ramp up to reach maximum efficiency, it is not burst at all. Sustainable burst is about being able to do that instant on demand damage without losing significant levels of DPS over an extended fight. Your argument for Rage having higher burst because of 1 GCD damage is invalid, my Berserked Force Screams hit for 8-11k at the cost of 1 second. I can also follow it up with 18k damage in 2.3 seconds. I can also do this once every 10 seconds on average, substituting 12k-15k for the 18k every other armor pen window (Beserked Ravage vs Proc Vicious Throw + Massacre). In Rage, I have only 1 ability that hits for over 6k consistently, as you have to roll a crit on Obliterate for it to eclipse 5k. All of these abilities cost 1.5 seconds, so even the DPS of one GCD of any single ability in the Rage tree doesn't match Carnage. My Rage Smashes don't hit as hard as my Carnage non-Berserked Force Screams anyways, I don't see how you can reason otherwise. The only way to maximize Rage's burst damage is to get a bleed/Crush/Oblit/Smash combo off, and that's just for one instantaneous spike in damage, which is only repeatable once every 18 seconds at best but at the same time is a significant overall DPS loss as you're not focusing on a proper rotation in favor of getting the highest damage spikes.

 

People make the egregious mistake of thinking that because in PvP, Smash specs can destroy someone's face that it is a burst class. It is anything but. Rage/Focus is a 100% sustainable AoE spec with limited if any burst capabilities. It all rotates on one ability's autocrit and that ability is only available every 7 seconds. The only way to get high burst damage with Rage/Focus is to set up your bleed/burn and your Exhaust/Crush to both tick at the same time you Smash. The follow-on DPS boost is nice as well, but you will not get a huge return as your biggest hitting abilities are already on cooldown. The ability to use Smash/Sweep as an instant finishing move or to remove a third of a player's health in one GCD does not denote burst damage. I have a much harder time killing Operative healers in Rage than I do Carnage because Rage lacks the burst damage to counter the instant cast quick heals of the Operative.

 

While we agree on the point that Carnage is more of a burst spec than Rage, you are completely incorrect in saying that Carnage's burst cannot be controlled and that it doesn't have viable AoE. On the controllable burst side, you have 100% control of when you apply your burst via Berserked Ravages, Autocrit Screams, Berserked Massacre spam, and when to 100% armor pen. Will you possibly lose a Slaughter proc by doing this? Yes, but the extra armor pen is not what makes or breaks this spec's rotation. It is a nice boost, nothing more. The reason is that in order to gain the most effectiveness of even the best timed Slaughter proc, you often have to delay Gore activation to sync it with Scream's cooldown. Even a 3 second delay in activation is a 5% DPS loss over an extended period of time if it is repeated every time, unless you make up for that within the armor pen window. If you were to not wait however, you'd suffer a full 8% overall DPS loss by not fitting every one of your Screams into armor pen. Armor pen is a boost to your abilities' damage, it's not what defines the class's burst. It increases the burst damage done, it does not define it. It is also very simple to maintain proper timing alignment for the procs, once you have mastered the timings and you know how to make proper decisions with the rotation, you can go an entire 5 minute parse and never miss a Slaughter proc or an autocrit Scream. This is also highly repeatable, considering it's more rare for me to go the other direction nowadays when I parse. Boss fights are different, but nothing ever goes perfect for any spec in a real fight.

 

On the AoE viability issue, DST has no upper target limit, we still have Smash and Sweeping Slash is completely under utilized. On a pure resource - damage aspect, any more than 3 mobs makes it completely worth using over any single target ability that requires resource to activate. I significantly outdamage our Sorc, Sniper, and Merc in every trash pull despite the fact they all have on demand AoE abilities that don't cripple their resource and they are all top 1% players. Our group noticed no differences on the NiM Trenchgutters when I was spec'd Rage or Carnage, the only reason I went with Rage was because I could use it as a multi-target execution ability in order to cut down on incoming raid damage once the Trandos got low on health. There isn't an adds phase in any fight that last long enough for Rage to overtake Carnage by a margin wide enough to warrant running it when you factor the STDPS time on the boss for each spec.

 

I disagree on all points. Burst in MMOs is defined as large amounts of damage dealt in a short period of time. There is no exception for set up because that would eliminate all classes from the category of burst. There is no spec that doesn't require some form of set up to burst; you have to do something first before you can do the thing that hits hard. The "spike" in damage IS the burst. Burst: to appear suddenly; become visible, audible, evident, etc., all at once. Carnage has great AoE when you have Gore, DST, and Smash up. Sweeping slash is terrible damage per resource. Annihilation can only DS sweeping saber for decent AoE. Rage has consistent burst that can be applied very often. I'd be willing to bet that you saw few DPS gains of Rage simply because if you are using your Gore windows for AoE when there are a number of adds up the burst will be phenomenal. As for there not being an add phase long enough, how about Dash? Consistent 2 adds + boss? The point isn't that Marauders can AoE, the point is that Marauders are the only class that can't AoE without wasting significant resources or abilities in order to do it.

 

Let me clarify something else:

 

Carnage on the other hand requires the use of abilities to proc Ataru form hits, which then in turn proc Slaughter, Massacre, and Execute. None of this is guaranteed and it becomes difficult to "hold" that burst for long periods of time.

 

No where in that phrase did I say the burst of Carnage was impossible to control. I said it becomes difficult to hold onto that burst for long periods of time. Which is entirely true given the nature of procs and the fact that Slaughter can frequently be procced at bad times leading to being locked out of a Gore window. No level of skill will prevent this from happening. Skill comes into effect in how one handles this situation but regardless, it doesn't change the fact that you can control the burst of Rage by hitting Berserk/Force Crush only directly before you want to Smash. That is controllable burst.

[Gudarzz]

Yes, that is true. But we both know that there is a difference between those questions as most of them are something the combat team can answer, while the other one is not something they can answer themselves.

 

As for the rage question I would approach it like this:

 

There have been an extensive debate on the position of Rage/Focus in PvP for the last year. Almost half of the PvP community considers Rage an overpowered spec that needs to be toned down, while the other half does not and consider it a matter of class balance.

With your answers to sentinel questions in mind , does the development team consider rage overpowered in its current state? If yes, can you shed a light on why you consider it so ? (we could elaborate here if it is a consequence of the meta, or because it is the other classes that are broken as I was hinting at in my discussion with kennethdale )

If you do not share this opinion, can you elaborate on the reasons why you do not consider it as such ?

Finally can you shed a light on how you view your intended role for rage's in 4x4 Arenas ?

 

I will add later some suggestions to the Annihilation question.

 

I don't want to say Rage is overpowered as a standalone statement. Rather, I would prefer to present it as the superior pvp spec to Annihilation/Carnage and ask if the developers believe that advantages offered by Rage are preventing Marauders from playing other specs.

 

This way, we arent necessarily complaining about Rage in a vacuum, but in comparison to the other specs.

Edited September 24, 2013 by Gudarzz

[znihilist]

I don't want to say Rage is overpowered as a standalone statement. Rather, I would prefer to present it as the superior pvp spec to Annihilation/Carnage and ask if the developers believe that advantages offered by Rage are preventing Marauders from playing other specs.

 

This way, we arent necessarily complaining about Rage in a vacuum, but in comparison to the other specs.

Fair, but my question was a template not intended as anything more than an idea.

 

The point I wanted to make is to understand from the combat team whether the heavy reliance on Rage is due to:

(edit: We know why there is a heavy reliance, it is because of the extraordinary performance of the spec, I want to see why they think rage have that performance)

1) The spec really is a very powerful spec (needs nerfing/toning down)

2) The spec is perceived as powerful because of the meta of 8v8 WZs (this leads to the question of whether this will continue with 4x4 in their opinion or not)

3) The spec is perceived as powerful not because of the meta but because of the shortcomings of the other specs (marauder and else)

4) What are their plans exactly for this spec in the near future (regardless of their answer) ? tone down the burst or the aoe part , or leave it as it is?

Edited September 24, 2013 by znihilist

[countpopeula]

I disagree on all points. Burst in MMOs is defined as large amounts of damage dealt in a short period of time. There is no exception for set up because that would eliminate all classes from the category of burst. There is no spec that doesn't require some form of set up to burst; you have to do something first before you can do the thing that hits hard. The "spike" in damage IS the burst. Burst: to appear suddenly; become visible, audible, evident, etc., all at once. Carnage has great AoE when you have Gore, DST, and Smash up. Sweeping slash is terrible damage per resource. Annihilation can only DS sweeping saber for decent AoE. Rage has consistent burst that can be applied very often. I'd be willing to bet that you saw few DPS gains of Rage simply because if you are using your Gore windows for AoE when there are a number of adds up the burst will be phenomenal. As for there not being an add phase long enough, how about Dash? Consistent 2 adds + boss? The point isn't that Marauders can AoE, the point is that Marauders are the only class that can't AoE without wasting significant resources or abilities in order to do it.

 

Let me clarify something else:

 

 

 

No where in that phrase did I say the burst of Carnage was impossible to control. I said it becomes difficult to hold onto that burst for long periods of time. Which is entirely true given the nature of procs and the fact that Slaughter can frequently be procced at bad times leading to being locked out of a Gore window. No level of skill will prevent this from happening. Skill comes into effect in how one handles this situation but regardless, it doesn't change the fact that you can control the burst of Rage by hitting Berserk/Force Crush only directly before you want to Smash. That is controllable burst.

 

You're welcome to define burst however you like, if that be the case than any class with an autocrit ability is a burst class. Sweeping Slash is absolutely amazing DPS when you catch the upper target limit with an attack, guaranteed mainhand and offhand for 2k a mob for 3 resource? Yes please, all day every day. We do NiM Dash only, where you don't have time to waste single targeting the Xuvas. Much more efficient for the entire group to mass burn them just prior to the shields dropping instead with 4 of them out, more bang for everyone's AoE buck. The reason Mara/Sent has to use a lot of resource to duration AoE is because it's a class that builds it's own resource. Other classes have to worry about draining their resource pool or entering reduced regen tiers to spam AoE, all Warrior/Knights need to do is auto attack to regain. A more than fair trade. Anywho, you're essentially disagreeing by agreeing with my statement, what is your point?

 

Uh, I never have a problem with wasted Slaughter procs even in boss fights. The exception is the Kell Dragon while I'm building resource and stacks during Spines. I still don't see how using Smash is burst. It's a single autocrit that hits for less than Carnage's autocrit and is on essentially the same cooldown. Only by stacking DOTs before using it can it truly become burst damage, otherwise again any class with an autocrit is a burst class. At what point does doing large amounts of damage stop being burst and start being just doing damage since every class other than Sage/Sorc is capable of it?

[Mr_Fuzzle]

So this discussion has gone pretty far away from the beaten path. What I'm seeing is a misunderstanding between burst in PVP versus burst in PVE. Burst in PVP typically needs to be controlled and therefore predictable, thus exactly what Rage brings to the table. Every x amount of seconds it brings in the autocrit Smash that the player can use when they choose. Burst in PVE however tends to revolve around the ramp up time needed to get to max dps with particular attention given to the damage spike in the opener. This is exactly what Carnage brings to the table with Rage trailing slightly behind. That's ask I have to say about the war in Vietnam, I mean, the war in the forums. Or is it the warums? Edited September 25, 2013 by Mr_Fuzzle