Why Smash Should Not be Nerfed

[szczypaczek]

u see ppl complaining, cause the smash problem is the pinnacle of the "what's broken" list

[Evolixe]

A reasonable inference to make when the vast majority of the discussion surrounding class balance seems to be focused around "nerf smash", or satire posts like "smash needs buff b/c can't heal to full!". Most people on these forums don't see to want to discuss or complain about the other balance stuff that needs to be done.

 

********. Get out of that box please.

 

And don't EVER compare me to the average poster again.

[iheartnyc]

********. Get out of that box please.

 

And don't EVER compare me to the average poster again.

 

Well my OP wasn't directed at the more rational-minded people on the forums. It was meant to be controversial and read by the "nerf Smash but can't raelly explain how it ties into the overall balance of the game" camp.

[ToMyMa]

********. Get out of that box please.

 

And don't EVER compare me to the average poster again.

 

Evo... Sometimes you ARE the average poster, just like everyone is once in a while. So take a chill pill walk out of here before something bad happens

[Helig]

Requires so much target uptime? Why? Why do they require that?

 

Last time I checked, it was okay if you would be forced to hold back and play defensively for a brief moment when you get low. Not be even more offensive because your cooldown will handle it anyway.

 

Undying is stupid, marauders should have to fall back everytime they have to use undying now rather than steamrolling forwards. And if you can't do that, you die. Simple as that.

Carnage requires more uptime than Smash, or Infiltration, for that matter. I don't really oppose nerfing Smash active survivability, because it has pretty solid passive mitigation, compared to other specs, as far as Marauders are concerned.

 

Most classes that are positionally vulnerable due to combat system design have the "don't kill me" fallback skills, or skill combos. Juggs have the mighty Endure Pain+medpack/Intercede. Sins/Ops get Vanish. Commandos get AR+HTL+3 instant heals combo(ok, a stretch, but saved my arse a lot of times). PT/Vanguard survivability gets a much-welcome boost in 2.4.

 

Sorcs can.... LoS and heal to full (sorry, couldn't quite help it).

 

Also, why so angry about being called an average poster? Could mean anything. Unless you aren't as secure about your knowledge and experience as you're trying to demonstrate.

i'm saying that smash maruders have too much survivability, and undying rage in its current form is a joke

 

Op u didn't post any good arguments either, you are just afraid of a nerf that is fully justified.

I run all AC types at 55, and I think I have a pretty good idea of balance from most possible viewpoints. You're probably just hurting over a traumatic experience.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Helig

[Evolixe]

Well my OP wasn't directed at the more rational-minded people on the forums. It was meant to be controversial and read by the "nerf Smash but can't raelly explain how it ties into the overall balance of the game" camp.

 

Yet half of your arguments are at the very least too closely minded to mean anything.. if you do something, do it right.

 

This was just bad.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Evolixe

[Helig]

<Post lost significance>

 

<Insert AD here>

Edited September 3, 2013 by Helig

[iheartnyc]

Yet half of your arguments are at the very least too closely minded to mean anything.. if you do something, do it right.

 

This was just bad.

 

I feel you need to counter extreme bias towards one direction with extreme bias towards the other. You can't fight emotion with logic.

[Evolixe]

I feel you need to counter extreme bias towards one direction with extreme bias towards the other. You can't fight emotion with logic.

 

Your post is the exact opposite of logic..

Edited September 3, 2013 by Evolixe

[PhatMcMuffins]

I do appreciate the how the OP has stuck to his guns, his old crazy guns.

 

Essentially, he believes healing needs a nerf but smash should stay the same.

 

Do you play a healer, friend? There is no reason to bring a healer if a single dps can cancel him/her out because then you might as well bring another dps. As I said before, op heals could afford to take a hit to energy management (say, pre-2.0 standards when kolto probe actually cost a fully geared op something) while merc heals need serious help and sorc heals need an exclusive defensive cd

[mfourcustom]

I feel you need to counter extreme bias towards one direction with extreme bias towards the other. You can't fight emotion with logic.

 

Chill out eliteduelist your precious smash spec will never be nerfed by the devs... You'll always be able to stream arena's smashing your way through the under powered classes and comps

Edited September 3, 2013 by mfourcustom

[AngusFTW]

Undying rage doesnt need removed, its easily stunned through and countered.

The smash tree talent that reduces the hp percentage needs to be thrown off a very large building tho why they buffed that i will NEVER know. Also the ridiculously low cd on rage tree with set bonus

Edited September 3, 2013 by AngusFTW

[Trephination]

Smash damage is fine, it's marauder survivability that is too strong relative to other melee DPS.

 

I strongly disagree with the suggestions to make smash less powerful as an AoE. Smash is the warrior's AoE spec and thus AoE pressure is what it should accomplish. If anything, smash is slightly too strong at single target DPS and that's where an offensive nerf should be if anywhere at all.

 

Marauders were initially designed without Force Camo and Obfuscate. During early closed beta, the PvP team added those two cooldowns based on a knee-jerk reaction to testers saying that the class was too easy to kill. The thing is, most of those testers were low-mid level players and marauders are late bloomers. This led to most people thinking marauders sucked soon after the game's release, when in actuality they were strong all along. I played a marauder during beta and for a year after release, and admittedly low level PvP was pretty miserable without Force Camo back then so I understood all the complaints at the time.

 

The point is, marauders have been defensively overpowered for such a long time now that the necessary changes to put them in the same league as all the other melee will probably never happen. Removing camo really wouldn't break the class, but it would create outrage among all the warriors who have gotten used to having 3 lives (with healers) available on a short cooldown.

 

It's too early to speak for 4v4 balance yet, but 1500+ 8v8 ranked games have taught me that using any other melee class in place of a 2 marauder frontline is settling for something that is beyond noticably worse in almost every way. That is the definition of a massive imbalance, but hey--at least they're fun to play.

 

Marauders are a guilty pleasure.

[AlrikFassbauer]

The thing is, most of those testers were low-mid level players and marauders are late bloomers. This led to most people thinking marauders sucked soon after the game's release, when in actuality they were strong all along.

 

Then, why were they designed to be "late bloomers" in the first place ?

[Trephination]

Then, why were they designed to be "late bloomers" in the first place ?

 

I couldn't possibly answer that. I'd imagine they weren't, and would instead chalk it up to PvP balance being very hard to achieve during the leveling process because of how rapidly the various classes evolve as they gain access to different abilities. Similar issues are present in many other classes. Snipers and Sorcs "bloom" very early, for instance.

 

Regardless, it really shouldn't matter. Balancing for low level PvP turned out to be a mistake that--in my opinion--was never rectified.

[iheartnyc]

I do appreciate the how the OP has stuck to his guns, his old crazy guns.

 

Essentially, he believes healing needs a nerf but smash should stay the same.

 

Do you play a healer, friend? There is no reason to bring a healer if a single dps can cancel him/her out because then you might as well bring another dps. As I said before, op heals could afford to take a hit to energy management (say, pre-2.0 standards when kolto probe actually cost a fully geared op something) while merc heals need serious help and sorc heals need an exclusive defensive cd

 

No, that's not what I said in my OP and that's the opposite of what I said in at least two posts in this thread alone.

 

There are numerous options for class balance, we don't know what the correct route is for sure. However, the hordes who claim that "nerfing smash" is the obvious solution are distracting from any discussion of the alternatives.

 

Also, as I mentioned in other posts in this thread, we need to address the fundamental question of the role healing should play in PVP. In PVE, healing is meant to keep the raid group from wiping. Is that the desirable outcome in PVP as well? E.g., do we, or do we not want, one team to be able to wipe the other team? As it stands now, two teams of equal ability will not die against each other.

[Kelsicle]

And yet you, like most other people who make these claims, can't seem to articulate exactly how they have too much survivability or why something is a joke?

 

If they nerf healing in this game, the exact thing you are worried about, which is being healed to full while using its DCDs, will be mitigated.

 

Voila, there's one alternate solution to the balance problem.

 

The being healed to full isn't the issue, its the fact that a marauder can get to extremely low health and just suddenly stop taking damage for 4 seconds, while at the same time continuing to output ridiculous damage. The fact that defensive cds are being used to further a mara/sent's offensive ability rather than being used to retreat is flawed.

 

A healing nerf will only further amplify the issues, seeing as other players will only die faster to the smash hordes with less healing. The only answer is to bring the mara's survivability more in line with its damage output, by nerfing one or the other.... The healing issues in the game are completely irrelevant to this discussion...

[iheartnyc]

The healing issues in the game are completely irrelevant to this discussion...

 

That's only if you view smash spec in a vacuum. In the bigger "class balance" discussion, which I think smash is integral to, you need to discuss the effects of nerfing or buffing one class on the overall balance of the game.

 

Let's say we do a simple nerf of smash. In 4v4 Arenas, would you run a Commando DPS? Or a Sage DPS? Or would you continue to use the smash, or simply bring along a Guardian DPS or another Vanguard hybrid?

 

Don't say, "maybe a full TK sage," or something like that, because that would only prove my point that some classes or trees are utter garbage atm and nerfing smash will NOT fix that problem.

Edited September 3, 2013 by iheartnyc

[Cordorian]

Also, as I mentioned in other posts in this thread, we need to address the fundamental question of the role healing should play in PVP. In PVE, healing is meant to keep the raid group from wiping. Is that the desirable outcome in PVP as well? E.g., do we, or do we not want, one team to be able to wipe the other team? As it stands now, two teams of equal ability will not die against each other.

 

Suppose that was would be changed

....

why bring a healer instead of another smasher.?

I think I recall that healing was buffed in 2.0 partially because people complained about our friends the smash mara, farming them like pigs.

Otherwise why no nerf tanks as well, this guard and taunts are really annoying, they ruin all that beautiful damage and make healers unkillable

[iheartnyc]

Suppose that was would be changed

....

why bring a healer instead of another smasher.?

I think I recall that healing was buffed in 2.0 partially because people complained about our friends the smash mara, farming them like pigs.

Otherwise why no nerf tanks as well, this guard and taunts are really annoying, they ruin all that beautiful damage and make healers unkillable

 

Exactly, which is why I said earlier, that the game seems to be balanced around melee (credit to this idea to Jeck). It's going to be a pain in the *** trying to figure out what kind of other balancing will be required if and when Smash is nerfed. It is not as simple as people seem to think, and it certainly deserves more attention. Simply blaming everything on smash is distracting and avoids the overall balance problems this game has.

Edited September 3, 2013 by iheartnyc

[iheartnyc]

You'll always be able to stream arena's smashing your way through the under powered classes and comps

 

Lol we ran vanguard, tank, smash and scoundrel, and we only lost once to a double/triple smash team using this build.

Edited September 3, 2013 by iheartnyc

[Kelsicle]

That's only if you view smash spec in a vacuum. In the bigger "class balance" discussion, which I think smash is integral to, you need to discuss the effects of nerfing or buffing one class on the overall balance of the game.

 

Let's say we do a simple nerf of smash. In 4v4 Arenas, would you run a Commando DPS? Or a Sage DPS? Or would you continue to use the smash, or simply bring along a Guardian DPS or another Vanguard hybrid?

 

Don't say, "maybe a full TK sage," or something like that, because that would only prove my point that some classes or trees are utter garbage atm and nerfing smash will NOT fix that problem.

 

I am hardly viewing smash spec in a vacuum, I acknowledged that healing is an issue, its just not related to the question of whether or not Smash spec needs to be nerfed. The issue isn't that healers heal... thats what healers do and whether atm they do too much healing is irrelevant to marauder survivability, they can heal all classes equally.

 

The issue is that marauders damage output and survivability/cooldowns are not even close to being in line with each other. No other class has the ability to put out the kind of damage a marauder does with the same survivability... As Evo said earlier, there is no stepping back, and thats an issue.

 

And I think I'm missing your point about what DPS class I would run? The point of a nerf to smash would be to make more DPS classes comparatively viable... So yea I would probably still stick to my shadow...

 

Also, I don't disagree that other classes have balance issues that need to be addressed, no reasonable posters here would disagree with that... Its just a lot easier to bring one class/spec back down to everyone else's level rather than bringing the other 8 or so DPS classes up to theirs. Not the most elegant solution i know, but i think we are well past that now.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Kelsicle

[mfourcustom]

Lol we ran vanguard, tank, smash and scoundrel, and we only lost once to a double/triple smash team using this build.

 

From what I saw of your steam your premade played very well and some of the teams you played were high end players for sure. Not trying to take anything away from your 25-1 just saying

 

 

Uncle Austin's got your back, elite.

 

You'll never have your ****** smash spec or your classed nerfed ever.

 

I hope this helps you sleep at night...

 

Keep smashing. :rolleyes:

Edited September 3, 2013 by mfourcustom

[Helig]

^

Somebody sounds sore that Pyro got nerfed while it was FOTM, and Smash takes so long to be brought down. Tested AP on the PTR. It. Is. AWESOME.

[Avicii]

Lol we ran vanguard, tank, smash and scoundrel, and we only lost once to a double/triple smash team using this build.

 

Uh you also lost to Exilove's VG/Sent/Shadow/Commando team or are you talking about a different run here? +1 to Exilove for shadow goodness.

 

Not to derail this don't nerf me bro thread of course.