IInox Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 yeah yeah..u're right! a better force management will **** up all the pvp! for 2mins of fight, omg! rotfl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 yeah yeah..u're right! a better force management will **** up all the pvp! for 2mins of fight, omg! rotfl Any change to increase damage will **** over PvP. No matter how you do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IInox Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Any change to increase damage will **** over PvP. No matter how you do it. rotfl. yes u are a bad player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 rotfl. yes u are a bad player. Your stupidity is beyond my capabilities to comprehend. Have a good day sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejollygreenone Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) Eh no, I don't. I said before that while I don't care about PvE personally.. I would give it room if there was any. But there isn't. None of my comments have anything to do with PvE at all though so I'm not sure why you keep bringing that up. i still think this is a silly idea. infiltration isn't 100% ideal for pve, therefore we should ignore it in pve? i think not. i, quite a few others, almost exclusively play infiltration and really don't fall too short from our balance counterparts. if you would like to explain why you think "there isn't any room" for infiltration in pve i'd love to hear it but as of yet you've just immediately dismissed it with the same statement. to say that any class has a spec that is to be completely ignored in pve and is pvp exclusive is not how this game works, imo. do people play only pyro mercenary but not arsenal in pvp? i think not. or do people play only balance sage and not telekinetic sage in pve? i also think not. however, i will concede this is mostly speculation since i stopped pvping long ago. furthermore, Any change to increase damage will **** over PvP. No matter how you do it. to me, this is a very closeminded thought process. are you a game developer? i didn't think you were but i could be mistaken. if not i wouldn't think you would have the authority nor full knowledge to be able to make such a definitive claim. even so, i've gone thought of too many changes to count that i believe will leave the order of pvp in tact and generally undisturbed, many times to you specifically. and of those many suggestions you've *partially* explained *one*. now since you seem to be so keen on asking people to back up their valid arguments how about you back up your own argument, because i've yet to see any valid explanations explanations, let alone any that i agree with. on a side note: stop attacking people about spelling and grammar, you do realize this game has people of different nationalities and not all of them speak english fluently? and even if that's not the case in any given situation, give it a rest. sweating the small stuff helps no one. i was able to understand everyone in this thread even with broken english, if you can't that's your problem and you should ask them to clarify. /end rant. P.S. can we get back to the discussion OP intended? that is if he didn't already get to know what he wanted to. we shouldn't be using this thread as an outlet to carry out a pissing contest, there are plenty of other threads that have ideas much closer in subject matter to that of what this thread has become. i would ask that this dispute be carried to private chat or to another more relevant thread, and that the subject of this thread be brought back to what OP was wondering. of which i could easily make my argument if OP is even wondering still. Edited October 28, 2013 by thejollygreenone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 What more of an argument that this class would get completely shat on or ridiculously OP in PvP through any damage adjustments do you need? As I said before, 2 specs for this class. None really work for PvE. 1 really works for PvP. Why ruin the one that works for one aspect.. if there is still one untouched? I'm sorry that you won't get the play the spec you prefer in that case. But what spec you prefer to play is hardly a fair argument in this discussion. Since you give a big **** you to a very large part of the Assassin playerbase. I'm not giving you any **** you at all, I wish it were different.. but don't fix something that ain't broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejollygreenone Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) What more of an argument that this class would get completely shat on or ridiculously OP in PvP through any damage adjustments do you need? As I said before, 2 specs for this class. None really work for PvE. 1 really works for PvP. Why ruin the one that works for one aspect.. if there is still one untouched? I'm sorry that you won't get the play the spec you prefer in that case. But what spec you prefer to play is hardly a fair argument in this discussion. Since you give a big **** you to a very large part of the Assassin playerbase. I'm not giving you any **** you at all, I wish it were different.. but don't fix something that ain't broken. why ruin it? you're right, thats a valid point that you've made before. but you dont seem to get my argument, which is you *can* change it *without* ruining it. and i also agree with dont fix something that isnt broken, but it is broken. in pvp theres clearly little room or need for improvement, but in pve it could be said it's not working properly (broken). being half broken is still broken. if being ok in one aspect in the game but not in another is "not broken" then what do you call, for example, combat sentinels who get to do both. super not broken? my real point to that post, that you seem to have missed or ignored, is that there are PLENTY changes that could be made that have a negligible affect on pvp. i've given examples of them multiple times which is why im refraining from specifying, to avoid being redundant. if you wish to hear them AGAIN i would be pleased to send you a private message and we can discuss them in the proper setting. we have 1 spec that works for pve, and one that works in pve, but improperly(infiltration) (this doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used, they both do similar acceptable numbers, see mknightrider). your skewed view on pve due to lack of interest and experience to me means that you have no right to make the assumption that any changes made to make pve better will automatically RUIN pvp for you, since you, nor i, have the knowledge to be able to plainly see every single possibility. i think that's a very large, illogical assumption. since the possibilities are near infinite, to say that NONE of those seemingly infinite possible changes will leave PVP undisturbed is just plain closeminded, because the chances of that reality are astronomically low, looking at exactly how many changes are in the realm of possibilites. and again, i've given you multiple of those possibilities that i thought would leave pvp generally undisturbed, yet you've only chose to comment directly on one as far as i remember(with a weak, but slightly valid argument at that). i wont deign to speculate on why this is but only ask that before you continue in believing these stubborn assumptions, that you ACTUALLY listen to some of the changes you automatically deem as ruining pvp. i will end on this note. almost all, if not all, of the top end pve balance players will use infiltration on specific fights. you saying infiltration has no place in pve goes in direct conflict with almost every shadow/s in that plays pve. are you telling us that they should quit playing infiltration when it is necessary in pve just because it is the inferior spec and has some deficiencies? i really hope not because then i have some bad news to deal to all the best shadows/sins out there. this, to me, is evidence that you're argument that infiltration has no place in pve is one of ignorance. since you don't play pve how could you possibly understand this? and therefore, why deign to speculate and insist on an argument that was made out of lack of an understanding? seems counterproductive to me. but i will restate, this is not the place for this silly argument. the idea that OP brought to us was that sustained dps isnt a problem in pve or pvp. you've clearly mentioned that sustained dps for infitlration is fine in pvp, this i can agree with, as little knowledge i have about pvp. but you're only idea concerning OPs post that has to do with pve is that infiltration shouldn't be worried about in pve because it doesn't belong in pve. even if that's true it doesn't answer his question, nor would you be in a position to give said answer. so once more, i'll ask OP if he still is wondering about his question, because i have a response rearing to be heard to those who are actually interested in the subject of this thread, which apparently isn't evoxlife. and to evoxlife: can we drop this silly pissing contest and talk about it in a more relative setting if you really wish to keep fighting? Edited October 28, 2013 by thejollygreenone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griad Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 why ruin it? you're right, thats a valid point that you've made before. but you dont seem to get my argument, which is you *can* change it *without* ruining it. and i also agree with dont fix something that isnt broken, but it is broken. in pvp theres clearly little room or need for improvement, but in pve it could be said it's not working properly (broken). being half broken is still broken. if being ok in one aspect in the game but not in another is "not broken" then what do you call, for example, combat sentinels who get to do both. super not broken? my real point to that post, that you seem to have missed or ignored, is that there are PLENTY changes that could be made that have a negligible affect on pvp. i've given examples of them multiple times which is why im refraining from specifying, to avoid being redundant. if you wish to hear them AGAIN i would be pleased to send you a private message and we can discuss them in the proper setting. we have 1 spec that works for pve, and one that works in pve, but improperly(infiltration) (this doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used, they both do similar acceptable numbers, see mknightrider). your skewed view on pve due to lack of interest and experience to me means that you have no right to make the assumption that any changes made to make pve better will automatically RUIN pvp for you, since you, nor i, have the knowledge to be able to plainly see every single possibility. i think that's a very large, illogical assumption. since the possibilities are near infinite, to say that NONE of those seemingly infinite possible changes will leave PVP undisturbed is just plain closeminded, because the chances of that reality are astronomically low, looking at exactly how many changes are in the realm of possibilites. and again, i've given you multiple of those possibilities that i thought would leave pvp generally undisturbed, yet you've only chose to comment directly on one as far as i remember(with a weak, but slightly valid argument at that). i wont deign to speculate on why this is but only ask that before you continue in believing these stubborn assumptions, that you ACTUALLY listen to some of the changes you automatically deem as ruining pvp. i will end on this note. almost all, if not all, of the top end pve balance players will use infiltration on specific fights. you saying infiltration has no place in pve goes in direct conflict with almost every shadow/s in that plays pve. are you telling us that they should quit playing infiltration when it is necessary in pve just because it is the inferior spec and has some deficiencies? i really hope not because then i have some bad news to deal to all the best shadows/sins out there. this, to me, is evidence that you're argument that infiltration has no place in pve is one of ignorance. since you don't play pve how could you possibly understand this? and therefore, why deign to speculate and insist on an argument that was made out of lack of an understanding? seems counterproductive to me. but i will restate, this is not the place for this silly argument. the idea that OP brought to us was that sustained dps isnt a problem in pve or pvp. you've clearly mentioned that sustained dps for infitlration is fine in pvp, this i can agree with, as little knowledge i have about pvp. but you're only idea concerning OPs post that has to do with pve is that infiltration shouldn't be worried about in pve because it doesn't belong in pve. even if that's true it doesn't answer his question, nor would you be in a position to give said answer. so once more, i'll ask OP if he still is wondering about his question, because i have a response rearing to be heard to those who are actually interested in the subject of this thread, which apparently isn't evoxlife. and to evoxlife: can we drop this silly pissing contest and talk about it in a more relative setting if you really wish to keep fighting? Nice to read that some people agree, i for one would love for deception/infiltration to be a good viable alternative to any other dps class and reading some of your ideas in other threads i think that there alot which can be done to help sins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IInox Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 boom headshot for evox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetideus Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 (edited) why ruin it? you're right, thats a valid point that you've made before. but you dont seem to get my argument, which is you *can* change it *without* ruining it. and i also agree with dont fix something that isnt broken, but it is broken. in pvp theres clearly little room or need for improvement, but in pve it could be said it's not working properly (broken). being half broken is still broken. if being ok in one aspect in the game but not in another is "not broken" then what do you call, for example, combat sentinels who get to do both. super not broken? my real point to that post, that you seem to have missed or ignored, is that there are PLENTY changes that could be made that have a negligible affect on pvp. i've given examples of them multiple times which is why im refraining from specifying, to avoid being redundant. if you wish to hear them AGAIN i would be pleased to send you a private message and we can discuss them in the proper setting. we have 1 spec that works for pve, and one that works in pve, but improperly(infiltration) (this doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used, they both do similar acceptable numbers, see mknightrider). your skewed view on pve due to lack of interest and experience to me means that you have no right to make the assumption that any changes made to make pve better will automatically RUIN pvp for you, since you, nor i, have the knowledge to be able to plainly see every single possibility. i think that's a very large, illogical assumption. since the possibilities are near infinite, to say that NONE of those seemingly infinite possible changes will leave PVP undisturbed is just plain closeminded, because the chances of that reality are astronomically low, looking at exactly how many changes are in the realm of possibilites. and again, i've given you multiple of those possibilities that i thought would leave pvp generally undisturbed, yet you've only chose to comment directly on one as far as i remember(with a weak, but slightly valid argument at that). i wont deign to speculate on why this is but only ask that before you continue in believing these stubborn assumptions, that you ACTUALLY listen to some of the changes you automatically deem as ruining pvp. i will end on this note. almost all, if not all, of the top end pve balance players will use infiltration on specific fights. you saying infiltration has no place in pve goes in direct conflict with almost every shadow/s in that plays pve. are you telling us that they should quit playing infiltration when it is necessary in pve just because it is the inferior spec and has some deficiencies? i really hope not because then i have some bad news to deal to all the best shadows/sins out there. this, to me, is evidence that you're argument that infiltration has no place in pve is one of ignorance. since you don't play pve how could you possibly understand this? and therefore, why deign to speculate and insist on an argument that was made out of lack of an understanding? seems counterproductive to me. but i will restate, this is not the place for this silly argument. the idea that OP brought to us was that sustained dps isnt a problem in pve or pvp. you've clearly mentioned that sustained dps for infitlration is fine in pvp, this i can agree with, as little knowledge i have about pvp. but you're only idea concerning OPs post that has to do with pve is that infiltration shouldn't be worried about in pve because it doesn't belong in pve. even if that's true it doesn't answer his question, nor would you be in a position to give said answer. so once more, i'll ask OP if he still is wondering about his question, because i have a response rearing to be heard to those who are actually interested in the subject of this thread, which apparently isn't evoxlife. and to evoxlife: can we drop this silly pissing contest and talk about it in a more relative setting if you really wish to keep fighting? Though PvE is not my gameplay, your arguments have reason. Apparently experience has proved that most of the based on PVE need changes have ended to a mess in PvP. So I kind of understand Evolixe's stubbornness. Ex. Marauder. is fine for PvE but destroys PvP. Destroys, not just alters. At least before Vang/PT buff brought some kind of balance to Arenas. Arenas are important in PvP since are the ONLY ranked existing. The way BW make changes infers that adding another <altered> melee class to arenas may have major effects. More than the effects of improving another PvE spec may have. But just a speculation. Edited November 16, 2013 by Aetideus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaCrucis Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) I have no problem at all in pvp putting up 1k DPS in arenas and never running out of force. I do not even use saber strike lolol (in pve i do cause....pve is hard). If you're running out of force......stop unproc mauling and spamming stuff off cooldown and use an actual rotation . these buffs to deception aren't needed at all IMO. Post your rotation man, Interested to see how you maximize you dps Edited November 22, 2013 by DeltaCrucis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP_Legatus Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) Why are people complaining about lack of sustained sin dps? I see comments like that all over the forums. Hit saber strike a few times and use your CDs correctly. I get low on force. Like we should.... But use saber strike, blackout and cloak right and you get it back. (very broad and basic examples of getting force... this is not a guide) PVP: Damage in both WZs and Arenas competes with any class. PVE: I can sustain my dps throughout whole fight operation boss fights. I do not think Sins have a resource problem in pvp or pve. I think people just like using the nuke button all the time. I just don't see where the support for the belief of lack of sustained sin dps is coming from. I'll try to get this right off memory, but it's been a long time so bear with me on the errors. If you know new information today feel free to correct me. The reason people say the sustained dps is low is because during PTS testing for 2.0 when the parsing for every spec in the game was recorded onto a forum thread and compared, it was discovered that sin dps was running about 200-300 dps lower than all the other specs in the game (both trees). And when I say lower, I mean lower than concealment, everything in the game (even bad specs) was doing at least 200 dps (10%ish) higher. This was at the time PT had that broken hybrid that was removed during PTS testing, and PT's were parsing 1000+ higher dps (and the average parse was around 2400-2500, PTs at 3400 with the broken hybrid that got nerfed). Sins were never upgraded after this discovery, so we have been about 10-15% lower dps than every other spec in swtor since 2.0 dropped unless something changed. For top end specs they were putting out 2700-2800, which is almost a 30% difference in damage output at the extreme ends. Even with changes I can't see anything making up for that. THEN when 2.0 dropped everyone realized crit chance got a big nerf, so specs with autocrits moved vastly ahead of non-autocrit specs (rage, lightning, etc). THEN bioware changed electric ambush so that you can get recklessness whenever you leave combat. A great idea in theory, but in about 99% of combat situations you won't be getting any benefit from this talent outside of popping your force cloak. If however, you manage to be in some place where you can repeatedly kill targets and remain out of combat, your dps suddenly skyrockets due to constant recklessness resets which are not the intended usage of the talent, IMO. Which leads to deception being really broken in some scenarios and quite lackluster in others. Madness, btw, was actually lower by some margin than deception, and never received any upgrades at all. It should still parse lower than every other spec in the game by at least 200 dps or more. Yes there are differences in skill of the parsers but people looked over the parses and confirmed the information was good. Of course the PTS thread is gone or I'd be linking it on the front page of the pvp forums every day. In any case, this is where the info comes from. I don't track pve forums so I don't know if this information has changed, we've progressed 4 major patches since then after all. Edited November 22, 2013 by JP_Legatus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthSylar Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Any change to increase damage will **** over PvP. No matter how you do it. Not quite. Reducing the cost of Low Slash will have literally no effect on PvP, but will increase sustained damage in PvE. Why? Because PvP encounters are much shorter, thus having enough force, isn't an issue with Black out and Force Cloak. But in PvE, do to the longer encounters, using low slash eats up enough Force, that the extra Maul, isn't worth it. Even the devs said that Low Slash+Maul isn't meant for PvE. But lowering the cost of Low Slash to be equal to VS+Torment (23 force), allows more Mauls in PvP, while having very little effect on PvP. An added bonus would be letting Low Slash proc Voltage after you take Voltaic Strike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Not quite. Reducing the cost of Low Slash will have literally no effect on PvP, but will increase sustained damage in PvE. Why? Because PvP encounters are much shorter, thus having enough force, isn't an issue with Black out and Force Cloak. But in PvE, do to the longer encounters, using low slash eats up enough Force, that the extra Maul, isn't worth it. Even the devs said that Low Slash+Maul isn't meant for PvE. But lowering the cost of Low Slash to be equal to VS+Torment (23 force), allows more Mauls in PvP, while having very little effect on PvP. An added bonus would be letting Low Slash proc Voltage after you take Voltaic Strike. A cost reduction to low slash would most certainly affect pvp. However the amount of impact it would have is hard to say without doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IInox Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 A cost reduction to low slash would most certainly affect pvp. However the amount of impact it would have is hard to say without doing it. lolwut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthSylar Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 A cost reduction to low slash would most certainly affect pvp. However the amount of impact it would have is hard to say without doing it. dropping it from 30 to 23, wouldn't make assassins anymore powerful in PvP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 dropping it from 30 to 23, wouldn't make assassins anymore powerful in PvP. That is an awefully weird number, but yes it would make us more powerful in PvP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthSylar Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 That is an awefully weird number, but yes it would make us more powerful in PvP. it's the cost of Voltaic Slash with the Torment skill. So please explain the impact on PvP, considering Low Slash has a 15 sec cool down. The seven less force is hardly game changing. Seems you are just against anything that will positively effect PvE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IInox Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 and that is the same for recuded cost of Maul. no changes for pvp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 it's the cost of Voltaic Slash with the Torment skill. So please explain the impact on PvP, considering Low Slash has a 15 sec cool down. The seven less force is hardly game changing. Seems you are just against anything that will positively effect PvE Not at all. However, the thing is that it's going to make Low Slash less of a choice to make. Again I'm not saying the impact will be big.. but denying it will do any effect to PvP is ignorant at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarafain Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 I just finished reading this thread and it's really funny. Evo the numbers you are posting are probably respectable from a PvP prospective but your missing that the talk is about increasing the sustained dps, non of the numbers you post are sustained numbers. How many of your parses include a bg that went into the 5 min mark? You also seem to be talking about your BEST parses. Do you consider yourself only an average player or one of the better ones... ie guess what this means for the average player. Think about how often it's been a close call after you've opened on someone, I'm guessing more then not you have them dead the moment you open or they get away, basically there's very few instances of "almost getting someone" in comparison to the other 2. Saying 1 spec is for pvp and 1is for pve is pretty shallow-minded, both specs should be viable for both environments. You are correct though in a decrease of force cost on any ability changing PvP. The example someone uses is Low Slash, this ability is more then just duplicity proce in pvp it's also a stun. I'm in the wait and see boat. BW seems to pretty actively review logs and the mention of a "slight" buff has me thinking they're on top of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 I just finished reading this thread and it's really funny. Evo the numbers you are posting are probably respectable from a PvP prospective but your missing that the talk is about increasing the sustained dps, non of the numbers you post are sustained numbers. How many of your parses include a bg that went into the 5 min mark? You also seem to be talking about your BEST parses. Do you consider yourself only an average player or one of the better ones... ie guess what this means for the average player. That's the thing, I don't want "average" players to be over averagely successful. This class being trouble for most people to handle is a very good thing from my point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarafain Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 Deception is hard to play. Shock, Discharge, VS, Maul, low slash - 5 abilities Force cloak, force shroud, deflection, - 3 defensive forcecloak, blackout, overcharge saber, reckless, trinket, stun- 6 CD's It's a priority/resorce management class. PvP brings situational but it does for all classes. There's really 2 problems with the ongoing argument. 1 is that we only have your numbers, we have no comparison to your numbers from other classes. The 2nd is we don't really know the class represntment in rbg/4v4. If only above average players can play the spec in competetive PvP then wouldn't you consider it broken? You can't argue with the parse tests show assassin dps 10% lower then most classes. I like playing an underdog class too but that's quite a handicap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolixe Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 If only above average players can play the spec in competetive PvP then wouldn't you consider it broken? No, I love that. It's a very good way to design a class and imo it should be like that for all classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaha Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 No, I love that. It's a very good way to design a class and imo it should be like that for all classes. Mmmhmmm. Because this game is totally, only meant for elitist bad azz mo-fo's, and in no way meant for casual players of any sort. Naw, naw. Make it impossible for casual people to play, that's the perfect business plan! Reduce profits to a few hard core people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts