Sage Top 3 Questions - Answered

[Rocanon]

LOL - No way - sorc was always the "paper" one ... Sorc did not even have Barrier we just had normal bubble in pre-2.0 NO other cooldown ... Then we got finally Barrier where you cannot move Great cooldown when you knoiw everyone else got another ones and much more powerful.

 

You're either trolling or awful.

[Drahy]

You're either trolling or awful.

 

I am just saying fact how it is all the time with sages ... Now finaly devs agree that it is not ideal or balanced and never was ... At least for sages. I play sage since December 2011 So I know what I am talking about ...

 

As a proof sages have no cooldowns nor armor you can see picture from yesterday arena:

I have Full PVP Brutalizer + some mods for power => 2018 expertise: one spell for almost 11 000 dmg:

http://www.2i.cz/404f5872a1

 

Who else can say he gets full damage by one spell? I counted already 15 spells from other classes which deal more than 10 000 one hit mostly instant ... Heatseeker missiles, Assasinate etc ... No other class but sage get this kind of damage and we have light armor and no cooldowns ... more than 3 years now.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Drahy

[Gyronamics]

This is pretty obtuse of you Gyro. I don't know what bug crawled up your butt to make you poo poo on every ranged class not assault commando, but this is pretty ridiculous. Let's take your points.

 

DCDs:

Commando and Gunslinger DCDs are completely off the GCD. Force Mend isn't, and it really absolutely should be. Additionally, Force Barrier is pretty much a nono in raids most of the time, unless you just really need another threat drop. It's significantly more useless 99% of the time than Adrenaline Rush. SS Slingers also get a 60% AoE damage reduction that lasts 23 seconds, has a CD of 45 seconds, and you can get an additional 6 seconds per use with good usage of Hightail it. Let's not forget that, as KBN pointed out, a lot of things that you have to eat are in fact K/E damage so armor rating does come into play.

 

Either way, Force Mend is their only real DCD in raids and asking for it to be off the GCD is not at all unreasonable. Putting Force Armor off the GCD with some sort of cooldown is also not the worst thing in the world, but I'm willing to say that Force Mend off the GCD is a good enough place to be starting with.

 

Utility:

 

I would include off cleanses for both commando and sage. I know those are very useful on Nefra and Draxus (the CG looking DoT he uses), Brontes (Nanites), and Council (Death Marks, especially with the raid so spread out). Additionally, if you're going to include Force Armor for sages, you should include Kolto Bomb for Commandos. It's instant, relatively cheap, AoE, and isn't negated by having another commando use it unlike Force Armor.

 

I'd say you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

I was listing major defences available to the other ranged classes in reply to the idea that sages have less DCD than other classes, logical thing was to compare to the other ranged classes.

 

The developer response already says they're looking at taking FM off the GCD. I said not a word against that but you went off on a rant as if I opposed it.

 

FB can be used tactically as a timeout or a cheesy anti-mechanic, AR is more like a second medpack, only used at low health. One cancels incoming damage, the other tries to keep you going after taking massive damage. I don't have a solid view on which is "better" since they are used so differently and it wasn't remotely part of my post to try to directly compare them so... not seeing why you went off on that either.

 

Yes I excluded the AOE reduction in SS and a lot of other talented damage reductions for all three classes, I was trying to go for general things that every spec had access to hence the Tier 1 talent but not the higher tier talents.

 

Cleanses yes they should have been in utility.

 

And no, I disagree, on KB being utility any more than the other true heals are utility.

 

FA while it can be considered a heal is also an effective health buff above someones maximum, which in the absence of a sage healer is something unique a sage DPS can do which can save/reduce the effect on someone from an anticipated large hit.

 

As to your first paragraph, if you disagree with something I say elsewhere then say it there.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Gyronamics

[ivanhedgehog]

I found that quite curious as well. I just assumed I was supposed to be using Force Armor. In absence of having other DCD, I'm not sure how you're expected to live through spikes.

 

the devs dont seem to play their own game.

[CommanderKeeva]

I'm indifferent about new animations. I don't care.

 

What i want is animations that reflect the lore part.

 

If you insist so much on the TK part, then you are clearly not playing SWTOR for its lore. To you, at least i get this impression, and to so many other players, SWTOR is merely the x-th MMO, which you will play no matter what. Only damage numbers are of interest to most here, it seems to me. And not at all how the game looks like, how it plays.

 

Me, I'm interested in the lore. IF they do an Star wars game, THEN I want it to be as close to the movies as possible (because OT & PT have the highest priority in terms of lore). Next would come comics, novels, etc. .

 

With this, we have 2 entirely different factions within the player base - and thus within the forums :

 

- Those who don't care at all how a game looks like, the only thing that matters to them is the - cynically put - hack & slay part. SWTOR could be ANY hack & slay game they'd discuss about - and about damage numbers within the game.

 

- Those who don't care about how the mechanics are. All they care about is the look, is how it feels, is how it plays. For them, it is important that they can have immersion and that, if the game is tied to a franchise, that it looks as closely as possible top that franchise.

 

And their entirely different approaches of how to play SWTOR can be very clearly in this "TK olr Jedi Lore" discussion.

 

Don't make assumptions about stuff you no nothing about. What makes you think I'm not interested in SW lore or that I'll jump ship when X MMO comes out? I said nothing about that. I care about lore as much as anybody else, in fact I played through all 8 class stories (4 of them twice), because I wanted to see what individual classes were about. This is a very generalized and distorted view of the player base, lore and mechanics are not mutually exclusive.

 

I just merely think that SWTOR lore does not have to be an exact copy of what we've seen in the films because I enjoy some variety now and then. I also recognize that SWTOR, being an MMO game, has to consider balancing mechanics top priority to retain long-term survivability. It's not that I don't support the changes people were asking for in the third question, I just don't think that was the proper place to ask that question.

[ArchangelLBC]

I'd say you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

I was listing major defences available to the other ranged classes in reply to the idea that sages have less DCD than other classes, logical thing was to compare to the other ranged classes.

 

The developer response already says they're looking at taking FM off the GCD. I said not a word against that but you went off on a rant as if I opposed it.

 

You listed every DCD available to ranged classes (baseline) and decided sages weren't bad off. Except just listing them ignores the fact that a) Force Mend is on the GCD and b) Force Barrier is a DCD of very dubious utility. The other DCDs are definitely off the GCD. Reactive Shield is the best of the bunch as an all purpose DCD, while Dodge has some definite utility in any fight where a self cleanse is needed, or on little things like overhead slam from Grob'thok. My point is that simply listing the 2-3 DCDs available to each ranged class is disingenuous, and forgive me if I think you're way too smart to have missed those fine distinctions.

 

FB can be used tactically as a timeout or a cheesy anti-mechanic, AR is more like a second medpack, only used at low health. One cancels incoming damage, the other tries to keep you going after taking massive damage. I don't have a solid view on which is "better" since they are used so differently and it wasn't remotely part of my post to try to directly compare them so... not seeing why you went off on that either.

 

My point was that even listing FB as a true DCD for Sage DPS is again being pretty disingenuous, and again rather obtuse. I was comparing it to AR only because you had gone out of your way to point out the limited usefulness of AR (which I agree with). If I'd said it was more useless than reactive shield that would have been a big old duh because reactive shield is very useful. I was just saying that putting FB on the list is, well obtuse. Anything that requires you to full stop DPS to get any utility out of it isn't really a true DCD for a DPS. Cheesing mechanics is one thing, limiting damage taken while you burn down a boss is quite another.

 

Yes I excluded the AOE reduction in SS and a lot of other talented damage reductions for all three classes, I was trying to go for general things that every spec had access to hence the Tier 1 talent but not the higher tier talents.

 

Well that's fair enough. I really only brought up that one because of the prevalence of SS Slingers in so many fights in the game, but yes, simpler is better.

 

Cleanses yes they should have been in utility.

 

And no, I disagree, on KB being utility any more than the other true heals are utility.

 

FA while it can be considered a heal is also an effective health buff above someones maximum, which in the absence of a sage healer is something unique a sage DPS can do which can save/reduce the effect on someone from an anticipated large hit.

 

As to your first paragraph, if you disagree with something I say elsewhere then say it there.

 

If FA, a costly instant that takes up a GCD to provide some effective off healing, but has a lockout and whose utility becomes severely limited with a sage healer in the group is considered a utility then I'm not sure how you can say that KB isn't utility. It's instant, which already puts it above other off heals which either involve long casts or the consumption of CB stacks for Gunnery commandos, is pretty cheap at 16 ammo, is completely unaffected by what kind of healers you have and is AoE. Frankly with Kolto Bomb alone, Commandos have probably the best DPS off healing in the game. If I recall right you run 16 man right? A lot of those fights have quite the hefty amount of AoE damage going out, especially compared to 8 man versions. You telling me you've never thrown the odd kolto bomb in a healing intensive fight to help the healers out?

 

If you think Balance Sages have the force and time to throw around Force Armors when needed (and if you think that I agree with you entirely), then surely commandos have the time to throw out the odd Kolto Bomb when the situation calls for it.

 

 

As to my first paragraph, I'm just noting a trend of you going into threads for other ranged DPS and seeming to come down against any suggestions of improvements for them. I could almost understand it for slingers but really you're going to do it on a sage thread? Maybe that's why I thought it seemed you opposed a change as simple as taking Force Mend off the GCD. Your post wasn't exactly overflowing with positivity now was it?

[MusicRider]

Compare Sage to Commando and Gunslinger.

 

Commando:

Reactive Shield (25% less dmg, 12s, 2m CD),

Adrenaline Rush is a last ditch DCD, requiring you to almost die and then not get finished off. (8s of healing up to 35%, 3m CD)

 

Gunslinger is often banned from using their Scrambling Field as a personal DCD, typically it's controlled by the raid leader in serious content so personal CD are:

Dodge: 0 ranged/melee damage for 3s, (1m CD)

Defensive Shield: mini force armour (20s CD)

Ballistic Dampers is a talent but since it's tier 1 it's typically taken: 30% less damage from next 3 hits in cover (6s CD)

 

Sage as you say:

Force Mend: chunky heal (30s CD)

Force Barrier: immunity for 10s(?) followed by about 75% of your health in a damage absorbing buff for 5s(?) (3m CD)

 

Doesn't immediately look like Sages have a bad deal for Operations.

 

Commando got some pretty bad news though, passive buff of heavy armour is intended to be bypassed by specific mechanics to ensure they do take as much damage from it as a sage and their two DCD have long CD.

Well my original post was not to start another comparison between the classes, there are a number of threads about it. And I am afraid to say that it is widely accepted that sages take more damage than the other classes, they are meant to do so, that's their design philosophy, and this is with bubble included.... taking out the bubble since according to the devs it is not meant to be used when in a dps spec the gap gets even wider. So there is no point of getting into such comparisons once more really.

 

Sage:

Pull -> total aggro dump on target and rescue/hilarious fail mechanic to save/kill an ally.

Force Armour - a heath buff you can put on an ally before a hit if no sage healer is available.

Combat Res

 

Gunslinger:

Scrambling Fields raid protection which I excluded from personal DCD

Armour debuff with healing debuff attached

Accuracy debuff (sharpshooter) -> can be used on powerful adds but not the boss

Immunity during roll, can remove self destructive damaging mechanics such as circles vs Dread Guard without anyone taking damage

 

Commando:

Armour debuff (gunnery)

Combat Res

 

Exactly. So given that:

a) friendly pull in a pve setting is a "hillarious mechanic to save/kill an ally" and also that the pull is to correct smns mistake rather than actually being part of a standard utility "rotation", it can hardly classify as a utility mechanic.

b) every healer will have a combat res and combat res has a long cd, so a dps having combat res does not add anything more to the group

c) force armour and I will also add the off-heals, exactly.... that was the only utility a sage dps was bringing with all its drawbacks... given the answer of the devs that as a dps sage you are not meant to be using bubble on yourself or on others (and hence not use also your heals which are lengthier/costier) the question remains:

 

What is the utility that dps sages bring then?

[AlrikFassbauer]

I just don't think that was the proper place to ask that question.

 

Okay, where should it have been asked, then ? With an guaranteed response ?

[Altheran]

Okay, where should it have been asked, then ? With an guaranteed response ?

 

And considering that it was more than 2 years that BioWare turned a blind eye to the multiple threads about it.

 

Personally I'm relieved that we asked it here, because given how long it has been unanswered, and the pretty bold negative answer we received, their astonishing silence could have lasted ad vitam aeternam.

Now even if we know they're fundamentally disagreeing, we now have a basis to try convincing them. Dialog has been opened, up to us to show them the goodness of changing this.

[Gyronamics]

My point was that even listing FB as a true DCD for Sage DPS is again being pretty disingenuous, and again rather obtuse. ... Cheesing mechanics is one thing, limiting damage taken while you burn down a boss is quite another.

 

I can't see any way that I could agree with Force Barrier not being a defensive cooldown.

 

Random examples, Brontes stuns a sage to perform Fire and Forget, a potentially fatal attack that all DPS classes are burning DCD on to increase survivability. Or any of the Kephess clone dread bomb type attacks in TFB or DF where he jumps up and stomps a player for high damage. Not being dead afterwards is #1 for being able to continue DPS. No its not suitable for a last stand except in really unique circumstances but I'm not seeing that as a rule for something being a DCD.

 

If FA, a costly instant that takes up a GCD to provide some effective off healing, but has a lockout and whose utility becomes severely limited with a sage healer in the group is considered a utility then I'm not sure how you can say that KB isn't utility.

 

The difference is one is healing (and therefore we get into offhealing) and one is a health buff.

 

If I took a 41k hit from whatever, maybe I'm forced to eat a predictable mechanic for the raid, I'd die, if a DPS sage knows that's going to happen and puts his FA on me, I'm going to survive with a few K of hp. He's not compensating for healing but increasing my maximum effective health. Maybe it helps that time maybe it doesn't but it's something different that only sages can do.

 

If you think Balance Sages have the force and time to throw around Force Armors when needed (and if you think that I agree with you entirely), then surely commandos have the time to throw out the odd Kolto Bomb when the situation calls for it.

 

Offhealing when practical is part of the package but this is covered by healers if all goes to plan. I was going for the utility of the sacrificial "health" of FA which allows someone to take more damage than they have health and while it's better from a sage healer, a dps doing it is better than nothing.

 

 

As to my first paragraph, I'm just noting a trend of you going into threads for other ranged DPS and seeming to come down against any suggestions of improvements for them. I could almost understand it for slingers but really you're going to do it on a sage thread? Maybe that's why I thought it seemed you opposed a change as simple as taking Force Mend off the GCD. Your post wasn't exactly overflowing with positivity now was it?

 

This is going into the area of "ought to be discussed where it was said" but I'm sure you've noticed the class I'm usually on has a forum which is stone dead and has no changes expected.

 

I came into this one to make a reply to "sages have X cooldowns, other classes have more" and "sage utility" I wouldn't bother to post just to agree so of course its going to be something disagreeing with the original post.

 

To say it again, I had nothing to say about taking FM off the GCD which in a cynical way can be seen as a good thing.

 

If someone woke up the mercenary forum to say that mercs need a damage buff I might post there too and it's unlikely I'd be overflowing with positivity since nothing that mercs need involves more damage.

 

What is the utility that dps sages bring then?

 

Kephess EC NiM sage pull was used by many guilds to recover the player bombing the robot so they didn't stay stunned under it taking high damage and potentially dying if they were not heavily healed and/or had a good DCD up.

I believe pull can be but I've not seen it in practice, used to zero a tanks threat as part of DF NiM Brontes final phase to ensure she attacks the other tank first.

 

It's not universally usable but it has been used as part of raid tactics.

 

Combat res is often a task for DPS because losing damage is preferable to losing healing which can result in more deaths. Depends on the fight.

 

As I was reminded, cleanses also are utility.

[Ycoga]

@EricMusco, will you pick the suggestions the devs wanted from Sages out of this thread yourself, or do you need list to be compiled by the community and posted in a new thread?

[wainot-keel]

the devs dont seem to play their own game.

 

If they do, probably no one mains a Sage/Sorc dps playing DF/DP hm/nim

[Galothor]

Well devs not playing the game or class they developed is like a chef not eating the food he cooked ... a bad sign. Edited May 30, 2014 by Galothor

[GrandLordMenace]

Random ignorant Sage/Sorc DPS/Heal survivability thing:

 

What if they made Force Armor/Static Barrier free when activated ON the user, IE hit myself with Static Barrier, as well as off the GCD? OP or just another short DCD? This would help with survivability in both game modes, and TBH in PVP the bubble isn't so amazing I'd kill myself if they could activate it that much faster.

[Master-Nala]

Well devs not playing the game or class they developed is like a chef not eating the food he cooked ... a bad sign.

 

I think they play their own game, but like many developers, they play their game as they envisioned it being played, not as players actually play it.

 

Developers create this complex set of tools, call it a class and unleash it on the masses. Some folks play it exactly how the developers envision it played. Some others find strategies that the devs never considered. That's where the disconnect comes in. Sages cannot play the class exactly how the devs envisioned because then other classes become superior options.

 

Not using Force Armor as a DPS spec is just a little bit nutty, but I can see how the devs think it's a good idea. It really makes me wonder how they reconcile that position with this:

 

There may be a little room for improvement here, though comparing a Sage to a Marauder or Sniper is not exactly a fair comparison. The fact is, Marauders and Snipers cannot heal themselves to full. Sure, you cannot deal damage while you are healing, but knowing when to heal or when to deal damage is part of playing a Sage. Marauders and Snipers definitely have a simplicity advantage over Sages, because they can only fulfill the role of a damage dealer. Therefore, they are easier to play to their full potential than any class that can tank/off-tank or heal/off-heal.

 

.....

 

It is not intended for Sorcerers to be easier to stop because they can heal while specialized to DPS or vice versa; however, the ability to heal is considered to be part of a Sorcerer’s overall survivability. Sorcerers should not be easier to shut down than any other Advanced Class, but due to the fact that most of the Sorcerer’s healing and damaging abilities have an activation time, they may need to be more careful than other classes about using LOS to their own advantage – for a Sorcerer, positioning is extremely important at all times. Sorcerer’s are an “easy to play, hard to master” class, in that most of their abilities are rather straight-forward and easily understood, but getting the most out of those abilities may require a higher skill level than many players are comfortable with.

 

 

Surely, using Force Armor and Force Mend would be far and away the best healing ability to use as a DPS. If we aren't intended to use that, then it seems that Sage/Sorc healing abilities should play NO role in the devs' assessment of the class's surviviability.

[AlixMV]

b) every healer will have a combat res and combat res has a long cd, so a dps having combat res does not add anything more to the group

 

Hahaha, no.

 

Granted, I'm not in a top flight raid Guild, but as my raid team has been working on progression, we find having a DPS Commando in the group invaluable for this. Yeah, we lose her DPS for a few seconds, but it allows the Healers to focus on continuing to heal the other seven members of the raid while she's channeling the rez on the person down.

 

So I would certainly argue that it adds something to the group.

[KeyboardNinja]

Hahaha, no.

 

Granted, I'm not in a top flight raid Guild, but as my raid team has been working on progression, we find having a DPS Commando in the group invaluable for this. Yeah, we lose her DPS for a few seconds, but it allows the Healers to focus on continuing to heal the other seven members of the raid while she's channeling the rez on the person down.

 

So I would certainly argue that it adds something to the group.

 

This.

[Ycoga]

Surely, using Force Armor and Force Mend would be far and away the best healing ability to use as a DPS. If we aren't intended to use that, then it seems that Sage/Sorc healing abilities should play NO role in the devs' assessment of the class's surviviability.

 

/golfclap

 

(For those that dont get the repercussions, it means that devs have released conflicting data about the Sage class and how it's designed to be played. Do they not understand the class themselves? Are there errors in the design? Is there in-fighting in the team? Stay tuned for more on, 'L2P Sages', every Weekday)

Edited May 30, 2014 by Ycoga

[MusicRider]

Hahaha, no.

 

Granted, I'm not in a top flight raid Guild, but as my raid team has been working on progression, we find having a DPS Commando in the group invaluable for this. Yeah, we lose her DPS for a few seconds, but it allows the Healers to focus on continuing to heal the other seven members of the raid while she's channeling the rez on the person down.

 

So I would certainly argue that it adds something to the group.

 

You are missing the point here, which is whether you already have this utility in the raid group and given its cd time it cannot be multiple used in a short time, and not whether it is more optimal for a dps to bring this utility, which is actually more of a failsafe mechanism rather than a utility. Let me rephrase the question to you then: Would you prefer a dps class with combar resurrection or a dps class with group damage reduction or armour penetration abilities? This is a pretty much straightforward answer of one or the other.

 

EDIT: clarifications

Edited May 30, 2014 by MusicRider

[Mathemagica]

Not using Force Armor as a DPS spec is just a little bit nutty, but I can see how the devs think it's a good idea. It really makes me wonder how they reconcile that position with this:

 

You need to look at both quotes in their respective context. The h2f answer is meant for a PvP setting, while the answer about not using Static Barrier is meant for Operations.

So the devs envision Sages/Sorcs to use Static Barrier and offheals in PvP situations (they seem to value healing abilities less than a few months ago though), but not in Operations. This is quite crucial context to understand how the devs envision Sages/Sorcs.

 

Nevertheless, I can't help but wonder how Sage/Sorc dps are supposed to survive mechanics like Dreadbomb without a Sage/Sorc-healer in their operation group.

 

@Gyronamics: The devs seem to consider Force Barrier as an escape, not a dcd. The obvious hint for this is, that Electro Net blocks Force Barrier. Electro Net only deactivates escape abilities, not defensive cooldowns.

 

Edit: I suck at punctuation.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Mathemagica

[Master-Nala]

You need to look at both quotes in their respective context. The h2f answer is meant for a PvP setting, while the answer about not using Static Barrier is meant for Operations.

So the devs envision Sages/Sorcs to use Static Barrier and offheals in PvP situations (they seem to value healing abilities less than a few months ago though), but not in Operations. This is quite crucial context to understand how the devs envision Sages/Sorcs.

 

I thought that as well. But Psirebral tagged his first question as PvE/PvP. No limitation was intended for PvP until the second question regarding being able to shut down Sorcerers.

 

It may be the case that your interpretation is what they MEANT to imply. But it still raises a fair amount of concerns. If Sage/Sorc survival is predicated on healing ability, but they aren't intended to use that healing ability in the most difficult PvE content, then something is amiss.

 

The developers can only reconcile that position if every other class is intended to be able to survive with only their healers keeping them alive. I can't think that the devs really believe Force Mend to be potent enough to make up for the DCDs other classes have access to.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Master-Nala

[Mathemagica]

The developers can only reconcile that position if every other class is intended to be able to survive with only their healers keeping them alive. I can't think that the devs really believe Force Mend to be potent enough to make up for the DCDs other classes have access to.

 

Well, I don't think that they had this in mind. I believe this issue has its origin in the introduction of unavoidable, operationwide/random-target damage. Sages/Sorcs whole survivability is built around 'outrunning' damage. In Warzones this works. In Arenas... not so much (see Q2&A2).

In Operations it's just as bad, because about half of a Sage/Sorc dps defensive toolset simply doesn't apply (CC-immunity of adds can also be quite evil on Sage/Sorcs).

 

This could be 'corrected' by redesigning Sages/Sorcs defensive tools. This is a huge undertake, including a new class philosophy that might repulse parts of its playerbase.

However, the different defensive toolsets of different ACs could also be accounted for, by a more refined design of Operation mechanics. In other words, very mobile classes should be able to outrun some operation wide damage. Again, this needs fine adjustment, because there are classes that have both strong dcds and very capable mobility tools which could become ridiculously resilient to operation mechanics.

 

In short: It's not just classes that need to be balanced against each other when faced with a part of the game. Aspects of the game like Operations, Warzones and Arenas need to be designed around the design philosophy of the classes and the interplay going on there.

The devs actually mentioned an example of this with the internal damage. Unfortunately, we don't see so many such examples and this might be something to bring forward to them.

[AlrikFassbauer]

Just quoting myself - note that is an highly cynical point of view :

 

most gave up because of them being hard to play.

 

Then it is WAI (Working As Intended), because the devs stated several times that the Sage / Sorc classes are "easy to learn, hard to master" and that mastery of both "might require more cskill than most people are comfortable with" (cited from my memory, but I know that these are not the 100 % original words).

 

Which on the other side means that - according to the devs - there SHOULD be only a small number of Sorcs / Sages within the game ...

 

 

 

 

Well, I don't think that they had this in mind. I believe this issue has its origin in the introduction of unavoidable, operationwide/random-target damage. Sages/Sorcs whole survivability is built around 'outrunning' damage. In Warzones this works. In Arenas... not so much (see Q2&A2).

In Operations it's just as bad, because about half of a Sage/Sorc dps defensive toolset simply doesn't apply (CC-immunity of adds can also be quite evil on Sage/Sorcs).

 

This could be 'corrected' by redesigning Sages/Sorcs defensive tools. This is a huge undertake, including a new class philosophy that might repulse parts of its playerbase.

However, the different defensive toolsets of different ACs could also be accounted for, by a more refined design of Operation mechanics. In other words, very mobile classes should be able to outrun some operation wide damage. Again, this needs fine adjustment, because there are classes that have both strong dcds and very capable mobility tools which could become ridiculously resilient to operation mechanics.

 

As much as I agree to you : A redesign won't happen. 100 %. The devs are too strong-headed over this. You can watch it via their answers.

 

And that's why I had insisted on the LOS thing in the questions discussion - and was very, very surprised that no-one saw that point ??? - the devs have stated several times - directly or indirectly - that the Sage / Sorc class has its primary damage mitigation by LOSing and by outrinning things. That's the way I see how the devs had designed this class from the ground on.

 

And THEN they do NOT add any LOS possibilities in boss fights ???

 

And now, with the actual answers showing that the devs don't expect DD Sages to use the bubble, it becomes more than apparent : They WANT the Sage to be an "outrunner" and a "LOSer" !

 

But - this logic is completely broken by them not adding any LOS structures Sages could participate from. Yes, they even REMOVED them from current Flashpoints ! (Tython / Korriban).

 

 

/golfclap

 

(For those that dont get the repercussions, it means that devs have released conflicting data about the Sage class and how it's designed to be played. Do they not understand the class themselves? Are there errors in the design? Is there in-fighting in the team? Stay tuned for more on, 'L2P Sages', every Weekday)

 

No, they are simply out of touch with the player base. They do mNOT play the game like WE are playing it.

 

I'm really, really, really keen on watching them play Sages / Sorcs in OPs now !

 

I think they play their own game, but like many developers, they play their game as they envisioned it being played, not as players actually play it.

 

Developers create this complex set of tools, call it a class and unleash it on the masses. Some folks play it exactly how the developers envision it played. Some others find strategies that the devs never considered. That's where the disconnect comes in. Sages cannot play the class exactly how the devs envisioned because then other classes become superior options.

 

Not using Force Armor as a DPS spec is just a little bit nutty, but I can see how the devs think it's a good idea. It really makes me wonder how they reconcile that position with this:

 

I agree to this.

 

Now, there's SWTOR Streaming ... I'd like to watch them how they play these classes themselves ...

Edited May 30, 2014 by AlrikFassbauer

[Galothor]

If they play their game as they envisioned it then they must be taking something while they are playing the game. That would also explain those contradictory answers.

 

The setting doesn't really matter as you usually got healer both in PvE and group PvP. So either we are supposed or not supposed to use our heal abilites at all. BW please make up your mind. But this much can be said: If you don't use your heal abilities espeically not you bubble you are screwed in PvP. I wonder how you envisioned us sorc / sages playing PvP without the bubble.

[AdrianDmitruk]

Sage/Sorcerer healers, we hear you and we see that our data validates what you are saying – as it shows you are currently performing behind both Scoundrel/Operative healers and Commando/Mercenary healers in PvP. We do not currently have any plans to share with you on how we intend to improve Sage/Sorcerer healing in PvP, but it is a priority for us, and we would love to hear your own ideas on how you would like Sage/Sorcerer healing to be improved in PvP without also making Sage/Sorcerer healing too good in PvE.

 

I know I already posted some feedback in here, but I just thought of something:

 

2.4 goes on PTS

testers tell Bioware that sorc heals will be broken useless in arena

Bioware ignores tester feedback, goes live

We ask about survivability/shutdown in sorc questions

Bioware replies h2f

We initially give lots of feedback but get burnt out trying to correct above dev stupidity, give up, reroll ops and/or go dps

Bioware spends the last 3 or so patches buffing sorc dps while completely ignoring heals, even though by then the metrics should prove sorc heals need the help

 

Tell me, Eric, in light of the above, why should we bother giving you feedback? You have several months' worth of it. Including on this thread where you actively solicited such feedback. It's been 9 months since h2f and six months since that feedback gathering session on corruption (and the evidence available to us players indicates that you have completely ignored such feedback for the past six months).

 

Why should we bother? The vast majority of us have long given up. We've all rerolled ops and/or respecced DPS by now.

 

P.S. To those who are butthurt about the sages "wasting" the third question on cosmetic concerns, the above is a large part of why--Bioware doesn't seem to take anything else seriously.