Class changes: Nerf vs. Buff

[ZionHalcyon]

There, you have the root reason why balance will never be any good.

 

You have to at least separate PvP and PvE skills somehow.

 

Until then you are wasting precious resources and will keep displeasing both type of players.

 

This to me is the one fly in the ointment. Its the absolute truth.

 

Although, since we have level shift and bolster now, is there a way to tune the game for PvE, and then use bolster to fill in the difference for PvP? That way, core abilities aren't affected, but instead a PvP buff/nerf for those in the PvP arenas can help equalize any potential imbalances.

[fire-breath]

Arsenal was around 8-9% behind top parsers then you nerfed the to the level of lightning and MM, even though these are 1) 15% behind top, 2) considered not viable for NiM mode.

 

Please note: Considered not viable by who? Sages are still capable of doing the content. Other classes are at times and in the correct hands better. Better doesn't all of a sudden discard the less good ones.

 

To use Erics example. Target is 1.000 DPS, Sages are at 1.200 DPS, gunnery is at 1.800 DPS. Does this make the sage not viable? Imo not. Only less desirable for most people but still viable

[teclado]

Clear as day, Eric. Thanks.

 

People automatically assume the Merc damage nerf was a PvP nerf because "nobody was complaining about Merc damage in PvE." In other words, being OP in PvE doesn't hurt anybody else, so why not leave it alone? It's not like you are shooting another player, as in PvP. It goes back to game difficulty. Some people like a challenge, some want it to be trivial. A few percent reduction in sustained dps won't make any difference for trivial content, but it will make a difference for challenging content. People get into NiM raiding for the challenge, or so I thought. If the combat team is nerfing Arsenal's damage, they must believe that even NiM raiding would be possible with the changes. I would think that players would respond with "challenge accepted."

 

I see a bunch of people trying to calculate what the new Arsenal sustained dps is going to be. They have to make some assumptions. It's possible that some of those assumptions are erroneous. If so, it would be helpful to get some input from the combat team to straighten them out. The combat team has to assume a certain rotation. Is it intended that part of the fun of playing a class is to try and figure out the most optimal rotation, and the combat team has something in mind that no player has been able to figure out? Is that why there seems to be a disparity in what players think Arsenal's sustained dps will be with the changes vs what the design goals are? Is that why the team is mum and not saying "nah, we were using this rotation in our calculations?" Even so, it would be helpful to hear that there is a more optimal rotation and leave it up to the players to figure it out.

Edited June 20, 2017 by teclado

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

Hope I'll manage to hit the right tone of voice for this one as it is a hotly debated topic, and one that it's difficult to remain calm on.

 

When looking at the upcoming first batch of class changes, one can see that the preferred method to restore class balance seems to be swinging the nerf hammer. For instance, my beloved mercenary will do less damage in the future in addition to producing more heat for one of the most important skills, which means one would probably have to redistribute attributes away from stuff like critical and toward alacrity. This will probably lower overall damage in addition to the 5% damage reduction they are planning anyway.

 

Now, this might work. It might mean that fights in PvP will be more fair. Already, many are demanding for Bioware to swing the nerf hammer some more and take away trauma regulators, responsive safeguards and/or the energy shield, insisting that the merc/commando is way way overpowered. To be honest, as far as PvP is concerned, I have no idea if that is true or not as I never play it. I know I need my utilities and my damage for PvE, not because I'm a poor player, but because I very often have to carry people in PUGs. Not sure how well I can do that if all of my survivability is removed?

 

But seriously, wouldn't it be much better to BUFF other classes to give them the tools to deal with this?

 

I know I sure won't be sad if my compadres in an Op or FP have more power and more options in a fight, and if "weaker" classes got the tools to counter what merc/commandos throw at them, and that makes PvP more fair, that should be okay, too? At least it won't piss off all the PvE people in the process!

 

And just randomly swinging the nerf hammer - no matter how hard - will piss off people like me.

 

What do you all think?

 

You fix what's broken. When you start trying to fix things that aren't broken, that's a great way to break them.

 

You may not be able to "carry" others, but than, you're not supposed have too carry other people. You can't make class design balance based on other classes needing help and you needing to be so overpowered so to make up for other's possible deficiency's.

 

Mercs overperform both in PVE and PVP, it's just not quite as big an issue in PVE because it's not working against any other player and raid bosses don't whine over classes being too OP. In PVP, it's not just business, it's personal and mercs [and snipers] are WAY too strong in almost every way. They literally ruin PVP for Melee and even effect other ranged. Their overperfomance in PVP is blatantly obvious, thats why you see 5 mercs or 3 or 4 snipers in most WZs, which only compounds it.

[JargoFett]

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

 

It is believed and pretty much proven in PvP that merc's current defensives throw off what seems to have been Bioware's intended combat balance so why was the decision made not to make any changes to those defensives? Or are you planning on making all ranged classes have strong DCDs and lower overall damage?

[adormitul]

What is the problem with being Overpowered it will reduce the gameplay and story difference we are playing very powerful heroes the best of the best in their respective fields.

 

I see no problem in going Mace Windu on most enemies in the game. When I say Mace Windu I make reference to him taking an whole droid army with his bare hands.

 

We know we are strong in story and the gammeplay will confirm it.

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

I agree, I think the devs would meet with a lot more approval if they gave the under performing classes some buffs rather than nerfing people. I'm not entirely sure why they're going the negative route with this issue. Granted, I don't PvP, so I could be missing something that makes their choice more logical.

 

I just hope my sniper and gunslinger don't get nerfed. Neither is one of the builds people say are overpowered but I still worry.

 

I'm sorry, I know you're just looking out for a class you love to play, and that's understandable, but Virulence and even more so Engineering are notably overpowered against melee, and are on even ground with mercs in PVP. Engineering ruins all hope for fun if you are melee because you spend the entire match 70% slowed and have no hope of being able to channel objectives because they can spam Plasma probe indefinitely with 100% uptime so you can't channel. It's game breaking.

[Kaldron_Fell]

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

Thank you, Eric, for taking the time to answer.

 

I guess I'm more worried about what happens to utilities. The thing about DPS numbers makes sense to me. But on the other side, I'm very worried that the legitimate complaints of the PvP community about merc utilities will reduce my survivability in PvE when pugging with the inexperienced, where I have to tank as well. I guess my point is if you guys don't perhaps want to look at these and decide that perhaps one utility is helpful as it is in PvE but overpowered for PvP, and make a distinction instead of just removing it.

 

Also, thanks everyone else for keeping it civil!

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

 

There is no reason you should not be able to solo heroics. Every single class in the game can solo heroics, they are faceroll easy. If you have tier 4 gear and mako level 50 and aren't being sucussful, respectfully you are doing something wrong. As a merc you should be virtually unkillable from any foe you could possibly fight in a heroic.

 

Jaesa is no more powerful than any other companion. All companions are exactly the same now there are no mechanical differences between Mako and Jeasa.

 

You can set the role of any companion between DPS/Tank/or Healer. Companion DPS is pitiful, don't confuse the damage bonus on the character sheet with DPS. If you are using a companion and have trouble surviving for some reason set them to heals. They can more than keep you standing.

Edited June 20, 2017 by WayOfTheWarriorx

[casirabit]

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

 

I almost want not to believe you. I have one of every class in the game and even I can do the heroics on Belsavis, Voss and Corella with no problem. Not sure what your problem is but it is able to be done.

[DenariusJay]

Erics post just confirms what many people have already commented on and have tried to explain a million times over to deaf ears. Arsenal spec was over performing across the board, PvE and PvP. The changes were not brought on by those toxic "pvp whiners".

 

It just took so long to get addressed that mercs just got used to it, like it was suppose to be that way, and if you bring them back down to where they are supposed to be , well my my, time to unsub!

Edited June 20, 2017 by DenariusJay

[ivanhedgehog]

I'm sorry, I know you're just looking out for a class you love to play, and that's understandable, but Virulence and even more so Engineering are notably overpowered against melee, and are on even ground with mercs in PVP. Engineering ruins all hope for fun if you are melee because you spend the entire match 70% slowed and have no hope of being able to channel objectives because they can spam Plasma probe indefinitely with 100% uptime so you can't channel. It's game breaking.

 

A lot of people dont give a flying **** about your pvp problems. We do care seeing things like our AOEs and other abilities butchered to make pvp complaints go away. make the abilities go away only when in warzones, whatever. but stop butchering the rest of the game because one special snowflake cant kill a team of 4 other players.

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

 

That's an excellent explanation and easy to understand the point of view you are espousing. The system you are basing this on however has some flaws. It doesn't take into consideration a host of abilties the classes have, some of which may not even effect DPS directly, but non the less provide certain usefulness even advantages.

 

If one DPS has self-heals and another DPS spec does has smaller self-heals compatatively [or even non in the case of Marauders] and the DPS between the two us close, the DPSer with the better heals have an inate advantage. It may not directly effect the damage of attacks, but, the principle of "you can't DPS if your dead" applies here. If a class with self heals has higher DPS than a DPS with few or no self heals, that isn't justifiable whatever damage type spec they may be [burst/DOt etc]. It's an inherent imbalance and automatically makes the DPSer with less DPS and less heals undesirable and less effective.

 

This notion applies to other abilities as well. Perma stealth gives inherent survivability advantages [ a you can't kill me button], it allows them to escape virtually any situation as long as they have a small amount of health left and dont' have dots ticking, so they can get away and heal. To say nothing of how it effects objectives and the ability to bypass ADDs [even in Operations].

 

CC kits have a vast effect on performance in combat both on the user and the so effected. [stun=DPS loss].

 

Having classes with a plethora of CCs and at the same time having CC immunities [sniper] and yet they still have higher DPS than most, and a ton of DCDs and self healing. How can you justify them having better DPS than a Marauder who doesn't have all those other advantages?

 

Why are snipers entitled to a great DPS than lightning sorcs who don't share all those advantages and are of the same type of DPS [ranged].

 

Some classes can use abilties that aren't even part of the normal DPS kit. You have Juggs and Assassins in DPS spec using taunts and guards with are tank abilites. You have skank tanks running around and doing more DPS as a tank spec than many actual DPS specs and with greater survivability.

 

You have some classes than can off tank and off heal, and some classes that do not have that option.

 

There is no consideration given in that regard to pure DPS classes who do not have access to any of those types of things and are still doing less DPS than those classes with those added abilities in many cases.

 

You have a spec that has self-heals, perma stealth, and a CC kit that could choke a horse doing more DPS than specs lacking in those things and classes that cannot play any other role but DPS.

 

You have one "pure DPS class" with self heals, more DCDS, greater range, and insane control over melee [in the form of their CC kit] also doing more damage than the melee pure DPS spec who doesn't have self heals, has less DCDs, and who suffers more forced downtime than a ranged. How does that make sense? Pure DPS classes shouldn't have heals, the non-pure DPS classes should.

 

Your metrics are all well and good and they are not without some merit, but you are failing to take account of too many other things that effect performance significantly and DPS.

 

There should be some sort of ratio to the amount of potential heals to the amount of DPS output. The more heals you have the less DPS you should have and vice versa, That's balance.

 

* A glass cannon should always do more damage than classes with greater survivability.

* Melee should do more damage than ranged as they suffer more forced downtime.

* All heal specs should be viable. Some more of less is fine, but it shouldn't cause someone to not be allowed to come along because the heals are so much less that it could be damning.

* Tanks shouldn't be doing DPS spec level DPS, but they SHOULD be able to take advantage of ALL the tank stats even in PVP just like they do in PVE. [Defense/Absorb].

* DPS specs shouldn't be able to taunt or guard. That's a tanks job.

* Trinity should matter based on role.

* PVE and PVP need separate metrics, and separate builds. Balancing classes cannot be achieved if certain changes effect PVE and PVP differently.

 

Metrics cannot always be the end all determinating factor if it comes at the cost of common sense.

[mike_carton]

... the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

So, what are those target numbers? Are they measured against a Dummy or are they the expected "Effective DPS" after mechanics, DCDs and Self-Heals are factored in? Why are the DPS targets similar for Commandos and Sages who wear different kinds of armor? (Light armor means you have to use DCDs or Self-Heals more, reducing the "Effective DPS." The Sage has less armor, and has Self-Heals and DCDs that are less effective and more time-consuming; all around "Effective DPS" loss compared to a Commando.)

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

There is nothing wrong with everyone being stronger than your balance targets. It just means the balance targets are wrong. Balance Targets should not become the next Sacred Cow after CXP.

 

At any rate, we should not be talking about content as if it is one undifferentiated lump.We should distinguish between:

 

 

• PvP - Should be balanced separately. There seems to be some agreement among player-base (independent threads in PvP forum) that the TTK is too long currently. I believe reducing TTK would be desirable (except for Sages). I hope other PvPers will chime in with their views. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is beneficial. (But the real problem lies in Combat Proficiencies and Stuns/CCs etc.)
   
   
  
• Levelling PvE - Already easy. All Disciplines can comfortably complete this content. No one has complained about differences in ease of doing this between Disciplines. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS will not make a difference.
   
   
  
• SM Group PvE - Generally, there is no problem currently. One or two Uprisings or Operations might be challenging for all-Sage teams now. Buffing all Disciplines will allow more people to have a better experience in completing them. There's no reason these activities have to take longer than they currently do, unless we want to intentionally slow down progress. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS will have a mild positive effect.
   
   
  
• VM Group PvE - One or two Uprisings and some Operations would be very challenging for all Sage teams currently. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is beneficial.
   
   
  
• MM Group PvE - Teams do not form with Sages or Sharpshooters. Adding Commandos to that list is not an improvement. If everybody's DPS comes down, there will not even be the possibility of a team carrying one Sage or Sharpshooter with them; teams just won't have the DPS margin anymore to do that (Excluding FPs?). Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is the only rational approach.
  

TL, DR: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is the way to go. It does not actually need "rebalancing the entire game."

Picking a Nit:

 

I hope the balancing guys (combat team) are good with numbers. Many of us have learnt over the years (or in school) that if you travel 10% faster, you won't arrive in 90% of the original time. If the DPS is higher by 20%, the TTK is shorter by 16.7% (assuming a Dummy as the target.)

[ludoviccb]

Please note: Considered not viable by who? Sages are still capable of doing the content. Other classes are at times and in the correct hands better. Better doesn't all of a sudden discard the less good ones.

 

To use Erics example. Target is 1.000 DPS, Sages are at 1.200 DPS, gunnery is at 1.800 DPS. Does this make the sage not viable? Imo not. Only less desirable for most people but still viable

 

The problem is that the target doesn't consider content. For some content, Sages might need 1.200 DPS for a part of a fight, but not being able to get it due to it requiring perfect conditions to get it. This make the Sage far less desirable than the gunnery Commando with it's 1.800 DPS since it got extra DPS in case of problem.

 

Two such case are the Dread Defiler in DP VM and MM and Empowering Power in MM. They come too often to rely on the Burst of the offensive cooldown and they require strong basic burst dps.

 

For the Dread Defiler, you got somewhere between 20s to 15s to kill it before it cast a DoT that do massive damage and probably wipe the raid and you got to kill one every 30s. In that time, you got to wait for it to be targetable, target it and kill it. This can bring the Time to Kill (TTK) down to less than 10s. This week, with a concealment operative (10.5-11k DPS on the defiler which is slightly higher than the best Sorc DPS dummy parse) and an Arsenal Merc we had trouble beating it in VM due to the time to be targettable being very long that night for the Mercenary. It was always by less than 1s that we beat it or not, but there was no way that we could have cleared it with 1 or 2 Sorcerer DPS. Just not enough DPS from that class with the time to target that night. In perfect conditions 2 Sorcerer could have been able to do it, but they would have had no room for any kind of mistake or the raid wipe.

 

For the Empowering Power (which is in the same portal, so it's the other 2 DPS that need to kill it), it's an orb racing to the boss in about 10s that need to be killed every time Calphayus destroy a crystal or the raid wipe. Since it can spawn in 4 locations that aren't always in range, there is a time to get in range, then the burst to kill it. Once again, Sorcerer would have trouble to meet the required DPS.

 

Then at the end, there is the burn phase of the boss which require once again strong burst DPS or the group will wipe.

 

 

This is why people that PvE go for higher DPS and HPS classes, it give them room for mistake so that when something go slightly wrong they can recover and it's not an automatic wipe. This is even more important for progression raiding since the group is learning those fights and the extra DPS and HPS give them the chance they need to learn it. Every nerf of DPS reduce the number of people that can get through some of the content since they can't recover from mistakes. This is something that the arbitrairy way of class balancing doesn't take into consideration since it's just a target number to reach.

[Tadagyt]

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

 

Not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic.

[ZionHalcyon]

So, what are those target numbers? Are they measured against a Dummy or are they the expected "Effective DPS" after mechanics, DCDs and Self-Heals are factored in? Why are the DPS targets similar for Commandos and Sages who wear different kinds of armor? (Light armor means you have to use DCDs or Self-Heals more, reducing the "Effective DPS." The Sage has less armor, and has Self-Heals and DCDs that are less effective and more time-consuming; all around "Effective DPS" loss compared to a Commando.)

 

 

There is nothing wrong with everyone being stronger than your balance targets. It just means the balance targets are wrong. Balance Targets should not become the next Sacred Cow after CXP.

 

At any rate, we should not be talking about content as if it is one undifferentiated lump.We should distinguish between:

 

 

• PvP - Should be balanced separately. There seems to be some agreement among player-base (independent threads in PvP forum) that the TTK is too long currently. I believe reducing TTK would be desirable (except for Sages). I hope other PvPers will chime in with their views. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is beneficial. (But the real problem lies in Combat Proficiencies and Stuns/CCs etc.)
   
   
  
• Levelling PvE - Already easy. All Disciplines can comfortably complete this content. No one has complained about differences in ease of doing this between Disciplines. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS will not make a difference.
   
   
  
• SM Group PvE - Generally, there is no problem currently. One or two Uprisings or Operations might be challenging for all-Sage teams now. Buffing all Disciplines will allow more people to have a better experience in completing them. There's no reason these activities have to take longer than they currently do, unless we want to intentionally slow down progress. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS will have a mild positive effect.
   
   
  
• VM Group PvE - One or two Uprisings and some Operations would be very challenging for all Sage teams currently. Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is beneficial.
   
   
  
• MM Group PvE - Teams do not form with Sages or Sharpshooters. Adding Commandos to that list is not an improvement. If everybody's DPS comes down, there will not even be the possibility of a team carrying one Sage or Sharpshooter with them; teams just won't have the DPS margin anymore to do that (Excluding FPs?). Bottom Line: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is the only rational approach.
  

TL, DR: Buffing most Disciplines up to the current top DPS is the way to go. It does not actually need "rebalancing the entire game."

Picking a Nit:

 

I hope the balancing guys (combat team) are good with numbers. Many of us have learnt over the years (or in school) that if you travel 10% faster, you won't arrive in 90% of the original time. If the DPS is higher by 20%, the TTK is shorter by 16.7% (assuming a Dummy as the target.)

 

I just want to point out that you, who did not help develop the game, are telling the developers, who did make the game, what would and wouldn't require rebalancing the game, even after they explained that it does.

 

That is just ridiculous.

[Aeneas_Falco]

I cannot solo Belsavis heroics even with rank 50 Mako, she dies in seconds, even if i have tier 4 full armor and 3 years game experience. Star Fortresses? NO CHANCE.Well congrats, you just FORCED everyone to make a marauder because Jaesa is currently the strongest companion in game, with exaggerated DPS.

 

I hate to say it but the issues you are having are learn to play issues, not issues with class balance. Most players are able to solo any heroic 2 in the game with any class, and if you can't you're doing something wrong.

 

Companions set to heal mode make you near invulnerable to anything mobs or bosses can dish out in the old heroics like the ones on Belsavis. Since Mako keeps dying on you I assume you must have her set to either tank or DPS, since she's apparently taking all the heat. Try switching her to healing instead, which will result in her both drawing less aggro and being able to heal herself. That is also what most people do with companions when soloing Heroics. If you're a healer she shouldn't be dying.

 

The Heroic 2 Star Fortresses are a bit more of a challenge to solo, but they can be soloed as well. I did it in 208 gear and I'm no hardcore NiM veteran who finds any content outside of Nightmare Ops easy. If I could do it, so can most players. Many players have.

Edited June 20, 2017 by Aeneas_Falco

[Andryah]

I just want to point out that you, who did not help develop the game, are telling the developers, who did make the game, what would and wouldn't require rebalancing the game, even after they explained that it does.

 

That is just ridiculous.

 

Hey, something you and I agree on.

[ViciousFett]

appropriate dps nerfs are all good, but I'm fearing BioWare is overlooking the thing that's making Merc OP in PVP more than anything. Responsive Safeguards

 

I know to stop DPSing when I see reflected damage, but 90% of the other people that solo queue don't, and mercs are constantly getting healed to full with it every time.

Edited June 21, 2017 by ViciousFett

[ZionHalcyon]

Hey, something you and I agree on.

 

True.

 

One point I will make - when I make a suggestion, big or small, its always within the framework of what the devs laid out before.

[Exly]

I just want to point out that you, who did not help develop the game, are telling the developers, who did make the game, what would and wouldn't require rebalancing the game, even after they explained that it does.

 

That is just ridiculous.

 

If they really know what they are doing then why didn't they get things right the first time. The fact that they are making changes shows that they might not know as much as you think they do.

 

On top of that, they need to remember that as customers, we have a voice in what we are willing to pay for. Listening to us is probably a good idea if they want us to continue as customers, and dismissing our feedback without considering what we have to say is not always in their best interest.

 

Also, the standards that they impose may not make sense to all of us.

 

In the past five years they have made many improvements to melee classes like making all attacks instant and not interruptible, 30 meter saber throws/screams. dot spreads, along with movement improvements like the op roll, and gap closers to all melee classes.

 

In spite of that, they continue to want to give a 5% advantage to melee characters because melee characters used to have a disadvantage due to a reduced time on target.

 

While 5% may have been ideal at game launch, it seems to me that they have already addressed the issue of time on target with these changes, and that they should now abandon the 2.5% buff + the 2.5% nerf that they apply to melee and ranged classes respectively. And even if they still think that there is a 2.5 % disadvantage to melee classes vs. ranged classes, then why do they apply a 5% differential (+2.5% to melee, and -2.5% to ranged)?

 

It used to suck when master strike was interrupted by a knock back or by having to move to get out of stupid, but it still sucks when aimed shot gets interrupted for the same reasons. Interrupts and knockback affect ranged characters, and the need to channel abilities that can't be used while moving like tracer missles, series of shots, and etc. make it so the overall time on target approximately the same as for ranged as it is for melee. But ranged classes are still having their dps nerfed because of this issue.

 

So speaking out, and giving advice may not be what you want people to do, and it may not be what BioWare wants to hear, but I am glad that people are dong it, and I hope that BioWare is actually willing to learn something from what is being said.

[Exly]

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

 

Can we please have a 500% cxp event lasting from asap until 5.3 goes live?

 

I am trying to do the grind to get another character to ready to op to replace my merc that you are planning on nerfing to an unsuitable level for pve, but I am having a difficult time motivating myself to go through that grind again at current cxp levels.

 

I was going to ask for a 12x event, and that would be even better, but I wanted to be more realistic in what it would really take to get me motivated.

 

p.s. Don't worry, I will still pvp on my merc if for no other reason than to keep the issue of how wrong you are to nerf merc dps instead of fixing the problem that currently exists with mercs in pvp. Heck, I may even pvp a whole lot more just to help prove the point.

[fifteendollers]

I don't envy your job Eric.

[Exocor]

Hey folks,

 

Any time that nerfs happen during Class balance, there is a common question we receive “Instead of nerfing <insert Class>, why not buff all of the other Classes up to their performance?” This is a really good question and we want to try to explain to you why we handle balance this way. For starters, if you haven’t read our detailed breakdown of how we balance Classes, please start there. From that thread, the main point you need to understand is that we balance Classes/Disciplines based on specific DPS, HPS, and DTPS targets.

 

Now, those balance targets not only dictate Class/Discipline balance, but they dictate balance across all combat in the entire game. Every Mission, Operation boss, piece of gear, and more is all factored around those balance targets. Let’s say that our hypothetical target for Ranged Burst is 1000 DPS and that Arsenal Mercs are currently performing at 1,200 DPS. This means that they are killing everything in the game 20% faster than we intended them to. Again, that’s every boss and every Mission. The inverse is true of Classes that have lower than desired DPS.

 

If we took every Class and moved it so that it was equal to the highest performing one, now everyone would be way stronger than we intended based on our balance targets. PvE content in general would become too easy, the “time to kill” in PvP would go down quite a bit making for less counter-play. The only way we would be able to “move everyone up to the best Class” is if we simultaneously rebalanced the entire game to be equal to that new target. That kind of thing typically only happens when we increase the level cap, as it is a massive undertaking.

 

TLDR – The entire game’s combat revolves around balance targets. To keep things in-line we have to move Classes up or down to be around that target or it throws things off greatly from their intended balance.

 

-eric

 

The problem is, that your numbers don't fit with the numbers of the theocrafters. When you say, range-burst-classes should do -5% of the target dps and the target dps is - just an example - 10.000 dps, then the range between the top-classes and the bottom-classes is 1.000 dps. The numbers of the theocrafters are telling us, that, atm the range between the top- and the bottom classes is 1.400 dps.

 

So, my suggestion would be, to ensure, that the results of your changes are pushing the classes at the right place. It would be very fatal, if players swap to melee sustained-dps classes, because their burst is equal or better, than burst-range-classes while their sustained damage is outperforming them.

 

All in all, I don't have problems with the class-balance-plan. But I have problems with the way, the team is realizing it. That the target DPS is somewhere around 10.000 is not difficult to guess (see numbers above). Merc is currently on the target dps - balance him at 9.500 and everything would be okay.

What I wanted to say: It is very nice to see your plans. It would be much nicer, to see your numbers and your formulas. Currently we only have the tables of the theocrafters, where we can rely on. Comparing their numbers with your plans gives us the impression, that the team doesn't know, what they are doing.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Exocor