The Problematic Design of Concentration/Fury

[Hombad]

REPOSTED FROM CLASSES FORUM. Let me know your thoughts below.

 

As a main mdps player for several NiM groups, I've watched the rebalancing/new balance philosophy that BW has taken with great interest. I was, however, concerned that their new approach was based on three arbitrary groupings (quasi-sustained, sustained, and burst). Though I disagree with this approach, on its own basis, there is a fundamental design error with the design AND designation of Focus/Rage for Sith Warriors/Jedi Knights.

 

From this point, I'll only use the imperial terms for the classes, and analyse the two starting points for class design: beginning with Marauders, and beginning with Juggernauts.

 

Now, if BW desires every Advanced Class to have access to, at the very least, both a sustained DPS and burst DPS specialisation, I think that is a good move.HOWEVER. The innate similarity of Rage and Fury poses a logical problem:

 

If x = y, but y cannot = z, we have a contradiction if x = z AND x = y. This is the case with Rage and Fury, which, for all intents and purposes, are identical in how they operate and perform, yet are classified differently. This contradiction is doubly problematic because the basis for differentiation of specs could begin with with EITHER Marauders/Sentinels (1), OR Guardians/Juggernauts (2).

 

1. Annihilation and Carnage are already, I think unarguably, sufficiently differentiated, and epitomise the 'sustained' and 'burst' groupings that BW want to focus on. This leaves us with a problematic third spec which BW desires to be 'quasi-sustained,' and shared between the two Advanced classes. The easiest way to build such a spec from the ground up would be to give it unconditional and continuous burst windows, but weaker outputs in those windows, similar to how Fury exists today, but with perhaps one or two DoTs to manage (which is not the case).

 

If Fury has as reliable target swaps/approximate burst to Carnage, Carnage will likely never see play under BW's model (as its output is strictly less in their model). Thus, Fury would need to have more of a 'sustained' than a 'burst' approach to give all three specialisations their own niche.

 

Yet, since Rage would have to have roughly the same spec (if they want a shared spec between the classes), Rage would therefore overlap too greatly with Vengeance to see play IN A COMPETITIVE SETTING WHERE PERFORMANCE IS EVERYTHING (i.e. high end PvE, or Ranked PvP). Vengeance itself already has reasonable target swapping, and near-unparalleled AoE (with the exception of Carnage). This effectively invalidates the use of Rage for Juggernauts, because Vengeance overperforms in a sustained manner and Rage is not sufficiently differentiated in a 'burst' capacity from its counterpart.

 

TL;DR If you want Fury as quasi-sustained as a priority, it would tend towards sustained over burst to not invalidate Carnage. Being shared with Juggernauts, this invalidates its use by them as Rage is not sufficiently differentiated from Vengeance as a 'burst spec' (TOO MUCH SUSTAINED).

 

2. If we start with Juggernauts, and design a Rage spec that epitomises a 'burst' approach, it would see some play, and would be able to coexist with Vengeance (having different strengths and weaknesses to its sustained counterpart).

 

However, if the same spec exists for Marauders as Fury, it would be functionally a 'burst' spec that (a.) would never see play if it was inferior to Carnage, or (b.) only see play in burst situations as it is superior to Carnage.

 

TL;DR If you want Rage as the burst counterpart to Vengeance for Juggernauts as a priority, it would be invalidated by Carnage if it were too weak, or invalidate Carnage if it were too strong, as it overlaps its role.

 

 

Currently, the (2.) case reflects the state of play in, at the very least, high end PvE. Even though Rage is performing far better than it has in the past compared to Vengeance, its Marauder counterpart sees essentially no use in serious progression. It lacks the sustained damage of BOTH Carnage and Annihilation, AND the burst of Carnage. If it were to become stronger than Carnage due to rebalancing, it is unlikely Carnage would see play because Fury functions already as a 'burst spec' (since Rage does for Juggernauts).

 

 

Conclusion:

 

As Juggernauts and Marauders currently exist, I am of the opinion that 1 or more specs between the classes will be effectively invalidated by BW's design approach (the classes MUST share a spec, and Marauders MUST have a quasi-sustained spec). This is really worrying in relation to the upcoming balance changes, as the problem will be unlikely to be fixed; a new spec will become invalidated.

 

However....

 

SOLUTIONS:

 

1. Forego the stipulation that Juggernauts and Marauders have to share a spec. This would allow Rage and Fury some design flexibility, and for Fury to carve out a unique niche for Marauders. Rage's burst could be amplified, and Fury's sustained damage could be amplified (while removing some of its burst). This would see that ALL 5 of the specs between the two classes would see some play

 

TL;DR Rage no longer = Fury. Rage is more bursty, Fury is more sustained (but not nearly as much as Anni, perhaps making Force Crush an 18second Dot, and the Ravage bleed last 12 seconds). All specs would see play as they would not overlap.

 

2. Forego the stipulation that Marauders/Snipers need 1 burst, 1 sustained, and 1 quasi-sustained specialisation. IT IS OKAY IF TWO EXIST IN ONE CATEGORY BW! So long as they have defined/differentiated strengths and weaknesses (pre 5.3 Engineering/Virulence were almost there).

 

Under that model, Fury and Rage could be buffed and treated BOTH as BURST SPECS ONLY, with a different area of strength to Carnage. In that way, all 5 specs would see play.

 

TL;DR No more quasi-sustained. All specs will have their own niche if they have defined/unique strengths and weaknesses. Rage and Fury should function as Burst only.

 

 

GRAND TL;DR BW's design approach to Fury means that 1 Marauder spec will always be worthless in a competitive setting, and 1 of 2 Juggernaut specs may be worthless. This can be easily fixed in one of two ways, either abandoning the need for the classes to functionally share a spec, or abandoning the need for quasi-sustained.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Hombad
typo

[DarthSealth]

As I've stated prior I'll always play Fury even with people calling it inferior. I'd personally like to see fury and carnage both as a full burst spec. Just offering different play style carnage offering more speed via alacrity bonus in stance meaning faster CD and fury being based on survivability meaning both perform the same where one might be faster at taking down an opponent the other will last longer but yet both have the same dmg output.

[Threjyan]

i cant wait to start playing fury after next pactch on WZ - FOTM