Tactician operative stealth nerf yet no compensation

[JediMasterAlex]

How about if you want pvp nerfs you call for pvp nerfs and not nerfs that also hit pve...

 

For better or worse, balance in this game affects both pvp and pve. But ranked pvp is the only place it actually matters, because the different classes directly compete against each other. As long as every class can make the necessary dps/heal checks and clear all the content, the dps hierarchy for pve really doesn't matter except to people that only play "meta" classes all the time.

 

They all were nearly on same lvl in ranked pvp

 

Except sorc is not nearly on the same level as deception sin and concealment op lol. This isn't up for debate, you're just posting nonsense.

Edited March 7, 2020 by JediMasterAlex

[AllisonLightning]

Spike damage and burst through almost an entire health pool? Operative healers are the least capable healer in that regard and while maybe, just maybe in PvP you can mitigate some of that through human error. In PvE NiM/MM, the ability to respond to spike damage and bring the required burst window in seconds has always been merc/sorc>operative. Sure, we can have our HoTs ticking and our sustained single target up but if a severe and sudden spike has just put a tank firmly into low health from full requiring massive heals in as few GCDs as possible- there's a clear way to run a healing comp.

 

PvE has just as much of a priority on class balance, for healers, DPS and tanks as ranked PvP and it's arrogant to assume otherwise because PvP is the most important thing for you.

[LD_Little_Dragon]

 

PvE has just as much of a priority on class balance, for healers, DPS and tanks as ranked PvP and it's arrogant to assume otherwise because PvP is the most important thing for you.

 

Not just PvP, they were only concerned with the concealment spec. Let's just forget about lethality/heals, as though they're not important, it's all about concealment. If one spec is overperforming you make changes to THAT SPEC only, not sweeping changes that screw with the in-no way overperforming other 2 specs.

 

And healers should use a healer set? *** does that mean? Healers like bonuses to crits, more TA, and a bonus to heals which is what the Tacticians set bonus gives us. Stop calling Tacticians a dps-only set.

 

The only so-called healers set for operatives is a aoe-focused set, that does absolutely nothing for their hots or burst.

 

Aggressive Treatment is great for 16 man ops (provided your co-healers are keeping the tank up) where you can basically spam your aoe heals only. Wheee. I happen to like flashpoints and 8 man ops, and don't always run with a merc co-healer which means I need to keep the tank alive and can't just spam aoe's.

[JediMasterAlex]

PvE has just as much of a priority on class balance, for healers, DPS and tanks as ranked PvP and it's arrogant to assume otherwise because PvP is the most important thing for you.

 

Oh yeah? if you think balance matters as much for pve as it does for pvp, make an argument for it, don't just state it. Again, as long as every class can clear all the content, balance does not matter in pve. There will always be a pecking order regardless. If there are classes that are so bad that they can't clear certain content, that's a problem, but from my understanding that has never been the case in this game.

 

In pvp, however, all the classes compete against each other in the game mode. If certain classes are outperforming others by a big enough margin, that makes for a fundamentally unfair and un-fun experience.

[themagickoala]

Oh yeah? if you think balance matters as much for pve as it does for pvp, make an argument for it, don't just state it..

 

You do understand the class performance set the spot preferences for progression guilds on HM/NiM ops, right? For reference, please elaborate how many 4v4 Ranked teams you saw pre 5.0 with a TK sage on the composition. Or go back to 2.0, where sentinels and gunslingers formed every HM progression. The same goes for PVE, if a build is underperforming far worst then the curve, it will be avoided.

 

Its still able to clear content? Probably, same as undertuned builds would perform well on PVP if pushed above the curve. The issue here is that the collateral damage from nerfing Conc will exclude Op healers from progression again, since the build weakness was never solved in first place (thats a systemic issue that goes back to 4.0).

 

So no, sadly the nerf on Tactician isn't a simple matter and obvious as it looks. Also if they simply wanted to nerf Conc, they could push the nerf on Acid Lash further, or remove the dmg component of the +6 piece and leave the heal comp.

 

On the other hand, if you look at other sets, nerfing it by 50% puts it on par with other buff uptimes. While that sounds logical, those builds already overperform Op heals, so youre stretching the gap again and making it an viable option only for content wich doesnt push burst heal scenarios (the class weakness).

 

PVP balance cant be compared to scripted encounters on HM/NiM where the target requirements are fixed, since those encounters are tuned and buffed over player experience and internal testing, and those rarely reflect the undertuned builds, but the meta ones.

 

So imo balancing PVE is actually harder then PVP, where playskill can overcome numbers.

Edited March 7, 2020 by themagickoala

[JediMasterAlex]

You do understand the class performance set the spot preferences for progression guilds on HM/NiM ops, right? For reference, please elaborate how many 4v4 Ranked teams you saw pre 5.0 with a TK sage on the composition.

 

No one is using pve parsing data to determine what the best pvp classes are, if that's what you're implying here. Conc ops and deception sins are the literal best examples of this.

 

Or go back to 2.0, where sentinels and gunslingers formed every HM progression. The same goes for PVE, if a build is underperforming far worst then the curve, it will be avoided.

 

It will be avoided by whom? People that are obsessed with always having meta, optimal compositions. That's a player-driven, optional problem.

 

Its still able to clear content? Probably, same as undertuned builds would perform well on PVP if pushed above the curve.

 

No matter how good you are, some specs like rage jugg and hatred sin are virtually impossible to succeed with with any kind of consistency in ranked.

 

The issue here is that the collateral damage from nerfing Conc will exclude Op healers from progression again, since the build weakness was never solved in first place (thats a systemic issue that goes back to 4.0).

 

So no, sadly the nerf on Tactician isn't a simple matter and obvious as it looks. Also if they simply wanted to nerf Conc, they could push the nerf on Acid Lash further, or remove the dmg component of the +6 piece and leave the heal comp.

 

Fine, Bioware isn't balancing optimally. But conc ops needed to be nerfed, and this is a good nerf for them. Minor side effects to pve healing aren't a concern as long as they can still clear all the content. Bioware should buff existing healer sets or make new ones if pve op healers are struggling that badly. Also, no one uses acid lash in pvp, so that's irrelevant.

[themagickoala]

It will be avoided by whom? People that are obsessed with always having meta, optimal compositions. That's a player-driven, optional problem.

 

Assuming a perfect rotation and optimal APM, the post-nerf operative wouldnt be an optional composition. Isnt sub-optimal, its unfit for doing that content. Thats game breaking.

 

No matter how good you are, some specs like rage jugg and hatred sin are virtually impossible to succeed with with any kind of consistency in ranked.

Fair, thats the same reference i gave with TK sage 4.0 on ranked. Post-nerf Ops will be in the same boat: running Meta + Ops will mean wipes and failure. Soon, people will give up on trying it, and meta will take over, as it is for PVP.

 

Fine, Bioware isn't balancing optimally. But conc ops needed to be nerfed, and this is a good nerf for them. Minor side effects to pve healing aren't a concern as long as they can still clear all the content. Bioware should buff existing healer sets or make new ones if pve op healers are struggling that badly. Also, no one uses acid lash in pvp, so that's irrelevant.

 

Valid point with Acid Lash, but how you can claim Op heals can clear all content while at Live they're already sub-optimal for the very same scenario they just had been nerfed at?

 

Also, pointing out that Bioware should make new sets is kinda obvious, but assuming that you're aware how such sets are released and how long it takes to actually fine-tune a healer set, sorry, i don't think wishful thoughts and *solve your own issues* can help Op healers right now. On the other hand, rolling back the nerf or adjusting it so it doesnt hit healers is far easier then starting stuff from scratch. Don't get me wrong, i would love a HoT oriented set, i even suggested one. But pls, lets be realistic.

 

I agree on Conc ops needing to be nerfed, but there no valid argument that can support an untargeted nerf on a build that already lack the proper kit to clear NiM content when compared to Mercs and Sages.

Edited March 7, 2020 by themagickoala

[KendraP]

Are we really arguing over what's more important to balance for, NiM or ranked? How petty. Rather than jabbing at each other, why dont you guys say what the issues you feel certain classes have in certain situations based on your preferred game mode.

[JediMasterAlex]

Assuming a perfect rotation and optimal APM, the post-nerf operative wouldnt be an optional composition. Isnt sub-optimal, its unfit for doing that content. Thats game breaking.

Fair, thats the same reference i gave with TK sage 4.0 on ranked. Post-nerf Ops will be in the same boat: running Meta + Ops will mean wipes and failure. Soon, people will give up on trying it, and meta will take over, as it is for PVP.

 

If op healers will be so bad that groups literally won't be able to clear content with them in the group, then yes, I agree, that's broken. I'm not sure how you can possibly know that already though. The nerf was not that extreme.

 

I agree on Conc ops needing to be nerfed, but there no valid argument that can support an untargeted nerf on a build that already lack the proper kit to clear NiM content when compared to Mercs and Sages.

 

I don't mean to be unsympathetic, but if op healers are being forced to use a dps op set, that means there's a more fundamental problem here. Bioware appears to not want healers using dps sets. And if the healer sets aren't good enough..ask for those to be buffed. To me, that seems to be the better strategy.

Edited March 8, 2020 by JediMasterAlex

[JulWolle]

I mean if acid lash is useless in pvp why don´t they nerf the conc pvp tactical instead and revert the pve tactical? best for both worlds?

[LD_Little_Dragon]

I don't mean to be unsympathetic, but if op healers are being forced to use a dps op set,

 

It is not a dps set. It gives a bonus to your crit percentage and to both heals and dps. What makes you keep insisting it is supposed to be a dps set only? It even functions to give heals 4 TA instead of the 3 the dps specs get. It even mentions triage, how often do dps specs use the cleanse?

 

Am I missing something? Tell me what part of the Tacticians set description says 'for dps only'. All the bonuses benefit heals as much as dps.

[JediMasterAlex]

It is not a dps set. It gives a bonus to your crit percentage and to both heals and dps. What makes you keep insisting it is supposed to be a dps set only? It even functions to give heals 4 TA instead of the 3 the dps specs get. It even mentions triage, how often do dps specs use the cleanse?

 

Am I missing something? Tell me what part of the Tacticians set description says 'for dps only'. All the bonuses benefit heals as much as dps.

 

Bioware clearly meant it as a dps set, just like they meant gathering storm to be a dps set for sorcs. I believe part of nerfing both sets is to discourage healers from using them, so that they'll use the sets meant for healers. If those sets are inadequate, that's another issue.

[LD_Little_Dragon]

Bioware clearly meant it as a dps set, just like they meant gathering storm to be a dps set for sorcs. I believe part of nerfing both sets is to discourage healers from using them, so that they'll use the sets meant for healers. If those sets are inadequate, that's another issue.

Do you work for bioware?

 

Look at the 6-piece bonus for tacticians

Tactical Advantage gets an additional stack. Having a Tactical Advantage increases your damage and healing by 5%.

 

That is a flat 5% buff to heals. The bonus to heals is equal to the bonus to damage. (Uptime for the TA bonus is for probably higher for heals than for dps as well, since you're pretty much always gaining TAs faster than you can spend them)

 

You keep saying healers should use the healer sets. Why do you think a bonus to healing is NOT intended for healers? Same with the 4 piece bonus that gives you a boost to critical rating. You do understand that crits are as important to heals as to dps?

 

You can't just flat out say 'this set is for dps, because I say so'.

 

Going by the set bonuses I have an equal right to say 'this set is for healers, dps need to stop using it.'

[Rion_Starkiller]

Pretty sure the devs never balance dps output for pvp. It's always for NiM raiding or dummy parsing, so talking about pvp nerfs and pvp class balance is moot. From what I've noticed, the dev's pvp balance is an afterthought, unfortunately. That's why we had arsenal mercs and corr sorcs as FOTY instead of FOTM.

 

Bioware clearly meant it as a dps set, just like they meant gathering storm to be a dps set for sorcs. I believe part of nerfing both sets is to discourage healers from using them, so that they'll use the sets meant for healers. If those sets are inadequate, that's another issue.

 

That seems unlikely since Tactician gives +5% healing, and FOUR UH/TA. The other op heal set is for AoE heals.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Rion_Starkiller

[JediMasterAlex]

That is a flat 5% buff to heals. The bonus to heals is equal to the bonus to damage. (Uptime for the TA bonus is for probably higher for heals than for dps as well, since you're pretty much always gaining TAs faster than you can spend them)

That seems unlikely since Tactician gives +5% healing, and FOUR UH/TA. The other op heal set is for AoE heals.

 

Dps ops (edit) make use of that +5% healing as well. Even still, I admit I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. The nerf to conc ops is still the most important thing. I'm not sure why some of you op healers are so attached to this set in particular when you could be asking for other kinds of buffs.

Edited March 8, 2020 by JediMasterAlex

[AllisonLightning]

Dps mercs make use of that +5% healing as well. Even still, I admit I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. The nerf to conc ops is still the most important thing. I'm not sure why some of you op healers are so attached to this set in particular when you could be asking for other kinds of buffs.

 

The same way operative healers use the 5% DPS boost (so instead of a DCD, contributed DPS to make a NiM DPS check), I'd still use the set without a DPS increase- that extra TA, the healing increase and crit chance. We know where lack so that crit chance helps with our mediocre burst in a mode where it's the major factor in an encounter on the NiM/MM encounter.

 

I don't know where you get the idea we haven't been asking for a buff to our single target burst- in fact a common response has been, we'll lose some of our AoE potential for it. (Our AoE potential against DTPS had a nerf in 6.0 with the loss of our set bonus and one of our AoE, nanotech is also a single target heal over time.) We've just tended to not ask for overpowered buffs to our class and I think the attitude has hit the point that if we don't make noise here, our class will be recommended against... again.

 

Nerfing Concealment can be done a targeted way which doesn't affect Medicine or Lethality. I mean, DPS sorcs endured quite a few survivability nerfs because of sorc healers back in the day. It didn't fix the issue and my experience has always been that it's core abilities distinct to the particular branch of the AC causing the issues and the issue will simply reemerge down the line.

[omaan]

Dps ops (edit) make use of that +5% healing as well. Even still, I admit I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. The nerf to conc ops is still the most important thing. I'm not sure why some of you op healers are so attached to this set in particular when you could be asking for other kinds of buffs.

 

Stop writing in this thread if you refuse to see the sirc/sin argument. IT IS SIN, SORC AND OPER who needed nerf not only oper. Yet both sin and sorc get some compensation buff while oper gets only nerf. Until you explain why only oper gets nothing while sin was much stronger class for sr as oper and sorc wasn't far from both oper and sin there is no sense to listen to you

[bladech]

Stop writing in this thread if you refuse to see the sirc/sin argument. IT IS SIN, SORC AND OPER who needed nerf not only oper. Yet both sin and sorc get some compensation buff while oper gets only nerf. Until you explain why only oper gets nothing while sin was much stronger class for sr as oper and sorc wasn't far from both oper and sin there is no sense to listen to you

 

On forum jedialex always writing like it is a sorc must be the best class in swtor. All other classes must be under sorc, weaker and useless. No sense to listen to him even

[themagickoala]

If we look at the feedback so far, both sides brought valid points and all thats left is:

 

1. Why Bioware stealth nerfed this? Didn't had the time to make a proper post about those changes? Those were shipped accidentaly to PTS? Can we expect for a response from Eric, Daniel and the Community Team about this?

 

2. Based on internal data (not player feedback), whats BW statement over Op Heals / Lethality? The nerf is on par with BW target numbers for equal balance and reflect the same potential of other classes?

 

3. Nerfing Tactician was a targeted nerf to all builds or its unpredicted collateral damage? (Highly doubt thats the case)

 

4. The nerf was based on HPS numbers, EFH HPS, or Live NiM completion rates and internal data?

 

5. Assuming the nerf is absolute and no matter how much noise we do, there's any plan on the pipeline to compensation? Compensation is necessary to Medicine and Lethality according to your data?

 

6. BW is satisfied with how Op heals are played atm? (We're the healers wich can push the highest HPS atm, and barely half of it are EFH).

 

Believe an official statement is necessary if you want us to support your game design philosophy. We're all passionate gamers and nerfs will only be supported if they're transparent and logic. Dont leave us hanging in the abyss

Edited March 9, 2020 by themagickoala

[AllisonLightning]

On forum jedialex always writing like it is a sorc must be the best class in swtor. All other classes must be under sorc, weaker and useless. No sense to listen to him even

 

My issue with him is he seems to think it's okay for classes to be damaged for PvE, and in the case of operative healers and a set which is completely set up for them as much as DPS (they sure as hell in their tweaks didn't remove toxic scan to teach us heals to go get the trash healer set)- we're acceptable collateral damage and any spec he wants to see nerfed that has another spec which will be affected also? Perfectly acceptable.

 

Ranked PvP's imbalances to him outweigh anything else which is wrong when it causes the same negative effects to be passed along to PvE. I'm sick as hell of even in a state of where operative healers are currently tuned (where double merc is even better than merc/op) because it's still a struggle for new operative healers to stay on their classes during progression and not get switched. I tried to help an operative healer in that position learn but he ended up just running merc.

Our class has zero reward for its high skill ceiling- we have the best sustained heal numbers but our reward for it is another healing class can mitigate our weaknesses by outbursting it and our current state puts us on a viability level where it's a consideration in spite of our lack of burst because our sustain will make up for it and we have a meh response to a spike.

 

This nerfs us across the board and our sustain will suffer as well, knocking off EHPS/HPS. Which means if sorcs are just buffed far enough and mercs aren't smashed into oblivion- and you know, I don't want my co healers to be nerfed into the ground. I want all of us to be able to do our jobs well enough and viably enough in MM/NiM to be worthy of an equal inclusion.

[AllisonLightning]

If we look at the feedback so far, both sides brought valid points and all thats left is:

 

 

6. BW is satisfied with how Op heals are played atm? (We're the healers wich can push the highest HPS atm, and barely half of it are EFH).

 

Believe an official statement is necessary if you want us to support your game design philosophy. We're all passionate gamers and nerfs will only be supported if they're transparent and logic. Dont leave us hanging in the abyss

 

The reason we push such high HPS is our sustain and if we don't have our sustain up as an operative, we are wrecked and useless. Anyone who looks at the EHPS of what happens when our sustained results in high numbers- look at what went wrong in the fight for that sustain to not just be 'why do you have probes up on this and this person' and the DPS being very very good at positioning. We are the most fragile healer to that.

[themagickoala]

The reason we push such high HPS is our sustain and if we don't have our sustain up as an operative, we are wrecked and useless. Anyone who looks at the EHPS of what happens when our sustained results in high numbers- look at what went wrong in the fight for that sustain to not just be 'why do you have probes up on this and this person' and the DPS being very very good at positioning. We are the most fragile healer to that.

 

Precisely. Im afraid that may be the case if the nerf was targeted: Balance taking raw numbers into account when those rarely reflect actual healing requirements. And when burst comes in, you can put barely half of the necessary EHPS, making all that APM ceilling useless.

[Rion_Starkiller]

It doesn't seem like much of a nerf to Op/Scoundrel healing with the Kolto Pack refresh to Slow Release. To me this translates to EZ mode refreshes on tanks, which means I can put more SR/Probes on raid members, which in turn means more UH generation for Emergency Medpac & Kolto Pack. You will never have to hardcast Underworld Medicine again (hopefully you weren't anyway)

 

I haven't played around with it yet on PTS, but looking forward to it.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Rion_Starkiller

[themagickoala]

It doesn't seem like much of a nerf to Op/Scoundrel healing with the Kolto Pack refresh to Slow Release. To me this translates to EZ mode refreshes on tanks, which means I can put more SR/Probes on raid members, which in turn means more UH generation for Emergency Medpac & Kolto Pack. You will never have to hardcast Underworld Medicine again

 

I believe you meant for the Agressive Treatment buff, but honestly i fail to see what youre talking about since Emergency Pack does exactly the same thing, its instant cast and proc our Diagnostic Probe tactical. Also, SRM management on PVE is already sustainable without any helpers; you can keep 2 stacks in the whole raid the whole time. Finally, taking Agressive Treament means nerfing yourself by 10% crit and 5% heals.

[Rion_Starkiller]

For my style, I'm talking about Tactician using Critical Surgery (ST) or Regenerating Waves (AoE). Kolto Pack is a much more efficient refresh than Emergency Medpac. Ideally, I wouldn't use EM on a tank unless he is 50%.

 

Why would you keep 2 stacks running on 8 raid members all the time? Sounds like a waste of time in most circumstances. Though it seems like it should be easier to maintain now.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Rion_Starkiller