There's a lot of insecure people out there

[DBZ]

A wizard solod ton on normal lets compare melee 30 minutes wizard 3 hours only a factor of 6x worse

 

[J1NG]

Just because you've been successful with what the Dev's would term as an exploit, doesn't give relevance to your counter-argument.

So your entire premise is that I'm exploiting to be able to do things...? Or that knowledge of the game is an exploit?

Not that you're all too focused on something (damage via spells, that whilst a problem) that you have all forgotten to look into other things you have access to. Just like all those uber dps before LVoD humbled them about defences?

If I don't have something to stand on, I wouldn't be making the stand. And, again, I'm not saying there's no issues on spell damage and/or frequency. Just that you're all trying to make a stand on something, but I'm telling you, one of those legs you're using is not as stable as you think it is. You need to focus on the actual weak points and raise those.

J1NG

 

[J1NG]

A wizard solod ton on normal lets compare melee 30 minutes wizard 3 hours only a factor of 6x worse

Not quite. Less than 2 hours. So only x4 worse.

Still bad . But not as worse as x6.

J1NG

 

[woq]

A wizard solod ton on normal lets compare melee 30 minutes wizard 3 hours only a factor of 6x worse

Brusee soloed it recently on LH - on artificer (repeater) - in 1 hour so don't gotta compare to melee

 

[adamkatt]

If you have to be selective as a leader to go through a raid on legendary hard (we all know which raid I'm talking about), it says a lot about your own level of play. Just saying.

(Alright, you got me: I'm going to TR my sorcerer into an easy button and play melee dps like most of you do. Not because I was underperforming on that sorcerer build, but because, apparently, figuring out how to properly play an out-of-meta character is too darn difficult.)

Freaking ridiculous.

we all know which raid? hmmm i dont since you didnt tell us...

 

[J1NG]

Our DPS is gimped compared to what a well-built martial can offer. It's reality. We can't turn a blind eye to it. Yes, next to a bad martial toons, a good caster may look good. But with a well-constructed martial build, they'll be left behind. That's the way it is.

Ah yes, excellent, I had hoped to ask someone else with an existing caster to assist with this:

Please go and do

1. A dps test to eliminate a giant (Sharn top) or purple name (Dragon or Worm) - time to eliminate them. This provides us your dps, but that's not really something you can compare with alone.
2. Then repeat again exhausting your entire Spell Point bar as well. This provides us the time it would take to exhaust your SP and how long your primary dps can go on for. This eliminates any temp SP generation. And also provides us your total damage output before you must rely on Echoes of Power and SLAs which is not the same as your primary dps numbers in 1.
3. Of course, if you run out of SP, please provide the time it took to exhaust it and how much damage was done in that time.

Using both of those together gives a way to compare caster aspects, such as (different class) caster dps, and sustainability issues, more easily.

But back to responding to this. At no point have I said caster damage burst output, or damage output overall is good and not in need of help. Only that one of the arguments used by various forum goers is not as strong a footing as they hope in use to argue for Dev assistance on the areas that do need help on (Burst damage or ways of increasing it where it may not seem like there's such a huge gulf of a difference).

J1NG

 

[Jack Jarvis Esquire]

Ouch, didn't need that back when I joined, it was 300 odd and make sure you're a Light Monk for the Anti-Stun.

J1NG

A wizard solod ton on normal lets compare melee 30 minutes wizard 3 hours only a factor of 6x worse

Surely the salient point here is the fact a class solos a raid de facto demonstrates there is no huge issue with with that class. Relative time taken is pretty irrelevant in that context. The differentiation lies with the player and not the class. There are loads of folks who couldn't solo TON, whether melee, ranged, or caster. This caster is better than them all, clearly. Because they can play better. So playing better is the solution.

 

[DBZ]

No time are math math does not lie and just compare purple times all you need to know

Can't cc or insta kill a purple only DPS period

 

[Wizard]

Yup what Jack Jarvis Esquire is missing here, is that no amount of player skill will raise the damage of spells to melee or ranged levels.

 

[J1NG]

No time are math math does not lie and just compare purple times all you need to know

Can't cc or insta kill a purple only DPS period

Math doesn't lie, but lacking essential info is.

What good is your dps is you are able to do 50k sustained dps but only last 45 seconds? Other than "speed" at that point, how is that different from 12k dps but needs a smidge over 3 minutes to reach?

What if the 12k dps can go on for far longer? 60 Million worth of damage at 12k dps. Which caster will you bring along with you for a slog of a fight?

J1NG

 

[kmoustakas]

If you have to be selective as a leader to go through a raid on legendary hard (we all know which raid I'm talking about), it says a lot about your own level of play. Just saying.

(Alright, you got me: I'm going to TR my sorcerer into an easy button and play melee dps like most of you do. Not because I was underperforming on that sorcerer build, but because, apparently, figuring out how to properly play an out-of-meta character is too darn difficult.)

Freaking ridiculous.

no you

 

[J1NG]

Yup what Jack Jarvis Esquire is missing here, is that no amount of player skill will raise the damage of spells to melee or ranged levels.

To be honest, that's not really in question.

What's being highlighted is, that there's a difference between:

1. Spells being seen as attacks to deal damage, have lost parity in a heavy way with other forms of attacks in the game (ranged/melee)

and

2. Spell casters using spells being able to contribute dps because they run out of Spell Points (sustainability).

1 is not in question by virtue of global cooldowns preventing more than 1 a second ever being lauched, and other attacks being able to be accelerated compared to spells 1 a second.

2 is however.

But players are putting the two together as though they are the same thing. They are definitely linked, but they are not the same thing. The sooner players realise this and concentrate on the part that no matter what is not performing as it should (1) with logical arguments and data, the sooner they can get the ball rolling on changes.

J1NG

 

[Lazuli]

Ah yes, excellent, I had hoped to ask someone else with an existing caster to assist with this:

Please go and do

1. A dps test to eliminate a giant (Sharn top) or purple name (Dragon or Worm) - time to eliminate them. This provides us your dps, but that's not really something you can compare with alone.
2. Then repeat again exhausting your entire Spell Point bar as well. This provides us the time it would take to exhaust your SP and how long your primary dps can go on for. This eliminates any temp SP generation. And also provides us your total damage output before you must rely on Echoes of Power and SLAs which is not the same as your primary dps numbers in 1.
3. Of course, if you run out of SP, please provide the time it took to exhaust it and how much damage was done in that time.

Using both of those together gives a way to compare caster aspects, such as (different class) caster dps, and sustainability issues, more easily.

Jing, two things. First, those NPCs have variable HP, not fixed HP. You know that even better than I do. And second, this has been done many times. There are tons of tests like this from not so long ago, and the results were universal. Martial DPS was superior to magical DPS, for any caster class. And now even Einarmal, who had a good build, has thrown in the towel and switched his main to a martial build.

Do we really need to do unpaid work for SSG to know there's a disparity in DPS? SSG has the caveats and the means to test everything. I'm not here to do unpaid work. I pay them too much given the poor returns we're getting lately.

It's time for SSG to get off their butts and do some balancing in this game. A balance that doesn't involve cheap nerfs that unbalance the game again. A balance that involves a design that isn't solely focused on DPS, and a design that adds some balance to spells. And look at how many threats I've already written this, arguing that the former is even more important than the latter. The disparity in DPS would be less glaring if casters had other roles like CC and IKs. But, if it's not about other roles, what's left but DPS?

I won't hide the fact that I'm very upset with this company. They treat their customers rudely. They give us very poor performance. They have quite abusive business practices. And they have a serious imbalance problem. I expect more professionalism from them, and not having to do their work for them.

But back to responding to this. At no point have I said caster damage burst output, or damage output overall is good and not in need of help. Only that one of the arguments used by various forum goers is not as strong a footing as they hope in use to argue for Dev assistance on the areas that do need help on (Burst damage or ways of increasing it where it may not seem like there's such a huge gulf of a difference).

J1NG

To be honest, that's not really in question.

What's being highlighted is, that there's a difference between:

1. Spells being seen as attacks to deal damage, have lost parity in a heavy way with other forms of attacks in the game (ranged/melee)

and

2. Spell casters using spells being able to contribute dps because they run out of Spell Points (sustainability).

1 is not in question by virtue of global cooldowns preventing more than 1 a second ever being lauched, and other attacks being able to be accelerated compared to spells 1 a second.

2 is however.

But players are putting the two together as though they are the same thing. They are definitely linked, but they are not the same thing. The sooner players realise this and concentrate on the part that no matter what is not performing as it should (1) with logical arguments and data, the sooner they can get the ball rolling on changes.

J1NG

Well, at least you're acknowledging there's a problem. Now understand the posters here. People are frustrated and asking for solutions. You can't expect all posters to make mathematically exact presentations. What you need to understand is the sentiment, and that sentiment is well-founded in a disparity in efficiency between casters and non-casters, specially in raids.

Many of the suggestions that have been made seem excessively op to me. Like eliminating the entire MCL, that would be very op, unless the gear scaling and such were changed. However, there is a problem, and what we need to ask the devs is to acknowledge it and come up with solutions. It's not the time to give ideas that the devs probably neither want nor have asked for. We're at the stage of the devs acknowledging the problem.

And it doesn't help to muddy the waters with very nitpicky arguments, when all people want is for developers to say: yes, we heard you, yes, we understand your frustration, yes, we're going to work to fix this disparity. The devs have all the means to run tests, to try out changes, to test new numbers and different builds. Much better than we do. But what we need to do first is draw their attention to what's going on here.

 

[Smokewolf]

So your entire premise is that I'm exploiting to be able to do things...? Or that knowledge of the game is an exploit?

Not that you're all too focused on something (damage via spells, that whilst a problem) that you have all forgotten to look into other things you have access to. Just like all those uber dps before LVoD humbled them about defences?

If I don't have something to stand on, I wouldn't be making the stand. And, again, I'm not saying there's no issues on spell damage and/or frequency. Just that you're all trying to make a stand on something, but I'm telling you, one of those legs you're using is not as stable as you think it is. You need to focus on the actual weak points and raise those.

J1NG

Love how my post was deleted... Nice Dev's. Did i touch a nerve ?

 

[J1NG]

Jing, two things. First, those NPCs have variable HP, not fixed HP.

This doesn't really matter.

Because every caster that uses spells out there, Bards, Warlock, Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, FvS, Alchemist, Druid, etc. are all different (different spells, different choices, different builds, different play styles, etc)

By having a dps rating, but not how long that can last for, you lose context on various things, such as total damage a lower sustined dps character can actually output before they resort to Echoes of Power and SLA.

Which is why you want to know when a character is going full out and exhausts their Spell Point supply to know that there's a total damage output limit as well. And this can be a useful factor to consider as well.

This can then also be used to show various caster classes having weaker spells available, or outright being far behind as well and needs propping up.

Unless you believe everyone only uses the same builds, equipment, design choices and play styles?

You know that even better than I do. And second, this has been done many times. There are tons of tests like this from not so long ago, and the results were universal. Martial DPS was superior to magical DPS, for any caster class. And now even Einarmal, who had a good build, has thrown in the towel and switched his main to a martial build.

Excellent, I haven't found them or know where to look. Anyone care to provide links? IRL care duties means I don't have huge blocks of time available as I once used to.

But, my concern is not just that casters that cast spells is limited by the global cooldown and then when compared to other classes that deal damage via melee or ranged has a wide gulf between them, but between various casters as well.

Well, at least you're acknowledging there's a problem.

I'm afraid you're mistaken. I have never not acknowledged there was a problem with the spells output when compred to other forms of combat right now. Only took a stand to try and help divert the discussion towards the more pressing issues that are valid and that the Devs can't just handwave away; and that remains the spell damage output when you factor in the 1 second global cooldown - when compared to other forms of combat dealing damage.

J1NG

 

[Fizban]

Hey, I can't slide a "laugh" emoji on your reply, otherwise I would have.

The WOW emoji is the new laugh. I gave him a WOW.

 

[Fizban]

If you have to be selective as a leader to go through a raid on legendary hard (we all know which raid I'm talking about), it says a lot about your own level of play. Just saying.

(Alright, you got me: I'm going to TR my sorcerer into an easy button and play melee dps like most of you do. Not because I was underperforming on that sorcerer build, but because, apparently, figuring out how to properly play an out-of-meta character is too darn difficult.)

Freaking ridiculous.

I agree with this. This is the right post about some LFM Leaders. Confident players add character classes that can help in certain scenarios, i.e. traps, ability score requirements, etc.. However, for the most part a mix of just about any class can suceed in a raid or quest.

 

[LurkingVeteran]

...

I'm afraid you're mistaken. I have never not acknowledged there was a problem with the spells output when compred to other forms of combat right now. Only took a stand to try and help divert the discussion towards the more pressing issues that are valid and that the Devs can't just handwave away; and that remains the spell damage output when you factor in the 1 second global cooldown - when compared to other forms of combat dealing damage.

J1NG

I have to admit that I don't really understand the bolded part. Why do you keep bringing up the 1s GCD? Sayin the issue is "spell damage output when you factor in the GCD" is like saying "no, the issue is melee damage output when you factor in attack speed". GCD is attack speed for casters and always has been. What do you mean? That they should decrease GCD instead of increasing spell damage? Why?

Here is another interesting thing this means - unless you specialize heavily in an sp efficient build, you will run out of sp in about 2 minutes at 1 spell per second.

 

[J1NG]

I have to admit that I don't really understand the bolded part. Why do you keep bringing up the 1s GCD? Sayin the issue is "spell damage output when you factor in the GCD" is like saying "no, the issue is melee damage when you factor in attack speed". GCD is attack speed for casters and always has been. What do you mean? That they should decrease GCD instead of increasing spell damage? Why?

That given that the GCD will remain at 1s, then mathematically, there can't be any other way for a caster to maintain any sort of semblance of parity with any of the other forms of combat. And so if the GCD can not be adjusted, something else must be.

J1NG

 

[J1NG]

Here is another interesting thing this means - unless you specialize heavily in an sp efficient build, you will run out of sp in about 2 minutes at 1 spell per second.

Now let's this further. Let's say the you have zero Spell Point issues. With the 1s GCD, can any spell caster realistically catch up with a moderately build damage dealer (melee or ranged) as is right now?

J1NG