Recent Topics

Ads

[Rejected] Proc meta

Proposals which did not pass the two week review, were rejected internally, or were not able to be implemented.
User avatar
Tesq
Posts: 5704

Re: Proc meta

Post#41 » Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:03 pm

no classes can have a raw 75% armor mitigation that's jsut impossible i was the nearest to that in liveand i couldn't made it, after all the ingore and debuff you get like 65% maybe.
Image

Ads
User avatar
gke96
Posts: 102

Re: Proc meta

Post#42 » Sat Oct 15, 2016 2:50 am

How about reducing base damage and adding( or increasing) stat contrubition? (Most of those dont have stat contrubition). These abilities mostly ignore toughness and make tanks have a bad time when they are stacked up to the point almost surpassing all other damages.
HORSEWHISPERER - PHALANX
CHOPPPA - PHALANX
COLDONE - PHALANX
SUNWHISPERER - ZERG
DOGWHISPERER - ZERG
BEARD - ZERG

User avatar
gke96
Posts: 102

Re: Proc meta

Post#43 » Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:06 am

For example if a dps dok were to atack a tank
Even with only 1 covenant, a dps doks damage to a tank with good defence is mostly covenants damage. Surpassing all other skills damage that dok have by far. Even if the dok has 900+ str, covenant alone is more than %50 total for sure.
The WP's Prayer of righteousness hits close to a WH's "torment" which is higher than other melee dps's damage by far to me (with tactic ofc)
HORSEWHISPERER - PHALANX
CHOPPPA - PHALANX
COLDONE - PHALANX
SUNWHISPERER - ZERG
DOGWHISPERER - ZERG
BEARD - ZERG

Cimba
Posts: 376

Re: Proc meta

Post#44 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:12 am

Reading through this thread leaves me kind of sad. Most arguments favor some kind change to proc mechanics would it be ICDs, scaling, changing the proc 'sources'. To me this seems like a lazy approach because the players wouldn't need to adapt when facing proc groups. Instead the mechanic would be tweaked until it's 'balanced'.

Would it not be better to think in terms of "What do we need to change to enable counterplays to these type of setups". IMO this 'meta' allows for wider variety of highly competitive setups which IMO is always a good thing.

From this point of few my preferred solution would be
zumos2 wrote:1: Add a cooldown on Frozen Touch (FT) and Flames of Ruin (FoR) (and possible on Daemonic Chill (DC) and Flame Shield (FS)). Considering it would take 1 person to shatter 3 persons 30 seconds and then 15 seconds if you have 2 shatters. I would say somewhere between the 15 and 30 seconds would be good. This allows actual meaningful shatters, but still allows the proc using group to have the procs up at certain burst moments.
I would increase the cooldown to 60 seconds though. IMO this solution would
1) Improve an underperforming skill: Shatter Enchantment (compared to Shatter Blessing)
2) Give additional value to currently more or less useless enchatment likes Archmage/Shaman/Magus/Engi resis buff
3) From my point of view relatively easy to implent

If it turns out that this is not sufficient, one can always come back and nerf the proc mechanic itself.

User avatar
Bozzax
Posts: 2477

Re: Proc meta

Post#45 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:37 am

Cimba wrote:To me this seems like a lazy approach because the players wouldn't need to adapt when facing proc groups. Instead the mechanic would be tweaked until it's 'balanced'.
The thing is there are mainly two classes that are broken with regards to procs.

DOK (DE) and SLayer (ID) rest is more or less ok.

You can compare BO before LM fix and BO after LM fix - says it all really
A reasonable RvR system that could make the majority happy http://imgur.com/HL6cgl7

Cimba
Posts: 376

Re: Proc meta

Post#46 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:16 am

Bozzax wrote:
Cimba wrote:To me this seems like a lazy approach because the players wouldn't need to adapt when facing proc groups. Instead the mechanic would be tweaked until it's 'balanced'.
The thing is there are mainly two classes that are broken with regards to procs.

Dok with AA tactic+ DW + DE
Slayers with ID + DW + Rampage

Nothing needs to be fixed if off hand procs for DW were remves plus DE / ID made type: PROC. Offhand is a proc it self and why it was allowed to proc is puzzling especially as DW already outperformed 2h a lot with +10% parry vs +10% block strikethrough.
These are the two classes we currently see causing issues. So your solution only addresses these to classes instead of offering a valid counterplay.
As an example, we did some theorycrafting and preliminary testing with SW's rapid fire. 7 attacks within 3 seconds, with a 75% proc chances get's you about 5 procs. Now combine that with WW and your SW does some really nasty DPS for an extended amount of time.

So what I'm saying is this 'proc meta' is 'young' and instead of killing it think of some ways to create counter plays.

EDIT: I guess I responded to a more or less deleted post. I will just let it stand because the core message is the same.

Annaise16
Posts: 341

Re: Proc meta

Post#47 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:31 am

The types of proc under discussion in this thread did not have an ICD on live because they are probability-based. So they work like crit - sometimes you'll get a lucky (or unlucky, depending on which side of the proc you are on) string of procs, while at other times the opposite will occur.

It is possible to use shatter enchantment to remove the buffs that supply the procs. There aren't that many people who use gcds to renew the buffs in the middle of fights. So once a buff has been removed, it tends to stay removed until combat has ended.


If you are looking to see if a tactic associated with a proc is overpowered, you can check the effectiveness of the tactic against other dps tactics for that class:

- Top tier dps tactics increase a toon's average dps by about 15%. Each dps class has about 2 of these.
- 2nd tier dps tactics increase a toon's average dps by about 10%.
- The dps healers get Divine Fury which increases dps by 25%.

So do the proc tactics increase the group's dps by more than 10%-15% of the dps toon providing the buff? For example, a BW is thinking about using the Crown of Fire tactic. Without the tactic, their average dps is 1200. 15% of 1200 =180. So, will using Crown of Fire increase their group's total dps by significantly more than 180? If so, then maybe the tactic is overpowered.

When making the above comparison you need to take into account how the BW's dps changes as its gear improves and make some decision about which level of gear is going to be the standard used.

User avatar
Bozzax
Posts: 2477

Re: Proc meta

Post#48 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:52 am

Cimba wrote: As an example, we did some theorycrafting and preliminary testing with SW's rapid fire. 7 attacks within 3 seconds, with a 75% proc chances get's you about 5 procs. Now combine that with WW and your SW does some really nasty DPS for an extended amount of time.
HTL and lol
A reasonable RvR system that could make the majority happy http://imgur.com/HL6cgl7

Ads
User avatar
Tesq
Posts: 5704

Re: Proc meta

Post#49 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:17 pm

Nerfed button will make every skill of your hotbar the proc buff if needed because they are no you / or on your party member, make em removeable it's not a weaknes it's a strengh point, they just take the spot of a heal over time when focused if you're lucky enough. Also it take 0,5 sec to re buff there is really not a downside to get em removed from you.
Image

Cimba
Posts: 376

Re: Proc meta

Post#50 » Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:28 pm

Tesq wrote:Nerfed button will make every skill of your hotbar the proc buff if needed because they are no you / or on your party member, make em removeable it's not a weaknes it's a strengh point, they just take the spot of a heal over time when focused if you're lucky enough. Also it take 0,5 sec to re buff there is really not a downside to get em removed from you.
Beware, nerfed buttons has entered the discussion.

So you can't think of any way to modify this ability so that the removability/shatterability (is that even a word?) is indeed a weakness?
Make it a 10 second cast time when in combat. The only way a spell with a cast time that long should get through is when the enemies take a nap or you invest additional resources (e.g. focused mind).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest