DPS DOK NERF

[Sofong]

haha... took 5yrs to tune down cordinated strike by little bit and 5 days to nerf dps dok gg

[Flavorburst]

- Instead you argue that the AoE capabilities of the heal debuff are overpowered in warband play with the tactic having a 9 second duration.

- When I point out it has a 5 second duration, you state that the duration "wasn't a factor really". When your argument rests on the fact that it is OP for warband play, a 9 s vs 5 s duration makes a HUGE difference in the AoE uptime that you will have. Meaning it would be much less impactful with a 5 s duration vs 9 s duration.

- Further you ignore the fact that no top organised warband runs any dps DoKs whatsoever, so they clearly do not agree with the fact that the dps DoK or this tactic was OP for warband play.

To be fair, the healdebuff being 5s or 9s doesn't really matter when speaking of things like FS which has the chance to healdebuff constantly for ~30 seconds. Granted, for this to happen you would have to not cleanse it for it's full duration.

The uptime on a large number of ppl will drastically be improved if it was actually 9 seconds.

Yeah, I mean, it depends on the uptime. If FS isn't cleansed, and/or it crits every other tick, it's going to have a pretty large uptime for very minimal effort (outside of the innate effort of being in melee for a zerg fight and not getting nuked), which would make a 5s debuff practically indistinguishable from a 9s one.

I don't disagree with your overall point, but my comments are specifically geared towards FS.

[Flavorburst]

haha... took 5yrs to tune down cordinated strike by little bit and 5 days to nerf dps dok gg

Ayyyy! It's the "30 matches is enough data to prove order OP" guy back to let us know that dok ae heal debuff has only existed for 5 days.

Will you ever stop blessing us with these pearls of wisdom?

[wargrimnir]

Spoiler:

If a top tier player from both small and large scale playing both order and destro isn't gonna agree much with your balancing changes, you have a serious issue. And if you don't understand that you have to balance around well-rounded groups, then I really have no idea why you are even talking in a balance discussion.

Because I'm one of the leads involved with balance. What exactly are YOU trying to accomplish here? Do you think admonishing me on nit picky BS is going to help you somehow? I'm more than happy to listen to people that want to provide value. You certainly don't seem to be interested in that.

How do you think that works out in the end? Don't be a problem if you want to be involved. Be a solution. Be helpful.

You actually believe I don't want to be part of the solution? I would love to apply for balance/design position, where can I do so?

And now lets set the records straight, cause you make it sound as if I only complain and whine at you, while I've given many arguments that were simply ignored.

- First of all you ignored my argumentation why the AoE capabilities of the tactic are not problematic in an organised group play. That is because Order has the tools to counter this with Blessing of Grungni and Focused Mending, which any average and above organised group would run 100% of the time. In addition you also have a chance of proccing Exalted Defenses on the Warrior Priest for even 20% more healing, although that is less likely in 6v6, yet likely in scenarios, 6-man roaming and warband play.

- Instead you argue that the AoE capabilities of the heal debuff are overpowered in warband play with the tactic having a 9 second duration.

- When I point out it has a 5 second duration, you state that the duration "wasn't a factor really". When your argument rests on the fact that it is OP for warband play, a 9 s vs 5 s duration makes a HUGE difference in the AoE uptime that you will have. Meaning it would be much less impactful with a 5 s duration vs 9 s duration.

- Further you ignore the fact that no top organised warband runs any dps DoKs whatsoever, so they clearly do not agree with the fact that the dps DoK or this tactic was OP for warband play.

- You ignored my argumentation for why you cannot balance for 1v1.

- You argue that the top groups will always adapt anyway. While true, this is completely unrelated to balance. If only one group setup is viable for 6v6, all the top groups will run it. But does this mean the game is balanced? Obviously not.

- If you want me to write a whole post why you have to balance around well-rounded groups I am happy to do so, maybe in that balance/design application? And just to be clear, this is not about 6v6. It is about well-rounded groups in all areas, whether that is 6-man roaming, scenarios, warband play, or 6v6. And I'm fine to try and find a balance for all these areas.

Are you sure you're not just coming on here to troll?

The only reason I bothered to post about this change was to inform people a little bit about why it happened. I'm not writing a book about it.
Didn't have to post in the first place, less interested to do so in the future. I'm not having a fight about it, just trying to be informative. But here we go I guess.

What we actually looked at (aside from obviously dps doks dominating pug?ranked? scens of course, very important business there).

This tactic provides a 50% healdebuff on crit. (we later amended two very similar tactics that are actually a better version at 10s)
This was able to proc on everything, AOE's, DoTs, ST. Apparently it still does, so we get to go back to that again in the near future.
POTENTIALLY this could be used to affect large groups of players, which is not desirable for a significant heal debuff.
This was the LEAST impactful resolution we agreed on to move forward. (consider it takes several people to agree on a change to push it out)


You're still whining that I said 9s instead of 5s. ??? Bruh, c'mon man. Let it go.
You can perpetually have this debuff on someone provided you crit every 5 seconds (not that hard for a dps spec).

I specifically addressed your argumentation (although it certainly wasn't asked for) about how we can balance, pretty much anywhere we find necessary, since things can break in multiple formats (not solely highly coordinated group-play). That wasn't a debate, it was an explanation. You're free to disagree with it all you want. It certainly doesn't look good on your application if you straight up want to fight about methodology before you even sniff at helping balance. We've had enough strongarms getting involved in balance and pissing the bed when they don't get their way. It's really sad to watch.

Pro-player levels of coordination however are a relatively minor consideration for balance (shock! horror! cringe!). If anything we watch what's being openly abused at that level to take it down notches when needed. Being at the top, in my humble experience with "top" players, usually means exploiting as much as you possibly can while (usually) staying within the lines of fair play. That being said, it's hard to take seriously whenever some super serious pro player gives us the details on what/how balance stuff should happen. Bias is a thing, and I'll take actual developers in a small group that I can trust over a ring-leader of organized clowns.

Average pug players are (again, whether or not you agree) a significant consideration for balance. They make up the majority of players on the server. Ignoring the pain points suffered by pug players leaves us with broken specs untouched for years because they're not good enough for organized groups so we're not allowed to touch them (for some reason?). Are they a driving factor in balance decisions? Of course not. Are they a consideration? Sure! There's so many considerations to be made for a lot of different changes it usually turns into a full conversation. Even for minor stuff! It's not shocking that you're going to rage about any piece of that conversation that you're not strictly aroused by. That's fine, you're clearly not made out for this, you certainly weren't involved in decision making, and by the sounds of it you wouldn't last long in such an environment anyway. I will happily reject your application in advance. RIP in peace.

Your continued hostility is dumb, and unproductive, but expected at least. In the future, if a staff member takes a moment to explain why or how something was done, it doesn't go far to immediately berate them over process or methods. If you can't handle that we're going to do what we're going to do, find some other stupid game to play. Pretty sure that's in the TOS somewhere.

[wonshot]

@secrets
The arguement of healdebuffs are no fun, will have to further more be applied to other utility though to hold true. such as morale draining and fighting completly dry vs full morales(solarfalre and mara). And to some extend AP draining too (?)

I dont disagree that healdebuffs are no fun, but on the other hand from warband experience they are kinda needed as a nasacary evil. You can get around them with Healing morales + clensing, and masking the healdebuff is really just an upscaled type of gameplay from 6v6 now done one a broader scale with the AoE paintbrush. With aoe healdebuffs gone this just means you unfortuneatly need to bring more offensive morales or sorc/bw firepower on each spot, as you need the highest criticalmass you can get to outmatch the healingpower with damagepresure, now that the damage is not sticking to the targets with a healdebuff.

How this directly will affect warbandplay, will be that there is simply just no reason anymore to play a DPS runepriest,
1)the armor debuff from this class is not needed as the psyical damagedealers are too far behind in the morale selfpump or lack of offensive morales to be slotted as a part of the warband's combined Criticalmass (an other issue leading into this)
2)Meaning that when dps Runie have no elemental aoe resist debuff.
3) no winds of insanity, and now no way to apply aoe healdebuff the class is unfortuneatly gone from warbandplay.

Same for zealot really, this healing debuff is "kinda needed" for destro to battle the +wounds all serious warband groups have on Orderside with woundsbuff, and the synagy between +healing on knight + runie+ wp synergy.

Yes I dont like healdebuffs when I am on a healer (rr80 RP on Live) and it can be chaotic to remove them in largescale, but the way to apply them on Zealot + RP requires just as much work with limmited uptime, as it takes to clense them and play around them.

I would strongly argue if Zealot and RP needs to be toned down (this is mainly for warband play as they dont see play in serious 6v6) make the two tactics that apply the healdebuff trigger with an internal cooldown so it cant be applied to the same target within 3-5sec. then there is counterplay to it, with Dok m2, invader clense proc on dok, etc. And lets not forget that the DPS runie+zealot is mostly full classcanon as they need high critchance + strikethrough to deliver these crits, so killing or punting them is always an option even for puggies.

[Greenbeast]

Pro-player levels of coordination however are a relatively minor consideration for balance (shock! horror! cringe!). If anything we watch what's being openly abused at that level to take it down notches when needed. Being at the top, in my humble experience with "top" players, usually means exploiting as much as you possibly can while (usually) staying within the lines of fair play. That being said, it's hard to take seriously whenever some super serious pro player gives us the details on what/how balance stuff should happen. Bias is a thing, and I'll take actual developers in a small group that I can trust over a ring-leader of organized clowns.

Average pug players are (again, whether or not you agree) a significant consideration for balance. They make up the majority of players on the server. Ignoring the pain points suffered by pug players leaves us with broken specs untouched for years because they're not good enough for organized groups so we're not allowed to touch them (for some reason?). Are they a driving factor in balance decisions? Of course not. Are they a consideration? Sure! There's so many considerations to be made for a lot of different changes it usually turns into a full conversation. Even for minor stuff!

Maybe I'm taking your words out of the context, if so excuse me.
It depends on how you define this a pug player.
The game is build around interaction with other players and exploring game mechanics which these interactions open.
There are many levels of the interaction

1) Join a warband/group and try to win with numbers. These are pure pugs.
2) Join a warband/group and try to take an advantage of archetype synergy - tank - healer - dps - 2-2-2, 1-2-3, 1-3-2 seupts. These are semi-organized warbands.
3) Join a warband/group and try to take an advantage of class and archetype synergy this are semi organized warbands and premades.

I doubt you can balance the game around the first group because because they barely using any game mechanics at all.
You can definitely make the game more friendly for people in the second group by making classes more versatile. Because it's very hard for new guilds to make any competitive setups without a necessity to recruit 8 BW/Sorcs. So I can only suggest making WH/WL/SW/IB/WE more warband friendly and add some synergies to them to encourage players to try new approaches. This could be a good move. The problem of the game right now is that it's has to few synergies on the 3d level making the recruitment very hard because you must recruit 4-5 classes.

From a point of view of a warband leader I can see DE warbands using dps doks as a source of heal debuff, or new guilds/semi-casual warbands taking it in since they probably can't find a dps zealot. So I ask why don't nerf the range of heal bebuff and add an ICD to it if necessary instead of reducing it proc chance?

Because the game built around win conditions and counter measures - Guard/Punt, Heal buff/Heal debuff, Kite/Pull, Focus/Detaunt, Defense/Morale, Channeling spell/Interrupt an so on. In my opinion you can't take one side of a win condition or a counter measure to it without addressing other one.
As it has been said before order bring so many stackable heal buffs and EHP buff with 100% chance to apply and due to order composition they can be considered aoe buffs. It forces Destruction to bring a heal debuff, blast wave, auras and crowd control to be able to fight back.

[zumos2]

Are you sure you're not just coming on here to troll?

You're still whining that I said 9s instead of 5s. ??? Bruh, c'mon man. Let it go.

It certainly doesn't look good on your application if you straight up want to fight about methodology before you even sniff at helping balance. We've had enough strongarms getting involved in balance and pissing the bed when they don't get their way. It's really sad to watch.

Bias is a thing, and I'll take actual developers in a small group that I can trust over a ring-leader of organized clowns.

It's not shocking that you're going to rage about any piece of that conversation that you're not strictly aroused by. That's fine, you're clearly not made out for this, you certainly weren't involved in decision making, and by the sounds of it you wouldn't last long in such an environment anyway. I will happily reject your application in advance. RIP in peace.

If you can't handle that we're going to do what we're going to do, find some other stupid game to play. Pretty sure that's in the TOS somewhere.

Your continued hostility is dumb, and unproductive, but expected at least. I

Now read all my posts here and tell me who is the hostile one? If I had written anything remotely close to what you are writing to me you would have banned me and you know it.

[wonshot]

Once again, to stress the issue of what can of worms you are about to open.
If all 50% aoehealdebuffs are removed for debuffing warbandspec healers (zealot and RP), just as a preview.

The new 25% aoe healbuff providers will be:
Chosen: 25% incoming aura
Knight: 25% outgoing (!) aura
Casters with full bloodlord gear proc chance

Morale abilities:
Zealot with an M4 50% aoe healdebuff (selfpump class)
Choppa middletree M4 9target 50% aoe healdebuff

This leads to quite a massive imballance in how to apply healdebuffs both standard 25% where a chosen just has to stand on the enemies, compared to knight having to stand on top of healers.
Some of these are legit ways to apply healing debuff, some of them are most deffo not, lol.

But what is the main objective here, I have to ask.
Doing a wide brush nerf to all healing debuffs because DPSdok has a too easy way of applying it in 6v6. Because dps runie/zealot is not an issue in 6v6 bracket, so adjusting this healdebuff on these two classes seem to be yet an other nerf of how smallscale adjustments are limmiting largescaleplay for several weeks in a row (Hello Dragongun) Last I checked this was an RvR game, with now an implimented gamemode for smallscale but how comes balancing feels like it is only done towards 6v6 and largescale directly suffering?

Halt this further adjustment of DPS runepriest and Zealot, for the sake of competitive warbandplay!

I've done my share of pugging in warbandplay, Ive been in puggroups fighting premades, solo tagging behind an organized force in front of me, zergsurfing. And never have I ever felt like I died because of healdebuffing in largescale! Morales, realm-advantages, better players, suprice attack and you name it! plenty of reasons to die and wipe, but being healdebuffed was never the main reason.

Now for smallscale, if DPSdoks (Hello Simtex, I like your music on stream) say that they can still get good singletarget uptime on healdebuff with the current change. Do we really need to take this additional step?

[wargrimnir]

Are you sure you're not just coming on here to troll?

You're still whining that I said 9s instead of 5s. ??? Bruh, c'mon man. Let it go.

It certainly doesn't look good on your application if you straight up want to fight about methodology before you even sniff at helping balance. We've had enough strongarms getting involved in balance and pissing the bed when they don't get their way. It's really sad to watch.

Bias is a thing, and I'll take actual developers in a small group that I can trust over a ring-leader of organized clowns.

It's not shocking that you're going to rage about any piece of that conversation that you're not strictly aroused by. That's fine, you're clearly not made out for this, you certainly weren't involved in decision making, and by the sounds of it you wouldn't last long in such an environment anyway. I will happily reject your application in advance. RIP in peace.

If you can't handle that we're going to do what we're going to do, find some other stupid game to play. Pretty sure that's in the TOS somewhere.

Your continued hostility is dumb, and unproductive, but expected at least. I

Now read all my posts here and tell me who is the hostile one? If I had written anything remotely close to what you are writing to me you would have banned me and you know it.

Yet you go pick at another post to continue to admonish me. There is a reason you've got warnings on the forums my dude. You want to fight battles you're not going to win. You're right though, this will likely end up with you being banned one day, I'm pretty sure of it. Your behavior doesn't change and it's not necessary or wanted.

It's not that hard to read between the lines is it? Here. Stop antagonizing staff that take their time to post on the forums and provide explanations to concerned players. If you want to provide substantive or constructive responses that's great, we encourage it. Your reactions so far have been some strange attempt to shame staff for making a change at all? For making a technical mistake on the duration of a debuff? Because you disagree with a partially explained methodology?

That's not cool. I won't put up with it. These forums will be a place devs and staff can post without being harassed, otherwise they're pointless to have around at all.

Clear enough?

[Ototo]

I just love how the pro players of this thread speak about casual players like if they can't read a skill description. Must be difficult to find shirts that can cover that amount of ego.