Shaman builds, RR, etc.

[footpatrol2]

@foot stop talking about a 12-man group. If Shaman doesn't work in a 6-man group, the class needs to be looked at. Simple as that, and applies to all the other 23 classes as well.

I've always stated that racial groups become very strong at the 12 man level. They are at a slight disadvantage at the 6 man level because the overall play style is not overwhelming yet although still strong and niche. No its not as simple as that. Most of this game is not designed solely around 6 man play. Very few instances throughout the life of this game is based around purely 6 man. Most interactions in this game that players conduct in are higher then 6 man.

Change your perspective of scale.

[Penril]

Yes, it is as simple as that. Check the balance forum rules and you will notice that devs have decided to balance classes from a 6+ group perspective. What I get from that is that they want every class to be competitive in a 6-man, a 12-man, and a full 24-man WB.

I'm just giving you friendly advice because, when the time comes and changes are made to some classes, "their performance in a 6-man is irrelevant because they are competitive in a 12 man and therefore need no buffs!!" is an argument that won't fly. So yeah... it is you who should change your perspective of scale.

[footpatrol2]

I don't want to further derail this thread. This is now too much off-topic.

What your talking about penril deserves its own thread and should be discussed separately probably prior to the balance threads opening up. I am painfully aware of when the time comes and changes are made to buff classes for more competitive play in 6 man's...I am holding my breathe. Why do you think I'm so active on the forums? Why do you think I spend hours writing stuff down and sharing it with the community? I'm trying to share my perspective and show there are a lot more things to discover in this game and the meta is not set in stone yet. Example: I wrote about proc meta months ago and now people are adapting it into their groups.

I dread that day. Especially given the responses I get from the forum community.

Most of the community has a square peg perspective of how this game is suppose to be played and they are trying to shove it into a similar size circle hole (the actual game design the sandbox that players participate in). So everything looks broken to them because they are unwilling to change their perspective for a variety of human flaw reasons. I started at that perspective and decided to change it to fit into the circle hole. My circle peg perspective fits nice and snugly into the similar size circle hole (game design/sandbox). I don't think things are that broken due to my perspective. Changes were definitely needed but the sweet spot for balance was patch 1.3.4.

I can go into detail on how this game is more based on 12 man's then 6 man's and how mythic tried to slowly gear us up to 18 man's and then 24 man warbands at a premade quality level of play which most players haven't even participate in. I have. If you know the history of this game it all points in that direction. What the players did in the sandbox is a different story.

[StormX2]

There realistically is no reason why a Shaman would do better in a 12 man than in a 6 man. If they are spamming group heal they cant heal out of party.

Unless you so happen to have 3 shammys per party in a 6 man ?

[Morf]

Footpatrol if u want us to believe you you need to prove it, give us facts and evidence not hints and speculation.
I am more then willing to play 1 of my greenskin chars and im sure i can find other players who also have a greenskin class, aswell as organise a decent order group to fight, just let me know.

As for group size, 6 is the group size, 6 is the most players you can que for scenarios together, skills that say "group" affect only 6 players, this is a clear indication that 6 is the basis for alot of the games abilities.
When you start looking past 6 be it 12/18/24 aoe rules and class imbalance becomes less clearer, it all boils down to who has the best aoe damage and fast heals which still shafts shaman/am healers.

[footpatrol2]

Please try what I suggested and comeback with a list of strengths and weaknesses. Try to think outside of the box. Think on how you can exaggerate those strengths through smart play if you had a gameplan prior to combat.

I'm trying to not just give the tricks we are conducting away. I'm trying to get players to think the way I do and change your perspective. I might be asking too much i guess.

[Morf]

Please try what I suggested and comeback with a list of strengths and weaknesses. Try to think outside of the box. Think on how you can exaggerate those strengths through smart play if you had a gameplan prior to combat.

I'm trying to not just give the tricks we are conducting away. I'm trying to get players to think the way I do and change your perspective. I might be asking too much i guess.

Thats my point tho, you claim to have "tricks" or whatnot without any prove.
Im offering my assistance to you, i can play any of 4 greenskin classes and can most likely find a decent order group to put your claims to the test, so lets do this and if you are right you can shut everyone (including me) up for good.

[Penril]

I'm trying to not just give the tricks we are conducting away.

Then you should not talk about balance. No change can be made with an argument like "trust me, this works but I just don't want to tell you my secrets".

[footpatrol2]

As for group size, 6 is the group size, 6 is the most players you can que for scenarios together, skills that say "group" affect only 6 players, this is a clear indication that 6 is the basis for alot of the games abilities.
When you start looking past 6 be it 12/18/24 aoe rules and class imbalance becomes less clearer, it all boils down to who has the best aoe damage and fast heals which still shafts shaman/am healers.

It would be easier if I can show you what we are working on then writing it out. We are expanding the 6 man to a 12 man and are looking for players that want to participate. We already run a lot of 8 man's. You can double que with que quer. You have to time when you que up. This was the case on the mythic servers also and was never discouraged by mythic. On the mythic servers you were able to use que quer in a warband and que 2 or 3 or 4 groups up like that. If you remember players would make premade warbands for city pushes.

There are abilities and buff's in this game that operate outside of group (6 man). They are few but they are there and they are extremely powerful. It suggests that this game isn't suppose to be played purely at the 6 man level. In addition all outgoing group effects/damage stack. Also in all the premade groups I ran we took banners and sometimes several banners depending on our size. When you plant a banner it affects multiple groups. I know no one puts any value into banners, which always... confused me...Banners were incredible cheap and provided a competitive edge. This is a guess but I think one of the reason's why there isn't a crapton of outside of group buff's is to not steal from the importance of banners. Banners in the original game design were suppose to be a important part of RvR.

We gear and spec differently then what classic meta dictates. Its up too on how much you want to participate. The door is always open. We are only limited by player interest.

We play in our groups nightly from 5 PM PST time to roughly 2 AM PST time. Contact me in game if you want to participate. I would like to get some EU time frame players in the group so we can constantly have these groups going the groups are a lot of fun.

@Penril

Spoiler:

Is this the balance forums right now? No it is not. So I don't have to share what we are working on. I am currently documenting everything we do for when I need to make a argument. How many times have I been ridiculed on my idea's on these forums and told its not possible? Why should I share them with players that are forum warriors that want to start arguments against me for the sake of argument. Those same players are not willing to stick their neck out and make mistakes and try new idea's but are willing to instantly ridicule me if I step outside of their perspective.

Also I'm trying to get players to think like I do and get more creative with group compositions. Get players to think outside the box. Apparently my previous approach doesn't work by just telling people what is possible when I'm sharing my perspective. If players can discover it on their own or come up with the idea on their own they will have more ownership of the idea. I'm trying to guide players to come to the same conclusions I have. I'm sorry penril if you see me as holding secrets.

[Penril]

No, this is not the balance forum. But I am not talking to you as a Balance Mod, but as a fellow player. And you should really stop talking about balance unless giving actual proof that what you claim is true.

So far, you have provided zero evidence to your claims, and even go so far as to accuse other people of being Forum Warriors even though your only arguments are walls of text. No videos of your group zerg-busting, or winning a fight against a good premade. Haven't even accepted Morf's offer to group with you and find some Order players so you can proof your claims. If some people attack you or feel insulted, it probably is because you talk like you are reinventing the wheel, ignoring the fact that they might have already tried several of your ideas and found out they aren't as competitive as running a mixed group.