zumos2 wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2020 10:19 am
wargrimnir wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:06 pm
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.