philo said:Its not about the rogue out dps'n the wizard. We are making the assumption that the rogue will be the highest melee dps. Melee having the large benefit of having much less down time than a mana user. They are consistent high dmg. The consistency part is the most important in your standard exp group where down time kills your efficiency.
I don't see how they could balance it so that the ranger or monk do the same dmg as a rogue for reasons I already mentioned in this thread...but we will see.
It remains on the same scale. Rogue beeing top DPS is a state of mind that had been carried from EQ to Wow for years and was based on considering only the rogues disadvantages against every other class advantages. While it could be maintained in a genuine early EQ state of mind, optimization, dps meters or simply TTK measures brought rogues in EQ as the top melee you want to stack with buffs, and any other melee was neglected (Not even speaking about ranger here...).
Now taking the rogue, ranger and monks :
Cons :
-Rogue have a positionnal ability (Only one known)
-Monks have a combat-generated ressource.
-Rangers have a combat-generated ressource, and need to swap between melee and range.
Pros :
-Rogues have a crowd control (competing with DPS abilities due to energy cost), and a static ressource allowing pooling and out of melee swaps with little loss.
-Monks can offtank (taunt compete with DPS abilities due to Chakra cost).
-Rangers can DPS at range, but need to go into melee for some of their big numbers abilities.
Rogues aren't positionnal only, rogues aren't twinked DPS machines like they used to be, rogues aren't useless out of group situation like they were in EQ. Different game, different design, different goals with the same core idea to make a group centric game with high socialization.
MauvaisOeil said:It remains on the same scale. Rogue beeing top DPS is a state of mind that had been carried from EQ to Wow for years and was based on considering only the rogues disadvantages against every other class advantages. While it could be maintained in a genuine early EQ state of mind, optimization, dps meters or simply TTK measures brought rogues in EQ as the top melee you want to stack with buffs, and any other melee was neglected (Not even speaking about ranger here...).
Now taking the rogue, ranger and monks :
Cons :
-Rogue have a positionnal ability (Only one known)
-Monks have a combat-generated ressource.
-Rangers have a combat-generated ressource, and need to swap between melee and range.
Pros :
-Rogues have a crowd control (competing with DPS abilities due to energy cost), and a static ressource allowing pooling and out of melee swaps with little loss.
-Monks can offtank (taunt compete with DPS abilities due to Chakra cost).
-Rangers can DPS at range, but need to go into melee for some of their big numbers abilities.
Rogues aren't positionnal only, rogues aren't twinked DPS machines like they used to be, rogues aren't useless out of group situation like they were in EQ. Different game, different design, different goals with the same core idea to make a group centric game with high socialization.
Rogues were very very rarely the top dps in WoW. As someone who played a rogue from launch until sunwell, we were constantly outshined by warriors in PVE, during all of vanilla, and only could compete in TBC if we had the ideal group comp providing all buffs.
But for pantheon, even if you are correct and all 3 melee classes are equal damage. You still benefit from having 3 smoke and mirrors. Offtanking should never be needed in a good group with proper CC so unless the monk is providing some other utility I dont see it being needed. I could see having a ranger in the group, if the dps is truly equal, ranged will always be better than melee. But the meta group will end up being
WAR, CLR, SHM and 3 melee, whichever provide the highest consistent dps and the greatest group utility.
Porygon said : Rogues were very very rarely the top dps in WoW. As someone who played a rogue from launch until sunwell, we were constantly outshined by warriors in PVE, during all of vanilla, and only could compete in TBC if we had the ideal group comp providing all buffs.
Combat rogues or the pinnacle of damage for a long time ! Warriors could really perform equally at equal gear, but it's gear accessibility was a pain especially with the sneaky agi nerf for warriors back in TBC. Not the subject I know, but it was the moment the game was the greatest to me.
Porygon said : But for pantheon, even if you are correct and all 3 melee classes are equal damage. You still benefit from having 3 smoke and mirrors. Offtanking should never be needed in a good group with proper CC so unless the monk is providing some other utility I dont see it being needed. I could see having a ranger in the group, if the dps is truly equal, ranged will always be better than melee. But the meta group will end up being
I'm not saying smoke and mirrors isn't a force to reckon with, but not enough to outshine or outcast other melees, or even other DPS overall. It's like nitpicking, if you got friends avaliable for that composition you can do it, but you don't loose much by scrapping it for a less straightforward and more diverse composition. I'm fine with that design, min maxxers will allways prefer the 1% ahead class anyway and perfect equality is never possible, but as long as it's more a behaviour choice than a necessity one, I'm fine with it.
MauvaisOeil said:Porygon said : Rogues were very very rarely the top dps in WoW. As someone who played a rogue from launch until sunwell, we were constantly outshined by warriors in PVE, during all of vanilla, and only could compete in TBC if we had the ideal group comp providing all buffs.
Combat rogues or the pinnacle of damage for a long time ! Warriors could really perform equally at equal gear, but it's gear accessibility was a pain especially with the sneaky agi nerf for warriors back in TBC. Not the subject I know, but it was the moment the game was the greatest to me.
Combat rogues could not touch warriors in classic. Warriors scaled better with gear, the more damage, the more rage, the more damage and so on. Rogues did not. At best if a horde rogue had WF and BiS swords he might be on par with the warrior, but most of the time he was not.
I know this topic has devolved, but I take wow history pretty seriously lol.
But I agree with you, we're absolutely nitpicking. Assuming max level skill, and gear what would be the best. It's not always the option, even in top guilds. Theres always a worst player no matter how good your guild is.
im of the opinion as others have stated i dont care what class is in my party or really level for that matter i remember doing wc in wow at lvl 12 when its recommended 15 also fond memories of irregular class parties in eq its more about knowledge of your class and can you make me laugh if so i am all in for grouping with you cheers!
Who knows...maybe 3 summoners and 3 enchanters lol.
When I played EQ as a kid I would invite everyone that I saw...for awhile and then ask what we have and keep everyone no matter what lol. So I would have some really dumb groups. Once the instance dungeons came out in Gates of Discord I think I put a group together that consisted of all paladins.
We wiped several times in the beginning, and the dungeons are usually timed. I think we wasted half the time on the first room without clearing it. However, once we got our act together and came up with a system we actually downed the dungeon on time with little down time. Was quite fascinating lol.
Pretty tough to make that prediction right now, people saying 3 rogues for the DPS that depends on if the rogues are indeed the highest DPS class...though it is true rogues won't have the downtime of wizards they may have cooldowns or something else holding them back. I would say any group with a bard/enchanter is gonna rock heh.
Ziegfried said:Pretty tough to make that prediction right now, people saying 3 rogues for the DPS that depends on if the rogues are indeed the highest DPS class...though it is true rogues won't have the downtime of wizards they may have cooldowns or something else holding them back. I would say any group with a bard/enchanter is gonna rock heh.
As strong as enchanters are in EQ1. They are still not included in a group that is farming AAs or levels asap. In classic eq the best group was similar to what I'm suggesting for pantheon.
War, Clr. Shm, Brd, Mnk, Rog.
Warrior tanks everything with no issues and provides more dps than other tanks.
Cleric has the best heals hands down. Especially once Cheal is available.
Shaman for slows and melee buffs as well as backup heals for names and if the cleric is lom.
Mnk and Rog as melee dps (they are very close in terms of numbers. Ideally you would have 2 rogues but the ability to pull singles and split names is invaluable in EQ1.
Brd to provide mana regen. And melee atk speed and buffs.
Chapters are just not needed and actually slow things down. Infact any casters of any kind slow things down.
I mained a necromancer for a long time and I was very good at it. I could dps for a very long time before needing to med... but I could only dps that way at 70% or so of my max. Melee classes go 100% dps, 100% of the time. They will always be more valuable in the min/max group meta game than casters
If percentage based out of combat mana regen makes it to launch at anywhere between 2% - 5% per tick, the only thing you'll want in XP gaining groups are mana consuming burst damage classes.
Why? Because there's no wind-up time. There's no build-up this, or generate that, or get hit for that, or hit this for that. You just stand, nuke, sit. Get enough nukers in the group, the mob dies as fast as possible, and you're out of combat, back to p.b.o.o.c.m.r. :)
So yeah, one monk and 5 nukers. :) Or if you want to be really cautious, 1 monk, one healer of any kind, and 4 nukers. Although the monk can self heal, so it's not likely it'll be necessary. Unfortunately, if Summoners have a controllable pet, and it's even 50% as effective as eq1 pets are/were, the path to glory will be have the monk bring a single, send in the 5 taunting pets, nuke it 5-10 times, sit, regen, repeat. All the pets have to do is hold aggro for 2 nukes worth of time, which.. won't be very long. Even if a mob does break free, it only affects 1 out of the 10 nukes, so not a big deal.
At least, that's how it'll play out based on the videos so far, imo.
Some pretty interesting viewpoints in this thread. it makes me curious what peoples thoughts on DPS ranking should based on what we know so far.
1. Wizard - Number one as they have limited mana and seems to be slower to recover said mana, so full burn DPS should be untouchable, but large downtime as a result as well as aggro.
2. Rogue - Second due to, although they have other utility options, the use will be very situational. Rogues remain coveted for one role, DPS.
3. Ranger/Summoner - Both basically the same DPS, just can do it differently.
4. Monk - This one was a little tough until I know more about the benefits of their optional utility, but just slightly behind Ranger/Summoner
Druid - With limited spell slots, when healing they have to give up DPS spells, so when in a pure DPS role, all spells can be dedicated to DPS.
5. Enchanter/Shaman - utility spells that every group wants them to use, limits how many DPS options they will have.
Left off the remaining classes as they do DPS, but they would rarely be invited for that role.
Keep in mind 1-4 are not leaps and bounds in separation, and the gaps are fairly small. Also, classes are no where near being finished and balanced, and many changes are yet to come. I am just curious how people think in the end, the heirarchy should end up.
vjek said:If percentage based out of combat mana regen makes it to launch at anywhere between 2% - 5% per tick, the only thing you'll want in XP gaining groups are mana consuming burst damage classes.
Why? Because there's no wind-up time. There's no build-up this, or generate that, or get hit for that, or hit this for that. You just stand, nuke, sit. Get enough nukers in the group, the mob dies as fast as possible, and you're out of combat, back to p.b.o.o.c.m.r. :)So yeah, one monk and 5 nukers. :) Or if you want to be really cautious, 1 monk, one healer of any kind, and 4 nukers. Although the monk can self heal, so it's not likely it'll be necessary. Unfortunately, if Summoners have a controllable pet, and it's even 50% as effective as eq1 pets are/were, the path to glory will be have the monk bring a single, send in the 5 taunting pets, nuke it 5-10 times, sit, regen, repeat. All the pets have to do is hold aggro for 2 nukes worth of time, which.. won't be very long. Even if a mob does break free, it only affects 1 out of the 10 nukes, so not a big deal.
At least, that's how it'll play out based on the videos so far, imo.
I honestly cant tell if your being serious. Or if you're just going off in a tangent because you're mad at the rate of which ooc regen is heading.
But if you are serious...
Your wizard group will not succeed, monks would most likely not be able to hold aggro over the wizards and wave seen what happens to any class that pulls aggro on a a named mob. If you're just grinding exp, you will still have downtime, for mana regen. Health regen... this downtime will negate any speed you gain from killing a mob. Burst dps is only a bonus if the fights last longer than it would take for a melee dps to achieve the same damage.
Your mage group would be slightly more manageable. But we know next to nothing about mage pets yet. But this was a pretty viable comp in EQ. But still slower than melee groups. Again, due to downtime.
There will be situations where a burst dps group could outperform a sustainable melee group. But this would all but be negated due to the versatility of the melee group. With the group I proposed, you can take on any group of mobs, any named mob, and potentially even mobs well about your level due to the debuffs and heals available to you. This is why it was such an effective comp in classic EQ.
Most games also utilize a level based system that makes your attacks far less effective on higher level mobs. Which means if a mob is capable of resisting a spell from a wizard or blocking a melee attack from a rogue... the wizard is going to suffer alot more in this scenario.
Porygon said: ... Again, due to downtime. ...
Which will be so vastly different than EQ1, it's not even in the same zone. :)
We're talking about the difference between 15 minutes versus 5 minutes, as a max.
If it takes 10 nukes to kill a single xp-granting mob (bear with me), that's two nukes per nuker. All it requires is each nuke to remove 10% of the target mobs health. Not unusual or atypical. If it requires even as much as 25% of the nukers mana to do that, consuming half their mana pool (punitive, but let's run with it) then they sit down and within 30, 60, or 90 seconds (from the current videos) they will be at full mana, having recovered 50% of their mana pool in that time. So far, wizards reduce a targets health by at least that if not more, but any pet class with any nuke would fit the role of nuker, given the pet would be acting as both a threat generator and a DoT.
And it will always be this, no matter what level. That's the whole point of percentage based out of combat regen. It turns gaining XP into a mathematical certainty over time.
Sadly, none of this even touches the concept of temporary barriers, which will even further exacerbate the issue. An out-of-group max-level duo or trio summoning barriers while the xp-gaining group nukes from complete safety? Ugh. :|
vjek said:Porygon said: ... Again, due to downtime. ...Which will be so vastly different than EQ1, it's not even in the same zone. :)
We're talking about the difference between 15 minutes versus 5 minutes, as a max.
If it takes 10 nukes to kill a single xp-granting mob (bear with me), that's two nukes per nuker. All it requires is each nuke to remove 10% of the target mobs health. Not unusual or atypical. If it requires even as much as 25% of the nukers mana to do that, consuming half their mana pool (punitive, but let's run with it) then they sit down and within 30, 60, or 90 seconds (from the current videos) they will be at full mana, having recovered 50% of their mana pool in that time. So far, wizards reduce a targets health by at least that if not more, but any pet class with any nuke would fit the role of nuker, given the pet would be acting as both a threat generator and a DoT.
And it will always be this, no matter what level. That's the whole point of percentage based out of combat regen. It turns gaining XP into a mathematical certainty over time.
Sadly, none of this even touches the concept of temporary barriers, which will even further exacerbate the issue. An out-of-group max-level duo or trio summoning barriers while the xp-gaining group nukes from complete safety? Ugh. :|
I feel as though we are tangenting away from party makeup and into the "meditation" thread. Currently in most games. When you sit to med you "drink or eat" and this is usually a 30 second, at maximum occurrence. I cannot imagine them settling in a system even remotely close to this. Even if (from eq standards) they settle on 2 mins to med to full. That's an eternity compared to modern games. Its 400% longer than most games. If we never had the 3.5 min (or more) eq baseline. I feel most people would find 2 mins very reasonable.
I'm not even sure I understand your barrier comment. As I have 0 knowledge of how barriers work, but I'm interested lol.
Porygon said:
"War, Clr. Shm, Brd, Mnk, Rog.
Warrior tanks everything with no issues and provides more dps than other tanks.
Cleric has the best heals hands down. Especially once Cheal is available.
Shaman for slows and melee buffs as well as backup heals for names and if the cleric is lom.
Mnk and Rog as melee dps (they are very close in terms of numbers. Ideally you would have 2 rogues but the ability to pull singles and split names is invaluable in EQ1.
Brd to provide mana regen. And melee atk speed and buffs.
Enchanters are just not needed and actually slow things down. Infact any casters of any kind slow things down."
They don't slow things down. In fact, let's say you remove the Bard and the Shaman and place another Rogue and an Enchanter instead. Now the Cleric mana is able to compete with the content with no issue of requiring side heals. You have Melee AND Spell Slows and you have Melee Hastes AND Spell Hastes. You also have something Shaman's don't have, a Damage Reduction Debuff that stacks with Slow. Then you factor in long term Silences since spell use from NPCs is apparently a major issue to Healer mana, especially those mobs that use high damage PBAE or AE attacks. Then you factor in 60 second long Pacify which allows you to single pull if need be, Regular Mez to lock down multiple targets, an AE mez and an Unresistable Mez. This while the Enchanter can Siphon Mana from their targets having far fewer issues with mana than you may lead on. Then let's get into Charm and Shock & Awe which when used by a skilled Enchanter not only can remove two targets from a fight, it creates additional damage for the group that exceeds that of a single DPS class.
The tools are there, the capability is there. I can argue if Bards in Pantheon are designed better than in EQ, they can be used for the same purposes but to downplay the Enchanter is extremely foolhardy. Will groups be functional without Support/Control or Tanks, or DPS or Healers? Yes, but your argument seems to be on some anecdotal group composition that may work and you felt worked well, it doesn't compare in the way you claim it can.
Naunet said:
"I have decided that the best party will be six enchanters, because why the hell not. :D"
Enchanters and Bards stack poorly. You just described a group that I wouldn't ever want to be part of. Interesting concept, and I have done it before, but it was largely a farce unfortunately. An all Summoner group for instance does work from a class and an archetype that stacks VERY well.
Porygon said:The best group is going to be:
Warrior, Cleric, Shaman, Rogue, Rogue, Rogue.
Rogues being a pure dps class are usually going to rank at the top in regards to maximum possible dps.
Rogues also have utility when it comes to crowd control.
Warriors will be the best tank for most situations
Clerics will be the best healers for most situations
Shamans provide damage mitigation in the form of slows and synergize with melee classes very well.
If the cleric runs low on mana the shaman will backup heal for the short time needed to meditate
How much DPS will your all melee group be doing when you come up against mobs with heavy AoE? Or when you come up against a mob with insane AC and melee damage mitigation?
Also, your assumptions of having 3 Rogues for CC while outputting crazy DPS also forgets that Smoke and Mirrors costs 75% endurance, if you use it then that Rogue loses a lot of damage output for a period of time before their endurance can regenerate.
For having CC on demand from those Rogues also means they can't fully DPS because they must always have 75% endurance available on demand to use Smoke and Mirrors, either you go full DPS and can't use it, one Rogue never goes full DPS, or all of you try to reserve a bit while maintaining only steadier DPS.
As for those of you writing statstics about Enchanters being such a force multiplier, you are making a huge amount of assumptions that one Enchanter alone is able to multiply each DPS slot by a certain factor, meaning that the Enchanter + DPS is worth 125% damage. This is a total fallacy.
All this thinking is based upon EQ metrics and haste. But most melee damage in EQ was from auto-attacks.
Most melee damage in Pantheon is from abilities that use the professions' particular resource pool. Melee haste and spell haste will not necessarily help as much as you calculate they will.
Signet of Refreshing - From the Cleric may do more for bursting potential than anything the Enchanter can offer.
The classes are being designed in a way that each can perform their archetypal role as well as another, therefore I wouldn't select any particular make-up of professions but rather offer the following:
Tank
Healer
CC
Melee DPS
Ranged DPS
Ranged/Melee DPS
Janus said:Naunet said:"I have decided that the best party will be six enchanters, because why the hell not. :D"
Enchanters and Bards stack poorly. You just described a group that I wouldn't ever want to be part of. Interesting concept, and I have done it before, but it was largely a farce unfortunately. An all Summoner group for instance does work from a class and an archetype that stacks VERY well.
1. It was a joke.
2. It's meant for fun.
3. I guess tone isn't easily conveyed through text. T_T I thought my earlier goofy posts in this thread were enough of a sign.
4. On the other hand, I've done all kinds of whacky stuff in the MMOs I've played just for the hell of it. Stuff that had no reasonable chance of succeeding, but the fun was in the trying.
Ezrael said: Janus it’s not true that only the Enchanter slow reduces enemy damage output, the Shaman one does too. ENC slow reduce STR which will reduce damage. SHM slow increases the chance of a glancing blow (opposite of a critical hit). That also reduces damage output.
You may have misunderstood what I said. Shamans have a melee slow, Enchanters have a melee and spell slow. However, Enchanters also have a damage reduction debuff that reduces a percentage of damage done called Eyumai's Dulling.
What I would personally want is to remove Enchanter slow, keep Shaman with their slow, then make sure Dulling is within league of Shaman slow in terms of performance. That way they have something that can work with a Shaman. The values are both so low that even if stacked, it's not the same as a Slow from an Enchanter or Shaman in Everquest which I always said along with Complete Heal was the worst decision they could have made back in 1999-2002.
The values back then were just too high in Kunark at 70% for Enchanter and 75% for Shaman.
Janus said:However, Enchanters also have a damage reduction debuff that reduces a percentage of damage done called Eyumai's Dulling.
What I would personally want is to remove Enchanter slow, keep Shaman with their slow, then make sure Dulling is within league of Shaman slow in terms of performance. That way they have something that can work with a Shaman.
The Dulling spell only works if the mob is carrying weapons, so I imagine it would be fairly common to find oneself in places it would be useless.
Iksar said:The Dulling spell only works if the mob is carrying weapons, so I imagine it would be fairly common to find oneself in places it would be useless.
Considering this is typically your process text but ends up having a more broad mechanic, we don't know for certain just yet. I would hope if it's used in conjunction with Enchanter melee slow and spell slow, it would have those limitations. I'm just saying, in the past, I have seen this before, written in such a way within a similar mechanic and it was attributed to flat damage values without a tag stringing to 'if entity is wielding item/weapon'.