+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: A Project for Mage Forums

  1. #1
    Ascendant Inixia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,365

    Default A Project for Mage Forums

    With the current state of mage pve most of our stdps viability is placed into a single spec, pyrolock, many of our other pve dps specs end up lacking atm relative to this spec. Additionally, most changes to dps in general are focused around adjustments to the top end dps specs to bring them in line with expectations and other callings. Even when they are to create viability in other specs its usually done a bit cautiously to avoid stuff like overbuffs. Oftentimes we as a forum know that we would like "more dps" in certain classes but the magnitude of this change is often unknown, and since diversity isn't always as immediately relevant as changes to metagame balance, its often approached as a secondary thing.

    I had an idea though, if we as a calling were willing to test it and give it some input, I think we could make a stronger case for boosting some of these specs sooner to add more variety to pve dps - hopefully keeping in mind and avoiding unintended synergies. The idea is simply to identify specs that we want boosted for stdps (51 elementalist for example, or High necromancer), identify the main rotation, find information on spell coefficients and such, and then through some testing, find out exact boosts we could apply to the main spells in those specs (keeping its rotation intact) to bring it in line with the numbers for pyrolock in a raid setting under normal gear/buff levels.

    I know this seems a little tedious, but I think if we could do this it would create a stronger case for adjustments in these trees- Instead of leaving it hazy as to what sort of changes are needed, the information for change would be more readily available. It would give a precise, and measurable way to change these specs that we could agree upon. We wouldnt' have to approach buffing certain classes as cautiously I mean (for example with some of the recent boosts to stuff like empowered darkness- where its a good start but after testing we see it needs to be higher to make 51 lock viable in a raid setting).

    Anyways, what do you guys think? (courteous criticisms please!)
    Last edited by Inixia; 02-01-2012 at 12:55 AM.

  2. #2
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,954

    Default

    We're happy with the current state of mages and are monitoring a number of smaller issues.

    Be happy you have one viable DPS spec, warriors' just got nerfed~.
    Maza the Mage <Damaged PvPness>
    Not playing a warrior anymore because it's boring.
    11/11 HK | 4/4 ROTP | 0/8 ID

  3. #3
    Ascendant Inixia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt55511 View Post
    We're happy with the current state of mages and are monitoring a number of smaller issues.

    Be happy you have one viable DPS spec, warriors' just got nerfed~.
    mages got somewhat nerfed as well through the lock synergy crystal, but... this isn't really about "we have it worse so you should be happy" or overall mage viability, but about boosting mage diversity without effecting overall calling balance by focusing some effort into giving tangible numbers for adjustments, because well, more diversity is good no matter what the state of other callings is imo. And I think our dev is pretty attentive if we identify issues.

    Actually, it might be a bit relevant, a lot of these sorts of nerfs (like what happened with warriors) imo seem to be due to adjustments based on incomplete information on their effects, and are tested afterwards and then are readjusted to match an expectation later. So.... by having a goal in mind and testing it beforehand and putting the numbers into one place we could avoid some of that maybe (not all but it'd help I think)?
    Last edited by Inixia; 02-01-2012 at 01:17 AM.

  4. #4
    Plane Touched
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    281

    Default

    While I agree that it would be nice to have multiple specs within a certain range for dps, this is no good time to make suggestions. Update 1.7 will change the "top" dps. Until we can realistically see where the new bar is set at, there's no way to make good suggestions.

    What I mean is, if for example "the" pyro/lock spec deals 3.5k (on average) in raids after the update. Then that's the bar we should aim to adjust other specs to.

    IMO its already very difficult to even estimate that bar now. You hear of several people that the pyro/loc does 3.5-4k dps optimally. Some claim 5k is possible. So what would you adjust the other specs to in the current situation?

  5. #5
    Ascendant Inixia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarim View Post
    While I agree that it would be nice to have multiple specs within a certain range for dps, this is no good time to make suggestions. Update 1.7 will change the "top" dps. Until we can realistically see where the new bar is set at, there's no way to make good suggestions.

    What I mean is, if for example "the" pyro/lock spec deals 3.5k (on average) in raids after the update. Then that's the bar we should aim to adjust other specs to.

    IMO its already very difficult to even estimate that bar now. You hear of several people that the pyro/loc does 3.5-4k dps optimally. Some claim 5k is possible. So what would you adjust the other specs to in the current situation?
    It wouldn't be that bad imo... I mean yea it would need to happen sometime after 1.7 so we get a feel of what the new numbers are, but it would take some time to setup anyways, so I think its a good time actually to suggest it now because its at the start of a new patch and things are unlikely to change too much for awhile. We don't need the maximum dps of pyrolock right away, but if we could figure out info on how stuff scales, and how it does in a more controlled environment like with raid buffs on dummies. I think it would give good information we could base off of later.

    edit: Its not as hard as it sounds at first imo... ^^
    Last edited by Inixia; 02-01-2012 at 01:29 AM.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts