Test Update 08/12/15

It is likely easier to have variable innate boost (82, 74, 66) to balance the classes rather than having to adjust 10 other ability lines per class to keep the innate value the same. For rogues, you have to consider the sustained boost Knifeplay is getting and the boost to burst via Rogue's Fury. For monks, Terrorpalm started at 207 compared to rogues 188 and zerkers 154, after adjust it is 157 / 138 / 124; point being it would be difficult to set point A the same for these classes when point b has so much difference.

The same goes for the tank arctypes, wars will get more out of the base boost because they have higher skills than the other tanks or bards. Which is a good thing since pal/sk just got a minor boost from the spell changes in the last patch.

Lets look at the overall picture. If there are to many sustained events then add more burst events you don't take a burst class and grant them similar dps to sustained classes unless you also then give the sustained classes the same burst as the burst classes. Either all dps does everything or you fix it so no one does everything and make sure there are roughly equal amounts of need during an expansion. Some classes still have tradeoffs and weak points even if everything at the moment caters to their strength but for others there seems to be no more rules of holding them back in either sustained or burst should they gain to much.

Even if you don't agree with that they are still using pretty much a universal change of 3 adjustments to fit for all the melee classes despite their being a world of difference in regards to what discs they use, have, as well as the reuse time of them. Some melee classes who were already ahead of other melee classes are gaining way more then the classes who might have needed a bigger boost. Even if on paper their boost is smaller then the others in regards to just the adjustment being made. Very similar to how mage pets were viewed as an issue so all pets took the same hit despite 100K hp pool and 15% in base mitigation differences. One size does not fit all or in this case 3 sizes don't fit the 8 classes effected.

Shadowknights burning visage should be a bit more impressive now, jumping from 245% to 311%.

Easy for you to say when you're getting 82% pure damage added compared to 66% damage being added that we're getting.

Considering we're already behind mostly every other DPS in optimal situations getting roughly 20% less base damage is substantially crippling.

Granted we haven't gotten the chance to parse it yet since the innate monk aa was not on test the raw data is basically once again monks being sat at the kids table and being fed table scraps while berserkers, rogues, and beastlords eat fillet mignon.

Ill have to go test on live and test and get back to you with it

Very true; 30 second mend and feign death in your utility column makes it difficult to balance the perceived dps gains. Do bear in mind things like zan fi just became nearly as powerful as infusion of thunder used to be (81 to 85) and that 85 just became 151; it is tough for me to judge the results without even a chance to parse yet.

Don't think this can be understated really. Monks are so much stronger defensively, I'd imagine there needs to be some kind of tradeoff, just like pet tanking is for the wiz/mag relationship. Though that logic makes the beast # odd in comparison, since as a hybrid they already bring a lot to the table.

I'd be curious to see what monks think is a fair balance point. 90% of a rog/ber? 80%? Etc.

is theyre going to be anything to mitigate this on PCs otherwise this will break zek.there is code in place which mitigates PC vs PC spell damage ie 40% of the hp cap is the most a mana burn, life burn, harm touch.I know pvp is far from a priority but we are loyal paying customers.

Until these changes are tested out (parsed) the percentages probably don't matter for comparative purposes, since how a gain effects one class to another is going to be different. Given I'll camp something for weeks for a 1 to 2 percent dps gain, going to guess this a huge boon.

Ruven

You sustained/burst argument is a bad one at this point. The same classes dominate most if not all of the arx fights. The sole burst encounter in Arx is still consistently "won" by wizards and necros just like every other event in Arx.

If they had the time and money, yes, fixing the the balance issue would need a different size for each class. This is a step forward though and if the tests still show a huge disparity then it should be addresses still.

Sustained should be dominated by necros as they have ramp up time and tradeoffs for that sustained. Just because there are to many sustained events or because events heavily favor caster dps verse melee making events last longer for that reason alone doesn't mean everyone needs necro sustained. Wizards bursting for 400k and sustaining with necros is and has always been broken. Not the model to be copied for all.

If the bold above is true, and you are not just calling a sustained duration fight for you guild a burst fight because its just the shortest fight or because you know others can do it in 70-80 seconds. Then I would like to talk to your necros and figure out how they are hitting 350-400K or greater dps. And that 350-400k is with mechanics that still penalize melee more so than casters prior to any of these changes.

We won't even talk about what can be done in older content or for AE events or events that last 30-50 seconds by these burst classes.

Looks like a decent bump up to sustaned melee dps
All dps classes except rangers got burn discs lowered some to compensate...I find it hard to see why rangers are complaining tbh.
I'd expect ranger burns to be more now, no?

interesting to say the least... anyone able to verify if the innate aa are up and working as intended now for those classes missing them earlier on test?

Not until test patches, no eta has been said on that other then it should be today

Any Rangers on Test that can confirm what the new Leap Ability entails?

Every melee gets Mammoth Force which is an 11% damage mod. Zan Fi's used to give use 4% higher of a damage mod than you could get. Now Zan Fi's gives us a 70% damage mod total, when you are running around with a 93% damage mod.

So the net gain from our former advantage with Zan Fi's is now negative 23%

Is all this a good thing for shamies?

Seriously, some classes get a boost without nerfing anyone and you complain? First, older content should not be a concern for balancing. Guilds doing only older content pretty much take anyone of any class that can be reliable. Some classes being able to shred blue con humanoid mobs helps those lower tier guilds that are struggling with numbers (and finding competent people) anyhow.

Current and future content should be the focus. As they should be pretty far in to design on the upcoming campaign, I'll give them the benefit for understanding what that content will be like and how classes need to be balanced now to fit their internal targets in such. Let's reserve some judgement for after we start seeing some parses. If things are out of whack, I'm sure we'll see further tuning. At this point, they have a patch or two to adjust things before we get new content. As current content is stale and being farmed, not much harm will be done if things tilt too far one way or the other at this point. It's actually an ideal time to experiment and try to get some resemblance of right on time for the new content.

And what's your obsession with Knife Play? Without it, rogues are lucky to compete with dps mercs for sustained damage. It does not stack with our burn AA (rogue's fury), so it is a way to normalize sustained without having multiplicative implications with our burst.

zerks dont get the crazy high damage hits monks do so im hoping it isnt that big of a difference. once the aa are fixed on test will check it out on my zerk and monk