The issue is RANGER utility. Not utility carried by all scouts. Rangers have zero class specific utility that they add beyond their dps. I don't ever have more than two concentration slots used. Yes, two. It isn't that I opt to not cast spells that would take up more slots...we just don't have them. What are the two? One increases my personal AGI, attack speed, and in combat movement...not the groups. The other reduces my hate gain as a %. Not the groups, just mine. Hate isn't exactly an issue issue since LU20. Every other class I have played has something that they cast on another group member or a buff(s) that benefit the group as a whole. In fact, most of them have had multiple lines that would benefit the group or specific group members. Those simply do not exist for us. Hence, the statement that we have no utility. So, if all our class brings to a group is DPS, but we can't do as much of that or at least no more than many of the "utility" classes can...what exactly makes us desirable in a group?
I am not going to go deep into it as many here on the ranger boards are familiar with my views on utility. Suffice to say I find the view that utility is "something used on other people" to be extremely narrow and that the ability of a class to take advantage of buffs from other classes as well as the overall design of the class serves should really be considered as well when speaking about utility. In any case, my observation was about classes in general and how those asking for more DPS tends to cite a lack of utility as the primary reason for their wanting more DPS. It is not a judgment but a simply an observation I found interesting.
The point of the matter: We cast no buffs on group members. We do sub par DPS. This is all that people look for in a group. It doesn't matter if we can use poisons that lower mitigation or saves. It doesn't matter if we can stun or stifle a MOB. WHY? Because they can't SEE it. How can you tell in combat if a mob went down 10% faster because you were there? How can you tell that the mob didn't get off that extra spell/attack or two? We do bring a LOT to a group besides DPS, BUT if no one can see it, it may as well not exist...
I agree with Sokolov about peoples tendencies to down play their own classes abilities and over emphasize other classes abilities when they are asking for nerfs or power ups. It is pretty hopeless to ask people to look at things objectively in these kinds of threads.
i am pretty sure my brigand has no group buffs either. utility is not defined by what ppl can "see". and lets be honest, most ppl do not even have a clue what other classes group-buffs are doing. how many melee do you think would know from top of their head what classes can buff their dps and what classes can buff their haste? and what classes buff STR? maybe they can tell 1 or 2 classes, but for the majority they have no idea. so unless its a very famous buff, like amends or power regen or the like, most do not really pay attention if they can "see" one more buff icon besides the 30+ which are already on their screen.
I think the whole question is insane. Rangers, scouts in general, will usually do great for any group. This kind of min/max... it's crazy. You're reducing adventure to a work exercise! I am sure SOMEONE can relate a story when a high damage class was sought, and a ranger rejected, but were I in that group, I'd be leaving it. Scouts - more or less - are high damage types. Whether this one or that one is the highest, who cares? Give me a ranger that doesn't do the highest damage, may not have the best weapons, but knows how to play his or her class, and I'll take them anytime. If you are constantly around people that are doing this min/max exercise, you NEED to find new friends. Madmoon, Shaman
In a casual group, it doesn't really matter, but not everybody is a casual grouper. In things like raids it matters a lot.
I can see that Xney, but even that's kind of narrow. Most Raids I have been to are organized by my guild or allied guilds. Everyone is welcome there. I suppose there might be pick-up Raids which one might wish to join, that are held to a certain number of people (two group max, etc.) where they want specific classes, and no other. Still, if I ever heard any guildie saying, "No rangers," or no this or no that, I'd be having some discussions with him or her, and I would not be the only one. Most pick-up raids, our problems have been getting enough people, never mind being choosey as to class. I haven't worked 60+ yet, but it hasn't been all that different for 50+ levels of adventuring. I'm sure there are people out there that are so picky, but then it's up to the rest of us to educate them. Me, I've never seen a ranger not bring something to the table, and I could care less if they are the top damage dealer. The reality is, they deal a LOT of damage, and as a shaman, I sure like seeing them pick up aggro, over a wizard. Try keeping a robe wearin' gnome alive, once that Heroic turns away from the main fighter! :smileymad: Madmoon, shaman
Hi coffin, meet nail..... [quoted] I wish that those damned DPS tiers had never been posted by the devs. Get in line, buddy. I said as much on a panel at FanFaire. While meant to be generally helpful, that post ended up being unintentionally misleading and has been used as evidence in all kinds of arguments when it absolutely shouldn't be. Why? Because there are simply far too many variables when it comes to DPS to ever produce an accurate list that would be applicable all the time. Consider just some of the factors that can and do have a major influence on the DPS a character can do: Level Spell/art quality Gear Which other classes you're grouped with Type of mob you're fighting Level of mob you're fighting Tier of mob you're fighting Player skill Player attentiveness Whether or not spells/arts have refreshed When you receive a major spell/art upgrade as opposed to another class Random luck As we have said before, we have server logs every day on the actual DPS that players do. It breaks it down for us into charts by class, level, and group size. Some of you are probably working under the assumption that classes maintain their relative position most of the time, believing that necros might go down a notch or two at some levels while another class goes up, but overall staying much the same. That is a completely incorrect assumption. There can be major swings by the same class from level to level and from soloing to a full group. That's not an indication that anything is wrong; rather, it shows how much everyone around you can affect the DPS you do. We didn't set out to fit classes into DPS tiers based only on solo play or only on group play or only on raid play. The tiers I listed were meant to give a general, overall, gamewide kind of overview of how the classes compared. Instead, some people parse how they did in very specific situations and use my post as proof that something is wrong. It doesn't work that way. Because if you had been grouped with characters A, B, and C instead of X and Y, your results could have been quite different. It is natural for people to try to eliminate as many variables as possible to accumulate data, and thus many people post solo parses as proof of one thing or another. But I never claimed that my original post was about how well each class could solo, just as it wasn't about how well each one does in a group. It was meant to illustrate in general how classes compare in potential DPS across the course of the game so that people could use that information as part (and only part) of their character development process. I'd take the post back if I could, if only because it presents a very, very general picture when what many of the people on this board want is specifics. Sorry, but we don't plan on releasing the amount of data that would be required for everyone to be able to prove their point in every possible situation. EverQuest II isn't a spreadsheet; it is a game played by a wide variety of individuals who play in a myriad of different ways. To say "class X will always be thus" would be far, far too limiting and would vainly try to remove the most important variable of all: the players themselves. =========================== Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard Game Designer, EverQuest II
Yes, it's the nail in the coffin. But let's be clear what Moorgard is saying. Here is the translation. "I wish I hadn't posted the dps tiers. Because at the time, we thought we knew how our game worked. We now know that we don't know how it works and never will. The game is too complicated for us to ever hope to balance the classes. It was bad enough before KoS was released. With the addition of 10 levels and the associated CAs plus the AAs, we now have no clue how to figure out dps for any class much less how to actually control/manage the dps of any class." "Oh, we'll monitor few damage logs from time to time to ensure nothing is happening that's totally out of whack like it was with the Rangers before LU20, but other than that, where the dps is now is where it's going to stay since we have no clue as to how to balance according to the original concept for each class." "Bottom line: If by design you were supposed to be a tier1 dps class like rangers who we've nerfed to be only tier2/tier3 dps...tough...get used to it because we have no way to verify that and no clue as to how to fix it if we did. And if by design you were supposed to be tier 2/3 dps like rogues and summoners and due to CAs/AAs you are now doing tier1 dps .... congratulations."
Are we saying that certain classes have more higher level characters? And other classes tend to have bad gear and spells? And that some classes group with specific classes more than others? Do characters of certain classes fight X mob more than another class? Are players more attentive when playing certain classes? Do more skilled players congregate to specific classes? Are certain players more lucky than others? Or, is it as I see it, that all these factors, when considered in the whole picture, have a roughly NIL effect on overall DPS distribution because each "variable" is as likely to affect one player as another? (i.e. the random flucations these so-called variables create tend to cancel each other) Message Edited by Sokolov on 04-14-2006 10:22 AM
They certainly do not have a nil effect because they do not equally affect all players. At least they do not on raids where groups are setup to maximize the above factors in favor of dps. As I posted in another thread, this is how it generally breaks down when my guild raids. The below are typical averages from many many fights over the course of an entire night in places like Ascent of the Awakened, Vyemm's, Temple of Scale, etc. Summoners/Necro: 1300-1600 dps Assassins: 1200-1500 dps Swashbucklers/Brigands: 1100-1300 dps Wizards: 1000-1500 dps Warlocks: 1000-1400 dps Monks/Bruisers: 1000-1300 dps Illusionist: 900-1200 dps RANGERS: 850-1150 dps Berzerkers: 750-1100 dps (offensive) Now those numbers are not the result of the inherant self-only CAs/AAs of each class. They are the product of the interaction of each class' CAs/AAs with one another in each group. Of course, some are more reliant on other's buffs, etc than others. The point is that SoE has no clue how all of the various CAs/AAs are interacting to produce the above results. I'm not sure they even realize that the above results are the norm in high-end raiding guilds. And because they don't, they have no clue how the classes have deviated from their dps design goals or to to correct it if they did realize it. Moorgard's post basically admits to this and he is essentially stating that they don't care that the classes no longer do dps as intended and SoE can't/won't restore the intended balance. Message Edited by Balerius on 04-14-2006 02:04 PM
So you are saying that certain classes have their DPS consistently maximized more than others in a specific situation? And that if one looks at the overall trend of these classes in all situations that this tendency to have their DPS maximized changes what would otherwise be their relative position on the overall DPS tiers? Or is it more likely that most DPS classes have situations in which they have their DPS maximized, and that when looks at the overall trend of each of these classes, one finds that the relative positions are maintained? What Moorgard is saying is that "parses are not accurate" because they do not take into his so-called variables. But statements like "necros have better gear" is obviously silly, their higher DPS cannot be attributed to a "gear difference." Likewise one cannot saying that "bezerkers are better skilled players" in an attempt to explain why they parse higher DPS. At the same time, it would be silly to say "wizards are lower level" as well. What I am trying to get at that those variables have no preceivable/measurable effects and as the dataset grows the flucuations caused by the variables tend to cancel each other out. Message Edited by Sokolov on 04-14-2006 11:17 AM
I am saying that your first statement is correct. Certain classes' CAs and AAs will consistently receive greater benefit than other classes' CAs/AAs when combined with the CAs/AAs from other classes in raid groups specifically designed to enhance those factors. On top of that, some classes CAs/AAs are inherently "better" at sustained dps than other classes. Let me give you some examples from my list of dps results: Typically, the assassins and I are in the same group or one pretty identical. We are receiving essentially the same buffs/procs from our groupmates. The assassin will greatly out-dps me. This is primarily due to the inherently more powerful CAs that assassins have as a bit to the fact that their AAs (str and int) are complementary). On the other hand, if you look at the illusionists dps, this is almost entirely due to the interaction of the illusionists CAs/AAs with those of certain other classes. If not for those other classes, the illusionists dps would be well down at tier 3. These things are consistent given raid groups designed to enhance dps. In such raids, rangers' dps should be considered tier 2 (at best). Please understand, my perspective is that of a ranger who raids top-end content almost every night. And the dps rankings are as I have posted. If one is a ranger who primarily fights in groups, then the ranger's dps might very well be highest in one group and not highest in another group since the groups will not likely be setup to maximize dps. So in that regard, Moorgard's statements about the dps rankings not being set in stone and dependent on variables is correct. But when it comes to maximum dps...things are not variable with properly established groups. And rangers are nowhere near the stated design goals. Message Edited by Balerius on 04-14-2006 04:54 PM
At the risk of getting my head bitten off... Please notice that most parses players are providing are from end game raids. And, yes, I know many feel that those are the only parses that matter. However, the statement the dev made basically said that they look at all aspects of play. For instance, in xp groups a necro will not always be #1 in dps. My necro is regularly out dps'd by assassins, wizards, and yes rangers while occasionally grabbing the top spot as well. When soloing my bruiser regularly puts out more damage than my necro (just because the damage is done faster and the fights are shorter). And yes, in raids, I tend to be at the top of the dps listings because when everyone else is clicking on shards and manastones trying to get enough to use another CA I'm still at 25% power and blasting away. And as a disclaimer: Yes, I know summoners are probably in for some "tweaking" and rangers definitely need some pumping up in the later levels (at least my ranger does). I just wanted to point out that the devs are not analyzing end-game raid encounters only. If they balanced for that it would leave the majority of the player base out in the cold. What is good for a 20 minute raid encounter against a x4 mob is not neccesarily good for regular xp groups and solo play.
That is a good point, because raid content (long fights, multi mobs, and many people going low on power) definitely play to the summoner's strengths. I also agree with the SOE posts that it's very situational, so it's hard to get a grasp of, and that the 'tiers' are not a hard rule. I do feel dissapointed because I get the feeling that SOE feels like it's just about right. I know in my raids, I think, I can never get up to that DPS the assassin is doing. It's just not possible. The potential DPS in the class just isn't that high. It could be that I just havent' learned some tricks or something, but I think Rangers are pretty familiar now with their class since LU20-21 changes. It's discouraging when you learn to play your class well, and classes which bring a lot more to the table than you do so much better at what you're supposed to be good at. That's not going to change until the fundamental issues are fixed. What's the upside to playing a Ranger? The same problem exists with Wizards. Even with proper gear, spells, and knowledge of how to play, it just seems to fall short and it's not right. SOE needs to take a look at the *potential* of the classes instead of just the *average* being done now.
I'm not going to bite your head off. Because I agree with you. SoE had a hard time balancing classes before KoS and LU20 across all play-styles (solo, group, and raid). After KoS, 10 additional levels, and 50 AAs; it is abundantly clear to me that they have completely lost any ability to not only determine what is happening but also correcting imbalances. I think they have given up and are only going to adjust classes if they see something outrageously broken (like rangers pre LU20). Unfortunately that leaves rangers as Solo: OK; Group: Good; Raiding: Mediocre. And since I spend 90% of my play time raiding, that means that I am going to have to adjust to being tier 2/3 dps. It's an adjustment I shouldn't have to be making if SoE was doing its job properly.
Ok, I'm going to count to 10, then post, because these kinds of statements really get me upset, and I dont want to head down that road. I raid a lot, and am consistently at the top of the dps charts (according to ACT). I find Rangers to be some of the most useful classes during a raid. We are raiding Courts of Al'Afaz tonight, would it help if I posted some parses from that raid or does anyone care? I'm sure someone is going to respond to my post and tell me that my guild must suck or that everyone else in the raid sucks and thats the only reason I'm on top, but I can assure you this is not the case. I'm not saying you're lying about your parse results, so please don't take it the wrong way. I'm merely wanting to know why on your raid you are way down the list and on my raid I'm at the top of the list? Now dont you think that if people at Sony were looking at both of these raids that they might say, lets leave thigns as they are? What happens if they increase our dps so you are on top, what will my parses look like then? I'd probably be double the dps of the next person and then everyone else in my raid would be screaming about the imbalance. I'd like to hear some constructive criticism to this point, and not simply "fix us by increasing our dps".
One other thing everyone should look at is the damage per power ratio for their CAs. How many people here spend the plat to upgrade their melee skills above Adept 1? I know I don't. I always upgrade my ranged skills first which makes my ranged skills more power efficient. As a result, I rarely use my melee skills in a fight where I know I'm going to run out of power. It seems a waste not to get the biggest bang for the buck. I know I should probably upgrade my melee skills becuase I use them a lot in groups and while soloing, but my priority is on ranged skills and equipment for raiding. If I ever hit level 70 and have excess plat, then my priorities will adjust accordingly.
I don't usualy cross post, but since the other thread has bee locked I'll post what I said there: --------------------------------------------------------- See that's the problem. Practically every one of the Rangers I've see post and say "My dps is just fine" or "Rangers have been fixed" either: (1) is level 60 or below with few AAs, (2) is primarily a casual or solo playstyle, or (3) conveniently doesn't post his dps or the dps of the other classes that he says he generally out-dps's. For soloing, I think our dps is actually pretty good. We are actually better off than assassins. So I understand perfectly those Rangers who say "Ranger dps is fine" when they look at it from a soloing perspective. But for me, I don't play EQ2 to solo. I am in a raid guild that raids 7 days a week. And in a raid guild, dps is paramount. Groups are tailored to maximize each classes' dps in a complementary way giving full consideration of CAs and AAs. In my guild, every single fight is parsed and posted in a dps channel post-fight. So I think I know very well what dps a ranger can achieve and what dps other classes can achieve. And Rangers are barely tier 2 dps in well setup raids. This is how it generally breaks down when my guild raids. The below are typical averages from many many fights over the course of an entire night in places like Ascent of the Awakened, Vyemm's, Temple of Scale, etc. Summoners/Necro: 1300-1600 dps Assassins: 1200-1500 dps Swashbucklers/Brigands: 1100-1300 dps Wizards: 1000-1500 dps Warlocks: 1000-1400 dps Monks/Bruisers: 1000-1300 dps Illusionist: 900-1200 dps RANGERS: 850-1150 dps Berzerkers: 750-1100 dps (offensive) You will, of course, note that Rangers are consistently out-dps'd by rogues and monk-types and only holding even with berzerkers. Now I, for one, don't mind occasionally being out-dps'd by any tier2 dps class. But to be consistently out-dps'd by them is wrong. And just for info, to head off the inevitable questions about whether I know how to play or am equipped: I have been playing since EQ2 started, I am level 70 with almost all Master spells and have 46 AAs. I have decent gear. So for anyone who posts and says "Ranger dps is just fine". Please let us know what your level is and your playstyle. Because "fine" depends upon who you play with (if anyone). Then let me know what your average dps is over a sustained period. Because if you are a raiding ranger, and you aren't routinely, fight after fight (not "bursting" when Sniper Shot is up), doing around 1200-1500 dps...then you're wrong...ranger dps is "not just fine". ---------------------------------------------- So tell me, what is your sustained average dps...fight after fight for the duration of an entire night in somplace like Ascent, ToS, or Vyemm's? I have stated mine. Only when you state yours in places like those can we discuss this point rationally. For the record, I don't want to be top dps. I don't even care if tier2 classes occasionally beat my dps on a given fight. I do care when the consistent results are as I have posted them above on T7 raid content. And I stand by my earlier statements. I think SoE has given up trying to balance classes across all play styles. As someone else posted, I think they are only looking at some constructed "average" dps for each class versus looking at maximum dps.
