+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 61 to 80 of 80

Thread: To Homogenize or not to Homogenize

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    352
    Personally I feel some classes have been unfairly nerfed based on "numbers" or pure theory crafting. If HP was king like was asserted in tanking topics #3 for progrssion fights, why did testing on the PTR show that it wasn't HP but cooldowns that was the problem?

    Nerfs based on purely on theory crafting bothers me a bit, but they have already happened so no point QQ'ing about it. Anyone can mathematically prove how insanely good something is.. anyone remember block qq'ing by druids and DK even before wrath went live?

    I really think blizzard should hire their own in house team of testers to do the number crunching for them. It will be a more controlled environment and they can balance it much better and faster.

    /derail

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    Well bear in mind, a paladin has to master 3 different roles (healing, dps, tanking), while a warrior only has to master 2. There are 3 trees each, but roles tend to take a much larger skill change than trees. The classes are different in mechanics as well. I don't know if that makes the difficulty differences fair or not, but just bear in mind that there are other factors that play into it.
    I'm a bit confused what difference that makes. How does mastery of Paladin Healing or DPS affect your ability to Tank? How does the lack of a healing tree for Warriors affect their ability to tank? It seems completely immaterial. Even if one person has a wider variety of skills (ie, the ability to tank, heal, or dps well), that says nothing about the caliber of their skill in any particular one of those areas.



    As far as my thoughts on the topic in general... I think people crying about not wanting tanking homogenized aren't looking at things quite right. In the end, it doesn't matter if all tanks have the same effective health, mitigation, avoidance, TPS, or whatever other stat. What matters is how each tank goes about getting the job done.

    As long as Paladins are still popping Holy Shield whenever it comes up, and Death Knights have cooldowns (albeit weaker than they are today) to rotate, and Warriors and Druids are primarily concerned with threat output with a few cooldowns in reserve for when things really go bad, then the current flavor of tanks has not really changed at all. We are not truly the same if we arrive at the same place via different means.

    I don't see anyone complaining that Blizzard wants all of the pure DPS classes to do essentially the same DPS, assuming equal gear and skill, unless their argument is that for whatever reason, they feel they should be just plain better than another class. Even if a Hunter and Mage do the exact same DPS, nobody is going to argue that, "Oh noes, ranged classes have been homogenized, it's all the same now!!" The fact still remains that Hunters and Mages achieve that DPS in a fundamentally different way.

    Such will be the case with tanks, too. Until our actual abilities become copies of each other, our various stats play no role in the homogenization that everyone seems to fear so much.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Kuna, Idaho
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by TomHuxley View Post
    Yes, but probably not for the reasons you were implying. It just seems like some sort of strange parallel universe where the people concerned about tank balance repeat the the sarth3d encounter itself is not the issue, that the imbalance was evident across the game, and people keep responding "It's just one encounter!!!!"
    You know, I just can't remember this being a topic of discussion until Sarth3D became the new "Brutallus" or "Muru" brag/whine encounter of the game. The defining encounter between heroes and scrubs. Sorry, but don't shovel that line to me. It is an attempt to deflect attention away from what really brought the issue to the surface. Find me a thread, one thread that pre-dates the Sarth3D hype where Warrior or Paladin survivability was called into question in any credible way.

    Previously everyone was on the topic of max DPS, and zero white swings. Sure other examples have been brought to light as a segue to the larger issue... now that the discussion is out there. We knew our overall avoidance and survivability went down as a trade-off to higher threat and DPS before WOTLK launched. Nobody really said much until that difference started to cost a few people a spot up front.

    I want to see the changes done in a way that leaves everyone on a closer plane of ability. Personally I would not ask for strict equality on every aspect of tanking. If we are going to do that, might as well knock it down to 4 classes. Warrior, Priest, Rogue, Mage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalken View Post
    "I'll let the dragon hit me in the face, you stab it in the ass."

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    15
    It seems like what this argument and all the spin-offs come down to is simple value. If you'll excuse the crudity of the example, you have one class (say warriors) who paid the same price for the same car, Ford's shiny new TANK, that another class (say DK's) bought as well for the same price ... except when they're delivered the DK's version has sattellite radio, bucket seats, a sun roof and corners better.

    Can both cars perform similarly? Sure, the warrior version just has to have a slightly more experienced driver to take a turn that fast and it's a lot less comfortable. You can make the argument that that's fine, in which case I'd argue that it's only fine if you got the better car or you're Milton from Office Space (neither of which is really fine with me, but your milleage may vary). But either way the guys with the lesser car feel a bit cheated, get it?

    We all rolled up tanks. We all play in different situations with different quality of play (and other players). It's nice and altruistic and all to say that disparity's just perfectly fine but everyone here knows it's only fine when it's not happening to you ... imagine reading on mmo-champ tomorrow that Blizzard is removing Consecrate on the PTR and applying a -50% modifier to druid hitpoints and I have a feeling quite a few people selling this "we won't know till Ulduar's implemented, be patient, Blizzard knows best, yada yada" would be singing a vastly different tune.

    There are very simple ways via talents and glyphs to solve some of the inequalities between the tanking classes AND do so in a way that saves this depressing Brad McQuaidish Vision (tm) of how the classes are supposed to be non-homogenized. I think a more interesting question than we're asking right now is why they aren't just going that route to solve things? For example, if warrior AOE threat is considered (common consensus points to this) to be sub-par in comparison to other classes, why not provide a glyph that cuts the damage done and cooldown of TC in half? Or one that sacrifices some mitigation value but allows magic mitigation?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    2,437
    Tenaclebob I take extreme offense to that reply....but only because I work for a Nissan dealer

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Kuna, Idaho
    Posts
    955
    Not to take anything away from your fine example Tentaclebob. I would characterize it as the F-14A vs. the F22, because I'm a nerd like that. One has a late 60s/early 70s design, and flies dirty at lower air speeds but has seen a lot of action and been the premiere Interceptor for the fleet for over 30 years. The other is of 90s' design, state of the art, a truckload of air superiority tricks - but no combat record to back it up. lol

    I kid. Yes, as a long time Warrior I will shamefully admit that it is hard to not look at a newly minted DK and think they were given all the tools, bells & whistles blizzard didn't know how to make when I rolled my trusty old tauren warrior.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalken View Post
    "I'll let the dragon hit me in the face, you stab it in the ass."

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by Shake View Post
    But of course, D stance is getting nerfed, so we'll take more damage on a progression instance that's supposed to have bosses that hit like trains.
    Defensive stance is getting buffed. damage DEALT by you will be decreased by 5% instead of 10%.
    Every action brings a reaction...now that people have successfully lobbied to Nerf DK's to the floor; that means future nerfs are in store for all the other classes to even things out.
    1. DK nerfs werent caused by lobbying. While it is quite likely data provided by tanspot and Xav's tests was looked on by Blizzard, its very unlikely taht it was sole reason for changes. DKS were nerefd because tehy WERE too good, and not because people thought they are. Also, DKs are quite fine after nerfs, changes are indeed big, but it shows only how much they were better at surviving heavy damage than other classes. If further testing will show that nerfs went too far, its all on PTR so nothing is set in stone.
    Quote Originally Posted by bludwork View Post
    Personally I feel some classes have been unfairly nerfed based on "numbers" or pure theory crafting. If HP was king like was asserted in tanking topics #3 for progrssion fights, why did testing on the PTR show that it wasn't HP but cooldowns that was the problem?

    Nerfs based on purely on theory crafting bothers me a bit, but they have already happened so no point QQ'ing about it. Anyone can mathematically prove how insanely good something is.. anyone remember block qq'ing by druids and DK even before wrath went live?

    I really think blizzard should hire their own in house team of testers to do the number crunching for them. It will be a more controlled environment and they can balance it much better and faster.

    /derail
    Of course they do have testers and they use all available data... No nerfs are cause by theorycrafting alone.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,105
    Quote Originally Posted by kolben View Post
    Not to take anything away from your fine example Tentaclebob. I would characterize it as the F-14A vs. the F22, because I'm a nerd like that. One has a late 60s/early 70s design, and flies dirty at lower air speeds but has seen a lot of action and been the premiere Interceptor for the fleet for over 30 years. The other is of 90s' design, state of the art, a truckload of air superiority tricks - but no combat record to back it up. lol
    Perfect example IMO, except that there's a reason the airforce and navy ares phasing out the F-14s and F-15Es in favor of the F-22, and it's not just theorycrafting.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Stancedancer View Post
    I'm a bit confused what difference that makes. How does mastery of Paladin Healing or DPS affect your ability to Tank? How does the lack of a healing tree for Warriors affect their ability to tank? It seems completely immaterial. Even if one person has a wider variety of skills (ie, the ability to tank, heal, or dps well), that says nothing about the caliber of their skill in any particular one of those areas.
    Please read what I say rather than put words in my mouth please. I said nothing about it affecting the caliber of anyone's skill. The comment was another comment about how one tank was easier to play than the other. I was making the point, that there are other factors that might explain why that is. It could be something as simple as some people do better with certain types of play mechanics than others to something as complex as the devs balancing around skill distribution on a role level versus a class level (I.E. less stuff to learn means the material is slightly harder..quantity versus quality). It could be any number of reasons. I was just tossing out ideas. None of them may be correct, but since we don't know how they make those decisions, all we can do is guess. The point is, it isn't as simple as "Class A isn't as easy to play as Class B. Not Fair!" and that there could be other factors that we either don't consider or don't know. However, none of them affect whether or not a tank should be better than another. It's a diluted argument. It's as absurd as me claiming since warriors have it easier against casters, paladins should be better against non-casters (I don't believe this).

    The sheer thing people seem to miss is that (to my knowledge) the devs never mentioned that they balanced "ease of play" between classes. They balance tanking, dps, and healing such that skill can blur the lines enough to make classes mostly equivalent, but they never said they tried to make each class as easy to play as the other ones. I am not saying that is fair, or that it is how I want it, but simply how it appears to be at this point. Things could change in the future, but for now it looks like they are balancing output quality rather than process quality.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    Quote Originally Posted by TomHuxley View Post
    Perfect example IMO, except that there's a reason the airforce and navy ares phasing out the F-14s and F-15Es in favor of the F-22, and it's not just theorycrafting.
    Actually, it is more budget related than most people realize. As a rule, the navy almost never phases out existing technology unless it absolutely has to for some reason.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Kuna, Idaho
    Posts
    955
    F14 is almost completely gone except for some Reservist squadrons that have not disbanded yet. Just about all squadrons that flew F-14s have been moved onto the F/A-18, and all of the squadrons that flew the A-6 have. Some E/A-6B holdouts still I think since there is no Electronic Warfare equivalent in hornets that I know of, they pull double duty as tankers also.

    But none the less that's true. Aircraft aside, equipment in the navy gets a very long life before retirement unless it's deemed too expensive to operate like the Battleships. Sure wish some of them were still around, extremely cool ships.
    Last edited by kolben; 03-11-2009 at 03:14 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalken View Post
    "I'll let the dragon hit me in the face, you stab it in the ass."

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    2,437
    Or like the bloody USS Inchon....first it goes out for a routine 12 hour maintenance deployment, and ends up staying out for 36 hours because it couldn't find the shore.....then the boiler blows up 60 days later. Should have scrapped it decades ago.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    There were lots of navy systems I would have loved to scrapped. The answer I got back most of the time: "Its what we have been using all this time, there is no need to risk a change if it works well enough to get us to where we are now."

    Gotta love the navy.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,105
    Quote Originally Posted by kolben View Post
    You know, I just can't remember this being a topic of discussion until Sarth3D became the new "Brutallus" or "Muru" brag/whine encounter of the game.
    Honestly I don't know, because until the tanking topics and then test data came out (and not just Premonition's test, but the excellent rawr data posted in the last day as well) I had not participated in those topics, although I saw it regularly ingame (working with several DKs) but didn't worry about it. Neither I nor our guilds's DKs are going to get a Sarth3D kill, as our guild is not geared enough for it. The issue is larger game-balance for me. I really can't speak to everyone else.

    I want to see the changes done in a way that leaves everyone on a closer plane of ability. Personally I would not ask for strict equality on every aspect of tanking. If we are going to do that, might as well knock it down to 4 classes. Warrior, Priest, Rogue, Mage.
    And I agree with you there, and I think most of the people in the tanking topics threads do as well. This really becomes a matter of degree. The issues wasn't that malygos and sarth3D was easier for DKs and druids, it was that all encounters at that level and above were going to be so as well (and would get progressively worse as bosses hit harder).

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Kuna, Idaho
    Posts
    955
    I really hated 3 things when I was in the Navy, I thought they were just terrible.

    Nylon Mooring Lines - Deadly as hell, 6 inch diameter nylon line that when it breaks will cut people in half like they are warm butter. These are typically stretched to 25% of their breaking point in the process of mooring a ship to a pier. Manila lines for the record just fall flat when they break even under extreme stress, but are much more costly to make and keep in repair.

    Steam Boilers - Super heated steam at 1,200 PSI will cut you in half like warm butter, you won't see or hear the leak either. Very deadly.

    OBAs (Oxygen Breathing Apparatus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) - Most terrible design ever in fire fighting breathing equipment. Uses canisters which are only good for about 30 minutes and generate oxygen by a chemical reaction inside the canister. They also emits caustic fumes when exposed to salt water.... you fight fires with guess what... yep salt water. Naturally you are pumping fire fighting water out of the compartment when fighting fires. However, a real ship with a main space fire often has ballasting problems so there is a list which makes this problematic to say the least. On top of all that it was hard to get through a scuttle in a hatch, and they get caught on almost any right angle since you wear it on your chest.

    Thankfully, they Navy was switching out to the SCBA by the time I left active duty.
    Last edited by kolben; 03-11-2009 at 03:58 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalken View Post
    "I'll let the dragon hit me in the face, you stab it in the ass."

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    I hated sleeping under the arresting gear during flight ops.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7
    @jere

    Apologies if I was a bit unclear... My point being, I don't see why it should make any difference how many roles a class can potentially fill. It should not make a difference in the general level of skill of people who play that class as their main, and it shouldn't make a difference in how Blizzard balances the difficulty in playing a particular role of two classes.

    But you're right to say that Blizzard has made no guarantees that they balance around ease of play (though if I recall, they have made mention that they like to reward a more difficult play style with higher DPS, specifically in the case of Hunters), so it may not make a difference.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Hengist View Post
    Tankspot does not cause nerfs. Tankspot points at problems, presents arguments and data. People can read those and come to their own conclusions, Blizzard developers included. If you disagree, you are free to present your own arguments. -If- tankspot had anything to do with the changes, which is likely, it is because of quality of presented evidence, not because of whining.
    That is not entirely true, Tank Spot does not nerf classes, of course not.
    But most of the tankspot community consists of warriors, even the staff and the most famous players here, are all Warrior tanks.

    Have been since release often times and yes, Blizzard listens to them, Blizzard even gets direct input for developing from a few guilds and while Blizzard completely ignores the normal user on the official forums, a few chosen individuals not involved directly in development do alter the game, as I said not directly but through their feedback.
    you people need to understand that other tanking classes feel a little overwhelmed. It is easy to cry out "conspiracy" when it comes to community as huge and full of hobby mathematicians as the Warrior Lobby, many of them being the maintank for 4 years in times even when there was no real alternative for their spot.


    Tanking Topics... it is a funny name really because massive discussions like this only seem to appear when the warrior is hit by injustice.




    On topic:


    Of course I can also only speak for myself and I truly and honestly want everyone to be equal, that is just how I roll :-)


    Sad truth is though, the majority of people does not think this way no matter what they may tell you.
    I can partly understand this because in the end everyone of us plays this game for his personal pleasure, there is more behind raiding and pvping, the social aspect is strong. But when it comes to having a platform to be with friends you want your surroundings to be as comfortable as possible.

    And what is more comfortable than being a mandatory addition to a group, being a most - valuable - player in your raid?

    Most tanks like compettition as long as they know they have the best chance of succeeding and showing off their skill to everyone, further tightening their MVP position.
    Especially if you are the maintank for 4 years now - you just dont want to prove yourself again, even though somebody else deserved a chance why should you give it to them?

    Everyone knew Blizzard would likely overdo nerfs for 3.1.

    And everyone rather wants to see deathknights fail terribly ( Unholy and Frost are nerfed too you know) instead of his own class, which also is understandable. But the timing is just bad.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by Mufuti View Post
    That is not entirely true, Tank Spot does not nerf classes, of course not.
    But most of the tankspot community consists of warriors, even the staff and the most famous players here, are all Warrior tanks.
    Tanking topics were based on discussions between members of all four tanking classes. Tests run by Premonition were the effort of the whole guild, which except for warrior tank has death knight, paladin and druid tanks. So please do not try to make it look like it is "warrior tanks vs the world". It is not. Paladin tanks are in the same boat as warriors considering EH.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mufuti View Post
    Have been since release often times and yes, Blizzard listens to them, Blizzard even gets direct input for developing from a few guilds and while Blizzard completely ignores the normal user on the official forums, a few chosen individuals not involved directly in development do alter the game, as I said not directly but through their feedback.
    You make it sound like Blizzard would be mindless robots who can't really see the numbers for themselves and instead rely on the conclusions made for them by some players. That is a conspiracy theory. Like it is said in US tanking forums, correlation is not causation. You see tanspot article about DK tanking cds being too powerful and weeks alter you see cds being nerfed, and you think that it was the article that caused it. Why you dismiss the idea that Blizzard given the same data could come to the same conclusion as experienced players with great understanding of game mechanics? I don't even know half about as much about this game as tanspot authors, but after seeing equally geared death knight tank in action compared to me, I knew how it will end, and nobody had to tell me that. Assumption that Blizzard developers don't have enough brain capacity to see that themselves is very offensive tbh.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mufuti View Post
    Tanking Topics... it is a funny name really because massive discussions like this only seem to appear when the warrior is hit by injustice.
    There is absolutely nothing stopping authors representing other classes to post their views. It however could be hard if the reality is against you. No offense, but from what I have seen, those DKs with high understanding of game mechanics admit themselves that some changes were very much needed.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Berith View Post
    <stuff snipped>. I would argue that there are other essential elements that should be even across tanking classes:

    - Ability to take BIG hits from bosses
    - Ability to tank multiple targets (AoE tanking)
    - Ability to off-tank (generate agro without receiving consistent damage)
    - Ability to survive magic attacks
    - And the obvious Agro generation and effective health

    ...
    This.

    I want to be the same (or damn near the same) as my fellow tank classes. Not better. Give me parity. It's too late in the game for me to re-roll another class, and I do truly love my warrior. I don't, however, like feeling as though I'm gimping the raid by attending.

    Please don't give me the 'bring the player, not the class' creed until we're all in the same ball-park. From my perspective, would I swap my block for:
    1. higher max health
    2. higher avoidance
    3. higher base mitigation from armour
    4. lovely AE TPS
    5. wonderful single target TPS
    6. a nice selection of cooldowns to help me survive
    7. DPS-class DPS without a massive respec
    ?

    Also, what is the problem with Homegenisation (TM)? That the classes would behave the same, play the same, perform the same? Who really cares? You can only play one character (properly) at a time, and people only really level more than 1 tank class to cover the deficiencies of the others. The people who like the distinct flavours of each tank class and would rue the day that their 4 tanks 'felt the same' are, I submit, are a niche market.


    Medemer
    --
    Lots of QQ in my post, but I've been bottling it up for so long!!!

+ 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