Disparity of Battlefield Control Between Classes

TheB00N Profile Options #71

0
0
Neutral
Evolution Lvl.60
Mount Tyrannas (PVP)
Elin Berserker
Transfer your character to Jagged Coast, and I will teach you how to play for a small fee.

- Evolution
Vunak Profile Options #72

0
0
Neutral
TheB00N on 06/11/2012, 10:20 AM - view
Transfer your character to Jagged Coast, and I will teach you how to play for a small fee.

- Evolution


Come to Basilisk Crag and put your money where your mouth is. Oh wait. Neither of us are going to transfer, because I am a guild leader and don't feel like waiting a week to play with my guildies again.

Pointless post is pointless
Dannicus Profile Options #73

0
0
Neutral
Morgan.Manjaw Lvl.60
Mount Tyrannas (PVP)
Castanic Priest
noctred on 06/11/2012, 09:12 AM - view
Alright man, pointless argument is pointless.

You guys keep doing whatever it is you do and come up with reasons as to why sorcs can't be useful rather than reasons why they can. Meanwhile, successful teams with sorcs will continue to be successful - and successful sorc duelists will also continue to be successful.

Peace.

Or, rather than continuing to repeat points we all agree on, you can respond to the points we actually make instead. We know what the sorcerer is capable of. The issue is in their capacity to pull it off reliably in group situations against anyone that isn't a baddie. Same with zerkers and to only slightly lesser extent archers. Even priests considering lock on heals are the most reliable and efficient until you start getting into large scale PvP since Mystics have essentially the same lock on heal for none of the priest's drawbacks.

1v1 problems extend into small scale and group. If you continue to leave THAT unaddressed, then yes, pointless argument is pointless because you keep circle jerking.
noctred Profile Options #74

0
0
Neutral
Dannicus on 06/11/2012, 10:44 AM - view

1v1 problems extend into small scale and group. If you continue to leave THAT unaddressed, then yes, pointless argument is pointless because you keep circle jerking.


I did address it.

For one, sorcs are capable of beating any class 1v1 barring priests with full DR gear/zyrks and reflect stats. Mystics are beatable cause they lack appropriate debuff immunity and have lackluster self healing, relative to priests. Slayers are rough but beatable, assuming you can bait a few dodges (plenty of different lockons to do this with), use stoneskin at the right time, and get a little lucky with lightning traps on backstabs (after a while, it's not hard to predict when backstabs are coming). Warriors are similar to slayers, but made easier with stun resist/reduction jewelery - warriors will not take down ANY CLASS in a single stun rotation assuming the target has appropriate DR gear, or gear that otherwise matches the warrior's. Additionally, due to the way warrior animations work, their attacks tend to be easy to predict and juke, which when combined with stun duration reduction and/or resist gear, makes them manageable. Lancers are probably the hardest - however, their leashes can be dodged (eventually you learn to predict them just like backstab), their stuns can be avoided just like most any attack from any class, and hailstorm can be used to temporarily break shield turtles and get some damage in due to the way persistent AoE effects work (damage goes from the center outwards).

I'm not saying these fights are easy. I know that melee have very obvious advantages over ranged classes in this game. There are things I'd like to see changed in relation to RNG knockdown chains and combo attack staggers. Slayers are hard, lancers are hard, and warriors can be hard - but they're all ultimately beatable depending on the flow of the fight.

For two, I explained to you why and how sorc playstyle differs between a duel environment and a group environment. You chose to not read it for whatever reason.

---

Ultimately, it's easy to sit there and say that if I ever saw a sorc beat any of the above classes, then the player behind the other class was bad. It's also easy to sit there and say that if a sorc can ever get anything done in a group fight, then the opposing team was bad. I mean, it sounds like that's your argument now?

It's just the weakest argument out there.

Competitive gaming history is ripe with examples of individuals and/or teams overcoming hard counters. These victories didn't happen because of bad opponents, they happened because somebody got outplayed, outsmarted, outmaneuvered, or whatever. They happened because one team used a strat or an approach that the other team did not or could not expect. They happened because one team took a class weakness and turned it into a team strength (i.e. if you have classes that need to play defensively, adopt a survivalist strat and outlast until you see an opening).

The difference, generally speaking, is that some players sit around and talk about how garbage their class is, while other players sit around and talk about how to make the most of their class in whatever situation they find themselves in - it's the latter group of players that tend to be able to overcome those situations which the former group of players deem impossible unless "playing against baddies".
Edited by: noctred 12 months ago
Vunak Profile Options #75

0
0
Neutral
No.

What we are saying is that if a Slayer and a Sorcerer fight 1v1. And neither of them make any mistakes. The Slayer is going to win. Same for a Warrior, and a lancer. Disparity in class. Slayers, warriors and lancers all have more gap closing abilities then Sorcerer have gap creating abilities, which is unbalanced in its right, as melee classes should have a harder time closing gaps then kite classes should have creating them.

Thats what balance is. Kite classes have less Def/balance and health, and arguably in this game way less abilities to use and take advantage of in given situations then melee classes have.

The same can be said in group PvP, but to a greater extent because those same issues are made more apparent in group situations.

If you cant understand that. Then you have never been a top PvPer in any game. Or played against top PvPers where that disparity is made apparent.
Dannicus Profile Options #76

0
0
Neutral
Morgan.Manjaw Lvl.60
Mount Tyrannas (PVP)
Castanic Priest
noctred on 06/11/2012, 11:35 AM - view
Dannicus on 06/11/2012, 10:44 AM

1v1 problems extend into small scale and group. If you continue to leave THAT unaddressed, then yes, pointless argument is pointless because you keep circle jerking.


I did address it.

....

For two, I explained to you why and how sorc playstyle differs between a duel environment and a group environment. You chose to not read it for whatever reason.


Dannicus
1v1 problems extend into small scale and group.

Dannicus
1v1 problems extend into small scale and group.

Dannicus
1v1 problems extend into small scale and group.


Should I keep repeating this until you actually do address this point, or are you going to keep listing tools the sorcerer has that are far too easily countered, negated, or avoided given equal skill which is exactly the problem?
Edited by: Dannicus 12 months ago
noctred Profile Options #77

0
0
Neutral
Dannicus on 06/11/2012, 11:48 AM - view

Should I keep repeating this until you actually do address this point, or are you going to keep listing tools the sorcerer has that are far too easily countered, negated, or avoided given equal skill which is exactly the problem?


I'm not really even sure what you want me to say to you.

I addressed the point. You and Vunak apparently claim that sorcerers can never, ever, ever beat slayers, warriors, or lancers assuming both players have a brain - and because of this inability, they become incapable of doing anything in groups when matched against teams with those classes on them.

I'm telling you that sorcs can, in fact, beat those classes 1v1. Consequently, this means that sorcs can, in fact, get things done when matched against teams with those classes on them.

You're telling me that nope, not possible because the duels and deathmatches I've been in and/or spectated have obviously been against baddies. I'm sorry bro, that's not a good argument against anything.

There isn't even anything else to argue here since you have an utter defeatist perspective towards this class.

@Vunak,

Same to you, really.

You can sit there and cry about how every slayer/warrior/lancer that loses to a sorc is bad because you personally can't beat them. Or we can look behind door #2 - maybe you're just not as good of a sorc as you think you are?

Your comment regarding top PvPers is laughable. Generally speaking, class disparities are a bigger issue at LOWER levels of competition where players do not know how to successfully counter the inherently powerful mechanics of a given class - this is where the majority of balance nerfs originate in any given MMO. Once you get to the highest tiers, class disparities are overcome by team play (with some exceptions here and there).
Edited by: noctred 12 months ago
Dannicus Profile Options #78

0
0
Neutral
Morgan.Manjaw Lvl.60
Mount Tyrannas (PVP)
Castanic Priest
noctred on 06/11/2012, 12:16 PM - view
Dannicus on 06/11/2012, 11:48 AM

Should I keep repeating this until you actually do address this point, or are you going to keep listing tools the sorcerer has that are far too easily countered, negated, or avoided given equal skill which is exactly the problem?


I'm not really even sure what you want me to say to you.

I addressed the point. You and Vunak apparently claim that sorcerers can never, ever, ever beat slayers, warriors, or lancers assuming both players have a brain - and because of this inability, they become incapable of doing anything in groups when matched against teams with those classes on them.
As we keep informing you, the problems that crop up in 1v1 extend into group PvP. The sorcerer's escape and control tools are not up to par with a warrior's, slayer's, or lancer's chase and control tools, just as the zerker's chase and control are not up to par with the aforementioned. That's the key problem. We have to rely much, much too heavily on our team mates to perform optimally when other classes are self sufficient. Kiting classes need to have competitive escape mechanics against chasers and zerkers need to have competitive chase and/or lockdown mechanics that all three other melee classes have in spades.

I'm telling you that sorcs can, in fact, beat those classes 1v1. Consequently, this means that sorcs can, in fact, get things done when matched against teams with those classes on them.

And I'm telling you that given equal skill the likelihood of that is entirely too small. Everything the sorc has to create distance underperforms severely against a slayer's, warrior's, or lancer's ability to close distance. They can't get the room they need unless a mistake is made, and even then, all three classes have tools to get around a sorcerer's counter. Zerkers are the same what with our extremely small resistance to every form of control, the ease of which are attacks are predicted and evaded, and the ease of which they are countered through flinching or CC.

You're telling me that nope, not possible because the duels and deathmatches I've been in and/or spectated have obviously been against baddies. I'm sorry bro, that's not a good argument against anything.

There isn't even anything else to argue here since you have an utter defeatist perspective towards this class.

The argument is that sorcerers, zerkers, archers, and priests lack the self sufficiency of the other four classes. Priest and Archer may be a bit less so or at least have fewer situations of absolute team reliance, but zerkers and sorcerers flat out do not have the tools to commit to their rolls without disproportional precision and reliance on team mates. You keep pretending like we're arguing they can't 1v1, but that's not the argument. The argument is they can't perform optimally on their own. They are not self sufficient. They become a liability due to the consistency of performance another class could bring to the table. A zerker may have some huge spike damage, but that doesn't mean a thing if he must rely so heavily on his team to set up any chance achieving it. A sorc may have some great area prowess, but that doesn't mean a thing when he must rely so heavily on his team to set up any chance of achieving it. Why bother with either when they must be baby sat like this when they can be swapped for another class with more utility and more consistency of damage potential due to self sufficiency?
Leiloni Profile Options #79

0
0
Neutral
Leiloni Lvl.60
Lake of Tears (PVP)
Castanic Priest
I can't believe you guys are still talking about this.
noctred Profile Options #80

0
0
Neutral
Dannicus on 06/11/2012, 01:54 PM - view
You keep pretending like we're arguing they can't 1v1, but that's not the argument.


I'm pretty sure that's Vunak's argument. Have you read his posts lately?

Anyways -

Dannicus

We have to rely much, much too heavily on our team mates to perform optimally when other classes are self sufficient.


Yeah. However, like I've said multiple times, self-sufficient classes cannot do on their own what a reliant class can do with proper support. There's a tradeoff here that you seem to be ignoring. Teams with sorcs cannot play in the same way that teams with only slayers and warriors can play. You turtle, you survive, you play defensively, and you attempt to extend the other team until you see an opportunity open up - and then you turn the fight around because a window now exists for a dominant zone control class to do what he needs to do.

My entire point is that reliance isn't a big deal when the payoff is far larger than what a self-sufficient, non-reliant class can ever hope to achieve.

Dannicus

And I'm telling you that given equal skill the likelihood of that is entirely too small. Everything the sorc has to create distance underperforms severely against a slayer's, warrior's, or lancer's ability to close distance. They can't get the room they need unless a mistake is made, and even then, all three classes have tools to get around a sorcerer's counter.


This would be really cool if we were all robots and lived inside a spreadsheet. Fortunately, we aren't, and it isn't. Theorycrafting belongs primarily in PvE, where things are nice and static. No matter how good of a PvPer you are, you will eventually get outplayed by somebody who's class you're supposed to counter - this is the nature of PvP. Some players are more adept at this than others, and can overcome their hard counters on a consistent basis.


Why bother with either when they must be baby sat like this when they can be swapped for another class with more utility and more consistency of damage potential due to self sufficiency?


Then swap your sorc out and be done with it. I have nothing vested in trying to convince you otherwise beyond what I've already said time and time again.