New BiS 178K DPS build (No BEAM)

Twohothardware

For those saying that Arcanist beam is the only viable option for DPS here’s a build that outperforms in Raids.

https://youtu.be/abT0kVItrak?si=don_YsxBLUTxraGr

BananaBender

On dummy, yes, I would love to see some proof of it overperforming beam in any of the newer raids.

Twohothardware

BananaBender wrote: »

On dummy, yes, I would love to see some proof of it overperforming beam in any of the newer raids.

Charles is pretty experienced and goes into detail about the build and said this in one of his comments.

You can play Beam, it will be easier and you will still be able to get all your trifectas easely, but you will do more damage with this spec, by a wide margin in most raids.
So as it perform better and has no sustain disadvantage + its just a based spec like you have lot of pen and crit dmg + flexspot for cloak, I think it will be meta for most places whenever you want to do damage

ssewallb14_ESO

For most players 8% more single target DPS isn't going to be enough to justify much less AOE and a much higher skill ceiling compared to beam.

Nemesis7884

I hope for some skills and skill line rework to ptomote more diversity and not just blatant nerfs...but I also hope for a new class so I guess Im delusional anyway

sarahthes

Not gonna be the best build for anyone who can't light attack weave. Which is a lot of players.

sarahthes

BananaBender wrote: »

On dummy, yes, I would love to see some proof of it overperforming beam in any of the newer raids.

It'll be bad in slow groups, good in fast groups where you basically skip everything.

Desiato

sarahthes wrote: »

Not gonna be the best build for anyone who can't light attack weave. Which is a lot of players.

Swap Selene with velothi and one piece slimecraw and it's gonna do similar numbers. A decent player who can execute a full rotation can perform well with a build like this, even without optimal weaving. I've seen quite a few parses with similar builds and I'm sure you have too. It doesn't take an elite player like Charles. No, they probably won't out-parse Charles, but they can out-parse their beam builds. I have a guildmate running a similar build in a core to good effect.

Beam builds are popular among players because they're easy to perform well with and popular with raid leads because they make runs go smoother, not because they represent peak performance across the board. This game has a very casual, chill end game.

This is why beam isn't going to be nerfed. It is a distinct play style that is extremely popular. That's why like Dr. Strangelove, I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb beam -- because it's pointless to fight it.

If I had more clout in the open trial community, I'd definitely want to go down that path and will probably do so when I get into cores again.

Renato90085

What's the point of giving up AOE capability and 40+CPM for 8K more single target damage and 140 cpm?
old patch sorc can parse 140 and arc only 110,but we still not any sorc parse dd
you still in 95% combat use beam and maybe some single boss combat swap to this

BananaBender

There are already 175k+ parses with beam, making this only 3k better in single target at the expense of all form of cleave.
I'm sure builds like this will be seen in raids and they will do good damage in individual fights, because there is a quite large chunk of the endgame community who hate the arc beam playstyle and will play anything that isn't beam, but that doesn't mean beam isn't undoubtedly superior.

Here the beam parse I was talking about (credits to kingeight666 for the parse)

Morvan

Beam arcanist never was and likely never will be the strongest option for single target, that's why they get outparsed on the dummy, it's just 1 target.

It really gets to shine when you have multiple targets, which is honestly most trial fights, it doesn't matter if you're parsing high dps on a single target if the beam arcanist is hitting a little less but on each of the multiple targets, their DPS will skyrocket much beyond that.

Beam arcanist has an obnoxious range on an AoE skill that hits nearly as hard as the best single target setups, it's pretty tough to compete with them on scenarios with multiple targets.

Renato90085

BananaBender wrote: »

There are already 175k+ parses with beam, making this only 3k better in single target at the expense of all form of cleave.
I'm sure builds like this will be seen in raids and they will do good damage in individual fights, because there is a quite large chunk of the endgame community who hate the arc beam playstyle and will play anything that isn't beam, but that doesn't mean beam isn't undoubtedly superior.

Here the beam parse I was talking about (credits to kingeight666 for the parse)

he was also one of the people who knew about the subclass in April and proposed the beam meta within an hour..

BasP

There have been 175K - 180K+ parses with single target setups since the start of the PTS, so this new build really doesn't change much in my opinion. It might be the meta option for single target fights, but beam setups aren't too far behind and will outperform it in AOE fights.

To me, this just points to a bigger issue: Herald of the Tome and Assassination are overperforming compared to other skill lines, and I wouldn't mind it if they were brought inline somewhat (and clearly underperforming skill lines should still be buffed, of course).

Desiato

I suggest everyone read Charles' description because it includes a lot of relevant information. This isn't a dummy parse build. It is a content build.

In addition to what he's posted, dummy parses don't tell the full story. We all remember the rapid strikes/vma 2h parses that no one actually used in content. However, even though he uses highland sentinel, this is a functional and viable build with bistat food in content. He uses highland just to normalize the results against other dummy parses. It is not what he suggests for content.

He notes in particular it is highly sustainable. Coming from Charles, this means a lot. To those who don't know, he's a record holder-level player and probably one of the best and most knowledgeable. He's not talking out of his bum.

Not a lot of players can run vma 2h and exhausting fatecarver in content. It can be difficult to sustain. Apparently his build doesn't suffer from this problem.

Beam builds have a fundamental weakness in that they don't handle encounters with interrupts well, so it is truly an advantage to play a build without a channel at times. Even outside of that, a non-channel build offers much more flexibility to respond and react.

This is the same argument I've seen for at least the last year, but I know from Wildheart content parses -- as opposed to dummy parses -- and record runs on youtube, there has always been more viable build diversity than the average player thinks there is. That's not to say every top end player was running a non-beam full rotation build, but it was shown over and over again they represent the ceiling.

Yes, the tradeoff is very low. Especially when using pragmatic fatecarver which has become standard again. Frankly, it's like having training wheels. But with that said It's important to recognize beam builds are so popular not because they're overtly OP, but because they're easy. Players can choose to play other builds and perform better in arguably most cases if they are adaptive enough.

Beam are a middle ground between HA builds and a full rotation. I would guess beam was specifically engineered to be exactly that. They were actually nerfed in u46. U45 beam builds were ridiculously easy.

sarahthes

Desiato wrote: »

I suggest everyone read Charles' description because it includes a lot of relevant information. This isn't a dummy parse build. It is a content build.

In addition to what he's posted, dummy parses don't tell the full story. We all remember the rapid strikes/vma 2h parses that no one actually used in content. However, even though he uses highland sentinel, this is a functional and viable build with bistat food in content. He uses highland just to normalize the results against other dummy parses. It is not what he suggests for content.

He notes in particular it is highly sustainable. Coming from Charles, this means a lot. To those who don't know, he's a record holder-level player and probably one of the best and most knowledgeable. He's not talking out of his bum.

Not a lot of players can run vma 2h and exhausting fatecarver in content. It can be difficult to sustain. Apparently his build doesn't suffer from this problem.

Beam builds have a fundamental weakness in that they don't handle encounters with interrupts well, so it is truly an advantage to play a build without a channel at times. Even outside of that, a non-channel build offers much more flexibility to respond and react.

This is the same argument I've seen for at least the last year, but I know from Wildheart content parses -- as opposed to dummy parses -- and record runs on youtube, there has always been more viable build diversity than the average player thinks there is. That's not to say every top end player was running a non-beam full rotation build, but it was shown over and over again they represent the ceiling.

Yes, the tradeoff is very low. Especially when using pragmatic fatecarver which has become standard again. Frankly, it's like having training wheels. But with that said It's important to recognize beam builds are so popular not because they're overtly OP, but because they're easy. Players can choose to play other builds and perform better in arguably most cases if they are adaptive enough.

Beam are a middle ground between HA builds and a full rotation. I would guess beam was specifically engineered to be exactly that. They were actually nerfed in u46. U45 beam builds were ridiculously easy.

While Charles does know what he's doing of course, I will say - a lot of these record holding players are kind of disconnected from the reality of the average player. Their builds are also. The average player will do less damage even in a single target fight in one of these hyper optimized single target builds than they will in an 'aoe/cleave' beam build.

Basically its a pretty big learning curve. It's one thing to use that build well on the dummy. It's another to use it well in content, and also to recognize which content it is appropriate for. We did a 0 portal cloudrest a few weeks back and had a world record holder DD come in on a single target dread build, and he wound up changing off it after a few pulls because the build wasn't suited to a galenwe skip; the minis didn't die on time. The build would have been fine on a triple skip though, as long as there were at least 2-3 arc beamers to kill the one creeper and the one set of orbs that came up.

Dino-Jr

Been really enjoying no beam tentacular dread arcanist for a couple weeks now, though I didnt have it built out anywhere near as well or as awesome as this is. Definitely prefer the way it spends crux instantly compared to beam since it lets me engage with other abilities. I have been using the class mastery script to build crux without using runeblade since i find its animation more awkward than something like knife throw and with multi attack I get some really nice AOE dmg out of it + dread.

This will sound strange but for PVE I have found Tentacular Dread honestly less awkward to play than the beam stuff, certainly more fun. Rotation feels lots more flexible and im getting excellent AOE Burst damage while still being able to use roll as much as I need to.

Renato90085

Desiato wrote: »

I suggest everyone read Charles' description because it includes a lot of relevant information. This isn't a dummy parse build. It is a content build.

In addition to what he's posted, dummy parses don't tell the full story. We all remember the rapid strikes/vma 2h parses that no one actually used in content. However, even though he uses highland sentinel, this is a functional and viable build with bistat food in content. He uses highland just to normalize the results against other dummy parses. It is not what he suggests for content.

He notes in particular it is highly sustainable. Coming from Charles, this means a lot. To those who don't know, he's a record holder-level player and probably one of the best and most knowledgeable. He's not talking out of his bum.

Not a lot of players can run vma 2h and exhausting fatecarver in content. It can be difficult to sustain. Apparently his build doesn't suffer from this problem.

Beam builds have a fundamental weakness in that they don't handle encounters with interrupts well, so it is truly an advantage to play a build without a channel at times. Even outside of that, a non-channel build offers much more flexibility to respond and react.

This is the same argument I've seen for at least the last year, but I know from Wildheart content parses -- as opposed to dummy parses -- and record runs on youtube, there has always been more viable build diversity than the average player thinks there is. That's not to say every top end player was running a non-beam full rotation build, but it was shown over and over again they represent the ceiling.

Yes, the tradeoff is very low. Especially when using pragmatic fatecarver which has become standard again. Frankly, it's like having training wheels. But with that said It's important to recognize beam builds are so popular not because they're overtly OP, but because they're easy. Players can choose to play other builds and perform better in arguably most cases if they are adaptive enough.

Beam are a middle ground between HA builds and a full rotation. I would guess beam was specifically engineered to be exactly that. They were actually nerfed in u46. U45 beam builds were ridiculously easy.

In fact,I think it tell us why beam can't leave meta,because you can own best single/aoe skill and easy have heal/Shield/low cpm in a dd line ,it other class dd line can't did and you can't give up
and Top0.1% player (666 and Charles ) can in they high cpm and skill do more 3k dps it not a good reason,we not many good player have all trial trifectas /have high cpm skill do more 3k new meta,high cpm mean if you are a normal player do some mistack in parse ,you will lost lot of Dps in combat
sure, old patch we some combat run mk sorc and temp run st dmg,but I can't see this build better than beam in VLC or VDSR HM, maybe Tideborn Taleria hm can use ,but now we can use beam skip 3 bridge, why we need more st dps?

Renato90085

sarahthes wrote: »

Desiato wrote: »

I suggest everyone read Charles' description because it includes a lot of relevant information. This isn't a dummy parse build. It is a content build.

In addition to what he's posted, dummy parses don't tell the full story. We all remember the rapid strikes/vma 2h parses that no one actually used in content. However, even though he uses highland sentinel, this is a functional and viable build with bistat food in content. He uses highland just to normalize the results against other dummy parses. It is not what he suggests for content.

He notes in particular it is highly sustainable. Coming from Charles, this means a lot. To those who don't know, he's a record holder-level player and probably one of the best and most knowledgeable. He's not talking out of his bum.

Not a lot of players can run vma 2h and exhausting fatecarver in content. It can be difficult to sustain. Apparently his build doesn't suffer from this problem.

Beam builds have a fundamental weakness in that they don't handle encounters with interrupts well, so it is truly an advantage to play a build without a channel at times. Even outside of that, a non-channel build offers much more flexibility to respond and react.

This is the same argument I've seen for at least the last year, but I know from Wildheart content parses -- as opposed to dummy parses -- and record runs on youtube, there has always been more viable build diversity than the average player thinks there is. That's not to say every top end player was running a non-beam full rotation build, but it was shown over and over again they represent the ceiling.

Yes, the tradeoff is very low. Especially when using pragmatic fatecarver which has become standard again. Frankly, it's like having training wheels. But with that said It's important to recognize beam builds are so popular not because they're overtly OP, but because they're easy. Players can choose to play other builds and perform better in arguably most cases if they are adaptive enough.

Beam are a middle ground between HA builds and a full rotation. I would guess beam was specifically engineered to be exactly that. They were actually nerfed in u46. U45 beam builds were ridiculously easy.

While Charles does know what he's doing of course, I will say - a lot of these record holding players are kind of disconnected from the reality of the average player. Their builds are also. The average player will do less damage even in a single target fight in one of these hyper optimized single target builds than they will in an 'aoe/cleave' beam build.

Basically its a pretty big learning curve. It's one thing to use that build well on the dummy. It's another to use it well in content, and also to recognize which content it is appropriate for. We did a 0 portal cloudrest a few weeks back and had a world record holder DD come in on a single target dread build, and he wound up changing off it after a few pulls because the build wasn't suited to a galenwe skip; the minis didn't die on time. The build would have been fine on a triple skip though, as long as there were at least 2-3 arc beamers to kill the one creeper and the one set of orbs that came up.

True...