DPS discrepancy between classes (courtesy of ESO Logs)

Varana

Also, "being able to clear normal trials" is absolutely not what this discussion is about. If that were the criterion, then the OP would've been totally fine even with the skewed data he chose: Werewolves are at the bottom but fine for clearing trials, everyone else is even better, so all builds are good to play.
That's not what I read from OP's posts. ;D

Imperial_Voice

Varana wrote: »

Also, "being able to clear normal trials" is absolutely not what this discussion is about. If that were the criterion, then the OP would've been totally fine even with the skewed data he chose: Werewolves are at the bottom but fine for clearing trials, everyone else is even better, so all builds are good to play.
That's not what I read from OP's posts. ;D

In PvE. PvP is a bit different, more chaotic.

MartiniDaniels

FakeFox wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

FakeFox wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

FakeFox wrote: »

Werewolf is not a functional build and should not be included. Otherwise you should also include drunken Nord fistfighters and alike.

Do we have drunken Nord skill lines ? Or drunken Nord sets ?

Why do elitists force me to wear armor and use skills? I want to play the way I want!

Point is there are many theoretical playstyles that simply don't work for obvious reasons and there is no point in including them. Werewolf has a skillline and fitting gear, however that does not make it a functioning build that should be a part of endgame DPS. Werewolf does not have proper DPS Skills and a rotation that is literally one button. So in terms of rotation Werewolf and drunken Nord are the same. But thanks for questioning obvious jokes.

People had completed ALL normal trials with WW only ( or majority) groups. So ww is absolutely FUNCTIONING build. That is my point.

If that's your criteria, fine. But overbuffed to the point where it does decent single target damage without even having a rotation, basically doing nothing but spaming light attack is not my definition of a functioning build. And this "playstyle" that was somewhat viable for one or two patches has since been nerfed again, in my opinion rightly so, to the point where it is not viable anymore. And werewolf is not the only example, it's just the most ridiculous one.

And nonetheless pet-sorc and magplar do more damage then magblade and magDK, though rotation of latter two is more complicated. So don't tell ZOS made this purposefully, it was like always collateral damage due to PVP nerf.

kojou

NupidStoob wrote: »

Also gotta keep in mind who plays these classes. Score guilds will bring 8 stamcros and since those are all really good players the numbers are obviously higher. No score running guild would brings werewolfes or anything too much offmeta, so these are numbers from casuals. This is in no way a real representation of current DPS differences.

xaraan wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

A few caveats of what you've posted.
1. These are rankings only for Sunspire. As such, the extrapolation of these results may be limited.
2. This is not true DPS but relative rankings. So it is not a 20k raw DPS difference as you are stating, but rather that the bottom spec is performing at 80 percent relative performance to the top group. I have to double check with the maker of the site, but rankings do include DPS, but may also include other factors.
3. This only includes people who have enabled logging. As such, there may be some selection bias in place.

Class balance has been overall pretty good. Is there some disparity between the top and bottom? Sure, and there always will be due to the nature of MMOs and balance. But this is a touch better than what things have looked like in the past. Tone down Major Vuln a bit, fix the PotL bug, and class balance will be pretty gucci.

One note: You don't have to enable logging, It logs everything. They just show up as anonymous and you can tell what class (and essentially who it is) from the info listed.

Somebody still has to upload these logs. Casual groups are a lot less likely to upload them and if nobody does it in a group there are no statistic, so yes there is bias like Asian said.

So only casuals run werewolf and no casuals upload data?

So did casuals actually upload data or did elites actually run werewolf, contrary to what you said?

CambionDaemon

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

MartiniDaniels

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

CambionDaemon

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

Thanks, I assumed as much. I hardly see any none pet sorcs nowadays.

MartiniDaniels

CambionDaemon wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

Thanks, I assumed as much. I hardly see any none pet sorcs nowadays.

Yep, Zoo and Cleric do more damage then 2 true mages (necromancer and non-pet sorc), dragon and magical assassin. Ugh, and more then a druid of course.

CambionDaemon

I am a dying breed! Not sure what I am going to do with my Necromancer, I want to go magicka (because necro's are magicka) but will probably have to go stamina.

Royaji

CambionDaemon wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

Thanks, I assumed as much. I hardly see any none pet sorcs nowadays.

I think at this point ZOS has made it pretty clear that non-pet sorc is something along the lines of non-Assassin's Will magblade or non-whip DK.

CambionDaemon

Royaji wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

Thanks, I assumed as much. I hardly see any none pet sorcs nowadays.

I think at this point ZOS has made it pretty clear that non-pet sorc is something along the lines of non-Assassin's Will magblade or non-whip DK.

I think that you are right. At this point Zos should just split the sorc into two classes, and just change one skill line (daedric summoning) into an offensive battle magic line with a proper ward (from the original games)

MLGProPlayer

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

MartiniDaniels

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from.

Yep, and given that it matches dummy parses pretty well, it's not hard to guess that stamnecro and 2-pet sorc are broken. And fact that devs "forgot" about magwarden.. idk, reading actively forum and various info from ZOS in last half-year I don't remember a single word about PVE magwarden,..

T3hasiangod

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

No. Esologs does not differentiate between petsorcs and non-petsorc.

If you

1. Are a sorc
2. Have more magicka than stamina
3. Do more damage than healing

Then you are considered a Magicka Sorcerer DPS

T3hasiangod

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

MLGProPlayer

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from.

Yep, and given that it matches dummy parses pretty well, it's not hard to guess that stamnecro and 2-pet sorc are broken. And fact that devs "forgot" about magwarden.. idk, reading actively forum and various info from ZOS in last half-year I don't remember a single word about PVE magwarden,..

Magden has been the worst DPS class since it launched and has been completely ignored by ZOS.

There is a reason why it had 59 parses in that sample compared to 2k+ from other classes. They are hot garbage.

cheifsoap

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

MartiniDaniels

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

No. Esologs does not differentiate between petsorcs and non-petsorc.

If you

1. Are a sorc
2. Have more magicka than stamina
3. Do more damage than healing

Then you are considered a Magicka Sorcerer DPS

Thanks, I understand this. But I can count amount of pets in trial and they increase with every patch. There were mostly birds in U21. And now for example in my yesterday's group I had 3 magsorcs, 3 birds, 3 monkeys, 3 atro. Trial community adjusts to changes very fast and fights for each point of dps even on my, progression level.

T3hasiangod

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

No. Esologs does not differentiate between petsorcs and non-petsorc.

If you

1. Are a sorc
2. Have more magicka than stamina
3. Do more damage than healing

Then you are considered a Magicka Sorcerer DPS

Thanks, I understand this. But I can count amount of pets in trial and they increase with every patch. There were mostly birds in U21. And now for example in my yesterday's group I had 3 magsorcs, 3 birds, 3 monkeys, 3 atro. Trial community adjusts to changes very fast and fights for each point of dps even on my, progression level.

One data point does not a trend make.

While 2-pet sorcs are stronger now than they have been, in my groups, our sorcs are only running 1 pet builds. Does this mean that I'm right and you're wrong?

No, it just means that our single data points are not in agreement.

Runefang

cheifsoap wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

Nobody cares what suboptimal set ups (be it group, gear or rotation) pull in terms of dps. You just can’t conclude much from 59 Magden parses other than not many people who are in groups with publicly loaded logs run a Magden.

What you definitely can’t assume is that the top 1% of Magden parses (1 person) is equivalent to the top 1% of Stamblade parses (20 people). That top Magden result is highly unlikely to be representative of the class dps ceiling. Heck the Stamblade is also unlikely to be representative of the ceiling.

Aside from obviously bad data interpretation the other reason to disagree with the conclusion that the game balance is that bad is that Liko pulls numbers on all the classes which are closer to each other. At least I know he is closer to the Magden ceiling on the 21m dummy than the lone Magden parse on esologs.

Again I don’t disagree that class imbalance exists, I’m just disagreeing that it’s as bad as it’s being made out to be.

cheifsoap

Runefang wrote: »

cheifsoap wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

Nobody cares what suboptimal set ups (be it group, gear or rotation) pull in terms of dps.

Right that's my point, as a matter of fact it adds nothing useful to the data set. I don't know how to abstracted that other stuff from my reply though..

MartiniDaniels

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

CambionDaemon wrote: »

So is the MagSorc in that colourful chart the petsorc or the proper sorc? Time to buff magicka anyway.

It's 2-pet sorc.

No. Esologs does not differentiate between petsorcs and non-petsorc.

If you

1. Are a sorc
2. Have more magicka than stamina
3. Do more damage than healing

Then you are considered a Magicka Sorcerer DPS

Thanks, I understand this. But I can count amount of pets in trial and they increase with every patch. There were mostly birds in U21. And now for example in my yesterday's group I had 3 magsorcs, 3 birds, 3 monkeys, 3 atro. Trial community adjusts to changes very fast and fights for each point of dps even on my, progression level.

One data point does not a trend make.

While 2-pet sorcs are stronger now than they have been, in my groups, our sorcs are only running 1 pet builds. Does this mean that I'm right and you're wrong?

No, it just means that our single data points are not in agreement.

I don't know why they run with 1 pet, probably at some level of skill 1-pet became more powerful then 2-pet.

MLGProPlayer

Runefang wrote: »

cheifsoap wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

Nobody cares what suboptimal set ups (be it group, gear or rotation) pull in terms of dps. You just can’t conclude much from 59 Magden parses other than not many people who are in groups with publicly loaded logs run a Magden.

What you definitely can’t assume is that the top 1% of Magden parses (1 person) is equivalent to the top 1% of Stamblade parses (20 people). That top Magden result is highly unlikely to be representative of the class dps ceiling. Heck the Stamblade is also unlikely to be representative of the ceiling.

Aside from obviously bad data interpretation the other reason to disagree with the conclusion that the game balance is that bad is that Liko pulls numbers on all the classes which are closer to each other. At least I know he is closer to the Magden ceiling on the 21m dummy than the lone Magden parse on esologs.

Again I don’t disagree that class imbalance exists, I’m just disagreeing that it’s as bad as it’s being made out to be.

There is already a huge problem in the fact that in a sample of 8,000+, only 59 players are using a magden.

People don't just randomly choose not to play magden because they don't like the nature theme or the ability colours. They don't play magden because it sucks. Badly. It provides the lowest DPS of any class and absolutely no group utility.

It's also a class that sees its DPS go down in actual content (from dummy parses) because pet AI doesn't perfectly track moving targets and gets interrupted by mechanics.

SidraWillowsky

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

Have you ever in your life taken a statistics course? I'm guessing no, because if you had, you'd know about confounding variables. Let's play a game:

What's wrong with drawing definitive conclusions from the following two graphs?





No, higher ice cream sales don't cause higher murder rates or vice versa- there is a variable that accounts for both increases: season. Murder rates are higher in the summer, as are ice cream sales.

The ironic thing is that YOU are the one interpreting the data to fit your narrative by choosing to ignore any factors aside from class that may be affecting those numbers.

Looking at your chart, sure, some classes are more popular and tend to be considered stronger. No one is refuting that. The issue, however, is that you're not thinking about those factors- the popular, "stronger" classes are probably going to be played more frequently by the "pros". The "pros" are probably going to be running Sunspire more frequently for the scores. What I'm saying is that the percentage of top players playing on stamDKs or stamSorcs is going to be higher than the percentage of top players using some of the lower-DPS classes. And since these guys pull insanely high numbers, those are going to inflate the mean, and inflate it more for the classes that they're playing more frequently. That's one factor that I think may be at play, but in the end we don't know enough about the data to conclude that, which applies to your OP as well.

Also, LOL:
Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have.

I'm a statistician and I work in public health. One of my projects is working with data from children who have come into contact with the child welfare system who have been tracked over time to examine the effect of the CW system on social/emotional/behavioral outcomes. The data can be really messy sometimes, but if we sat back and said "oh, we'll work with what we have without any critical thinking whatsoever", the impact of any analyses done haphazardly could very well make a negative impact on the lives of children later on. My example is much more serious than yours but jesus, everything you've stated as a fact about data and analysis has been wildly incorrect.

MLGProPlayer

SidraWillowsky wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

Have you ever in your life taken a statistics course? I'm guessing no, because if you had, you'd know about confounding variables. Let's play a game:

What's wrong with drawing definitive conclusions from the following two graphs?





No, higher ice cream sales don't cause higher murder rates or vice versa- there is a variable that accounts for both increases: season. Murder rates are higher in the summer, as are ice cream sales.

The ironic thing is that YOU are the one interpreting the data to fit your narrative by choosing to ignore any factors aside from class that may be affecting those numbers.

Looking at your chart, sure, some classes are more popular and tend to be considered stronger. No one is refuting that. The issue, however, is that you're not thinking about those factors- the popular, "stronger" classes are probably going to be played more frequently by the "pros". The "pros" are probably going to be running Sunspire more frequently for the scores. What I'm saying is that the percentage of top players playing on stamDKs or stamSorcs is going to be higher than the percentage of top players using some of the lower-DPS classes. And since these guys pull insanely high numbers, those are going to inflate the mean, and inflate it more for the classes that they're playing more frequently. That's one factor that I think may be at play, but in the end we don't know enough about the data to conclude that, which applies to your OP as well.

Also, LOL:
Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have.

I'm a statistician and I work in public health. One of my projects is working with data from children who have come into contact with the child welfare system who have been tracked over time to examine the effect of the CW system on social/emotional/behavioral outcomes. The data can be really messy sometimes, but if we sat back and said "oh, we'll work with what we have without any critical thinking whatsoever", the impact of any analyses done haphazardly could very well make a negative impact on the lives of children later on. My example is much more serious than yours but jesus, everything you've stated as a fact about data and analysis has been wildly incorrect.

I'm a PhD student. I'm well aware of how to interpret data.

But comparing public health data to *** video game damage stats is laughable.

You can often improve the quality of data in the real world (especially if you're the one collecting it). In a game where you are at the mercy of the developer and the limited tools they provide you, there is only so much you can do with it, and only so much effort you're going to put into it. Nobody is publishing a *** peer reviewed paper with this data.

MartiniDaniels

Runefang wrote: »

cheifsoap wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

Nobody cares what suboptimal set ups (be it group, gear or rotation) pull in terms of dps. You just can’t conclude much from 59 Magden parses other than not many people who are in groups with publicly loaded logs run a Magden.

What you definitely can’t assume is that the top 1% of Magden parses (1 person) is equivalent to the top 1% of Stamblade parses (20 people). That top Magden result is highly unlikely to be representative of the class dps ceiling. Heck the Stamblade is also unlikely to be representative of the ceiling.

Aside from obviously bad data interpretation the other reason to disagree with the conclusion that the game balance is that bad is that Liko pulls numbers on all the classes which are closer to each other. At least I know he is closer to the Magden ceiling on the 21m dummy than the lone Magden parse on esologs.

Again I don’t disagree that class imbalance exists, I’m just disagreeing that it’s as bad as it’s being made out to be.

Sigh, 16k dps difference, "same numbers"

MartiniDaniels

Well, I may understand people who will say that this is usual state of ZOS and each year different class vastly prevail in PVE.
But to tell that they all are balanced in any way.. yes, they are re-balanced for PVP, without much consideration how this will work in PVE.

kargen27

The data means nothing if each class isn't being played by the same player. What you need is at least 100 parses of each class by the same person with the same group providing the same buffs and debuffs.
Then you need to do that several more times with different people also doing all classes with the same group.

And to get fair numbers the person doing the testing would need to be proficient with each class. You can't expect someone who spent hours and hours on a practice dummy perfecting his rotation on a DK to give you fair numbers on a nightblade they have barely played.

MLGProPlayer

kargen27 wrote: »

The data means nothing if each class isn't being played by the same player. What you need is at least 100 parses of each class by the same person with the same group providing the same buffs and debuffs.
Then you need to do that several more times with different people also doing all classes with the same group.

And to get fair numbers the person doing the testing would need to be proficient with each class. You can't expect someone who spent hours and hours on a practice dummy perfecting his rotation on a DK to give you fair numbers on a nightblade they have barely played.

Which you're never going to get. We have dummy parses from a variety of top players. And now we have trials data

Both highlight a huge balance problem.

You can disregard the data because it isn't perfect (and it will never be perfect), or you could use it to base an informed discussion on balance (which is objectively terrible in this game).

Even if you don't want to use the DPS numbers, you can just look at the usage stats. 59 magden parses in a sample of 8,000+. If that doesn't tell you that something is very wrong with the class, I don't know what does.

T3hasiangod

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

Runefang wrote: »

cheifsoap wrote: »

T3hasiangod wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

@ at all the folks saying this data is misleading because it doesn't fit their narrative that the game is perfectly balanced.

Lesson in data analysis: you're rarely going to find perfect data. Sometimes you need to work with what you have. This is the best we're going to have, and it's good enough to draw conclusions from. It's almost as if there is a different standard for collecting data for a dissertation and publication and analyzing video game balance.

No, this is not good enough to draw definitive conclusions. It is enough to say that this is the DPS trend for Sunspire, but not for drawing conclusions on overall DPS balance.

Good video btw, bro. Quick comment; why should anyone care about the "low end" dps for a specific class. No one cares about someone who messes up their rotation or has a laggy connection, as a matter of fact if anything it would be a bad metric to collect. IMO, you want the higher end of the dps scale because they are squeezing out the most dps they can on said trial. If ZOS were to balance with the low end in mind, you would have these uber players pulling crazy dps parses and what does that really do for "balance"? Not a whole lot

Nobody cares what suboptimal set ups (be it group, gear or rotation) pull in terms of dps. You just can’t conclude much from 59 Magden parses other than not many people who are in groups with publicly loaded logs run a Magden.

What you definitely can’t assume is that the top 1% of Magden parses (1 person) is equivalent to the top 1% of Stamblade parses (20 people). That top Magden result is highly unlikely to be representative of the class dps ceiling. Heck the Stamblade is also unlikely to be representative of the ceiling.

Aside from obviously bad data interpretation the other reason to disagree with the conclusion that the game balance is that bad is that Liko pulls numbers on all the classes which are closer to each other. At least I know he is closer to the Magden ceiling on the 21m dummy than the lone Magden parse on esologs.

Again I don’t disagree that class imbalance exists, I’m just disagreeing that it’s as bad as it’s being made out to be.

Sigh, 16k dps difference, "same numbers"

The difference is actually 7k for magicka DPS. For stamina DPS, using Liko's parses, the disparity is is 8k. It is not "16k dps difference" because you cannot compare magicka to stamina DPS. Is that a noticeable difference? Yes. Is it a meaningful difference? Not really, unless you're in one of the maybe half a dozen guilds that compete for world records between both PC/NA and PC/EU.