Maintenance for the week of November 18:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
DPS discrepancy between classes (courtesy of ESO Logs)
-
Kolzki✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »Bouldercleave wrote: »Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps the combat team isn't all that interested in complete equality of all the classes and really don't care if more people play Stamina vs Magicka?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not sure that anyone at ZoS REALLY cares that there are more of one class over another or if the DPS is equal across all the classes.
They mat tell you they care, but what really matters to them is the total number of players that keep logging in. As long as that number is acceptable and remains acceptable, why would they prioritize changes? If there are 1,000,000 players (just an example number) would they really care that 990,000 of them are the same?
This game is still raking in big bucks for them and may have already outlasted their expectations (MANY games don't make it anywhere near the 5 year mark). This game is still going strong and I'm not convinced that stuff like this is even on their radar anymore.
They pay a team of full-time workers to work on balance. Might as well get the most bang for your buck by creating as balanced a game as possible. You're not going to lose players with more balance. You only stand to gain players/lose fewer.
I guess that depends whether the aim is to make everything equal or to keep things interesting by gradually moving the meta.0 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »Bouldercleave wrote: »Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps the combat team isn't all that interested in complete equality of all the classes and really don't care if more people play Stamina vs Magicka?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not sure that anyone at ZoS REALLY cares that there are more of one class over another or if the DPS is equal across all the classes.
They mat tell you they care, but what really matters to them is the total number of players that keep logging in. As long as that number is acceptable and remains acceptable, why would they prioritize changes? If there are 1,000,000 players (just an example number) would they really care that 990,000 of them are the same?
This game is still raking in big bucks for them and may have already outlasted their expectations (MANY games don't make it anywhere near the 5 year mark). This game is still going strong and I'm not convinced that stuff like this is even on their radar anymore.
They pay a team of full-time workers to work on balance. Might as well get the most bang for your buck by creating as balanced a game as possible. You're not going to lose players with more balance. You only stand to gain players/lose fewer.
I guess that depends whether the aim is to make everything equal or to keep things interesting by gradually moving the meta.
Then they should've gradually move meta to magdens and magcros. But meta was moved back to sorcs.0 -
SidraWillowsky✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »
Actually, i work with such data every day and you are making assumptions about the data to make it fit your personal preconceptions.david_m_18b16_ESO wrote: »
This is why you cut the lower 95% of the parse so you only take in count the top5% of players of every class. That way the player skill are about the same.You can't make any definitive conclusions for class balance, unless you have the same number of players for each class (and arguably the same players, since individual skill matters greatly) against a standardized test, like parsing on the atro dummy,
Basicaly the info provided is what poeple use to see balance in every dam MMOs. The naysayer here are probably just not used to work with such data.
For instance, it has apparently not occurred to you that a lot of the top players are most likely trying out Necromancer builds (new class and all that) which in turn means that a lot less of the top players are currently playing other classes.
In which case the data does *not* represent a true average of top players across all classes equally, in which case your conclusions are based on a (wrong) personal bias.
Sir, I worked with statistical data of millions measurements for several years too (mobile networks). And grim truth is that no matter how you will look at things, 16 dB, 16Mbps, 16k dps whatever is difference of huge magnitude when it is within borders of "100" which shows that one thing is notably worse then other and no matter how good you are at making reports and masking truth, report will look very bad.
Except it's not coming from a representative sample so we cannot conclude that the "true" population difference is actually 16k. If it *is* 16k? Yeah, that's unacceptable. I just don't think that that's the truth... there are a lot of factors influencing these numbers that we can't account for that I think are making the difference much larger than it is in truth.2 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SidraWillowsky wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »
Actually, i work with such data every day and you are making assumptions about the data to make it fit your personal preconceptions.david_m_18b16_ESO wrote: »
This is why you cut the lower 95% of the parse so you only take in count the top5% of players of every class. That way the player skill are about the same.You can't make any definitive conclusions for class balance, unless you have the same number of players for each class (and arguably the same players, since individual skill matters greatly) against a standardized test, like parsing on the atro dummy,
Basicaly the info provided is what poeple use to see balance in every dam MMOs. The naysayer here are probably just not used to work with such data.
For instance, it has apparently not occurred to you that a lot of the top players are most likely trying out Necromancer builds (new class and all that) which in turn means that a lot less of the top players are currently playing other classes.
In which case the data does *not* represent a true average of top players across all classes equally, in which case your conclusions are based on a (wrong) personal bias.
Sir, I worked with statistical data of millions measurements for several years too (mobile networks). And grim truth is that no matter how you will look at things, 16 dB, 16Mbps, 16k dps whatever is difference of huge magnitude when it is within borders of "100" which shows that one thing is notably worse then other and no matter how good you are at making reports and masking truth, report will look very bad.
Except it's not coming from a representative sample so we cannot conclude that the "true" population difference is actually 16k. If it *is* 16k? Yeah, that's unacceptable. I just don't think that that's the truth... there are a lot of factors influencing these numbers that we can't account for that I think are making the difference much larger than it is in truth.
This is a really funny situation. When magblade was overperforming sorc for 2k dps at 60k parse and only in hands of best players who may squeeze max from NB's bonuses from light attacks that was end of the world, which end up in 4 updates of NB nerfs in a row.
Now magsorc is 6k dps better then magblade at 90k parse, and well.. "that's ok, there are different factors you know, in real conditions player's skill decides etc etc'"4 -
Runefang✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »SidraWillowsky wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »
Actually, i work with such data every day and you are making assumptions about the data to make it fit your personal preconceptions.david_m_18b16_ESO wrote: »
This is why you cut the lower 95% of the parse so you only take in count the top5% of players of every class. That way the player skill are about the same.You can't make any definitive conclusions for class balance, unless you have the same number of players for each class (and arguably the same players, since individual skill matters greatly) against a standardized test, like parsing on the atro dummy,
Basicaly the info provided is what poeple use to see balance in every dam MMOs. The naysayer here are probably just not used to work with such data.
For instance, it has apparently not occurred to you that a lot of the top players are most likely trying out Necromancer builds (new class and all that) which in turn means that a lot less of the top players are currently playing other classes.
In which case the data does *not* represent a true average of top players across all classes equally, in which case your conclusions are based on a (wrong) personal bias.
Sir, I worked with statistical data of millions measurements for several years too (mobile networks). And grim truth is that no matter how you will look at things, 16 dB, 16Mbps, 16k dps whatever is difference of huge magnitude when it is within borders of "100" which shows that one thing is notably worse then other and no matter how good you are at making reports and masking truth, report will look very bad.
Except it's not coming from a representative sample so we cannot conclude that the "true" population difference is actually 16k. If it *is* 16k? Yeah, that's unacceptable. I just don't think that that's the truth... there are a lot of factors influencing these numbers that we can't account for that I think are making the difference much larger than it is in truth.
This is a really funny situation. When magblade was overperforming sorc for 2k dps at 60k parse and only in hands of best players who may squeeze max from NB's bonuses from light attacks that was end of the world, which end up in 4 updates of NB nerfs in a row.
Now magsorc is 6k dps better then magblade at 90k parse, and well.. "that's ok, there are different factors you know, in real conditions player's skill decides etc etc'"
Well dummy parses are at least consistent. Esologs are so full of variety as to be mostly meaningless for comparing classes. And no it’s not down to skill but group skill and composition have such a massive impact on your individual parse.1 -
Bouldercleave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »SidraWillowsky wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »
Actually, i work with such data every day and you are making assumptions about the data to make it fit your personal preconceptions.david_m_18b16_ESO wrote: »
This is why you cut the lower 95% of the parse so you only take in count the top5% of players of every class. That way the player skill are about the same.You can't make any definitive conclusions for class balance, unless you have the same number of players for each class (and arguably the same players, since individual skill matters greatly) against a standardized test, like parsing on the atro dummy,
Basicaly the info provided is what poeple use to see balance in every dam MMOs. The naysayer here are probably just not used to work with such data.
For instance, it has apparently not occurred to you that a lot of the top players are most likely trying out Necromancer builds (new class and all that) which in turn means that a lot less of the top players are currently playing other classes.
In which case the data does *not* represent a true average of top players across all classes equally, in which case your conclusions are based on a (wrong) personal bias.
Sir, I worked with statistical data of millions measurements for several years too (mobile networks). And grim truth is that no matter how you will look at things, 16 dB, 16Mbps, 16k dps whatever is difference of huge magnitude when it is within borders of "100" which shows that one thing is notably worse then other and no matter how good you are at making reports and masking truth, report will look very bad.
Except it's not coming from a representative sample so we cannot conclude that the "true" population difference is actually 16k. If it *is* 16k? Yeah, that's unacceptable. I just don't think that that's the truth... there are a lot of factors influencing these numbers that we can't account for that I think are making the difference much larger than it is in truth.
This is a really funny situation. When magblade was overperforming sorc for 2k dps at 60k parse and only in hands of best players who may squeeze max from NB's bonuses from light attacks that was end of the world, which end up in 4 updates of NB nerfs in a row.
Now magsorc is 6k dps better then magblade at 90k parse, and well.. "that's ok, there are different factors you know, in real conditions player's skill decides etc etc'"
Well dummy parses are at least consistent. Esologs are so full of variety as to be mostly meaningless for comparing classes. And no it’s not down to skill but group skill and composition have such a massive impact on your individual parse.
Very much this.
Even if they did want to create a perfect level of balance, there are just too many variables to make that happen.
Individual skill level
Group skill level
Group composition
Gear for both you AND the group
etc.
PLUS
You simply cannot balance the PvP and PvE together. You can say anything you want, but that task is impossible without creating a vanilla bland piece of garbage.
Edited by Bouldercleave on June 3, 2019 11:31PM3 -
SidraWillowsky✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »This is a really funny situation. When magblade was overperforming sorc for 2k dps at 60k parse and only in hands of best players who may squeeze max from NB's bonuses from light attacks that was end of the world, which end up in 4 updates of NB nerfs in a row.
Now magsorc is 6k dps better then magblade at 90k parse, and well.. "that's ok, there are different factors you know, in real conditions player's skill decides etc etc'"
NERF SORCS!!!
But really, I just want to know how the classes are performing in the hands of the general ESO player base... balance is certainly a big issue but these astronomically high DPS values are not at all realistically obtainable for 95% of players. Unless you parse on the iron atro dummy, which I don't actually consider to provide legit numbers.
1 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SidraWillowsky wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »This is a really funny situation. When magblade was overperforming sorc for 2k dps at 60k parse and only in hands of best players who may squeeze max from NB's bonuses from light attacks that was end of the world, which end up in 4 updates of NB nerfs in a row.
Now magsorc is 6k dps better then magblade at 90k parse, and well.. "that's ok, there are different factors you know, in real conditions player's skill decides etc etc'"
NERF SORCS!!!
But really, I just want to know how the classes are performing in the hands of the general ESO player base... balance is certainly a big issue but these astronomically high DPS values are not at all realistically obtainable for 95% of players. Unless you parse on the iron atro dummy, which I don't actually consider to provide legit numbers.
I agree that those iron atro parses are far from reality but now if we combine them with eso logs...
Anyway it's wrong when simpler rotation brings 7% more damage then more complex rotation, I mean what's point to play magblade now other then looking for some kind of personal challenge? Same for magwarden and magDK. You may said same for "year of magblade". Yep, that was bad, but now it will be year of magsorc for ranged slots, is it better? Not to say how all that ton of pets and lightnings impact lag in trial..0 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »Bouldercleave wrote: »Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps the combat team isn't all that interested in complete equality of all the classes and really don't care if more people play Stamina vs Magicka?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not sure that anyone at ZoS REALLY cares that there are more of one class over another or if the DPS is equal across all the classes.
They mat tell you they care, but what really matters to them is the total number of players that keep logging in. As long as that number is acceptable and remains acceptable, why would they prioritize changes? If there are 1,000,000 players (just an example number) would they really care that 990,000 of them are the same?
This game is still raking in big bucks for them and may have already outlasted their expectations (MANY games don't make it anywhere near the 5 year mark). This game is still going strong and I'm not convinced that stuff like this is even on their radar anymore.
They pay a team of full-time workers to work on balance. Might as well get the most bang for your buck by creating as balanced a game as possible. You're not going to lose players with more balance. You only stand to gain players/lose fewer.
I guess that depends whether the aim is to make everything equal or to keep things interesting by gradually moving the meta.
The meta hasn't changed much.
Top DPS has shuffled between NB, sorc, and templar.
DK has been the BiS tank since 2014.
Templar has been the BiS healer since 2014.
Magden has been the bottom DPS class for 2 years now.Edited by MLGProPlayer on June 3, 2019 11:43PM2 -
Kolzki✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: »Bouldercleave wrote: »Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps the combat team isn't all that interested in complete equality of all the classes and really don't care if more people play Stamina vs Magicka?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not sure that anyone at ZoS REALLY cares that there are more of one class over another or if the DPS is equal across all the classes.
They mat tell you they care, but what really matters to them is the total number of players that keep logging in. As long as that number is acceptable and remains acceptable, why would they prioritize changes? If there are 1,000,000 players (just an example number) would they really care that 990,000 of them are the same?
This game is still raking in big bucks for them and may have already outlasted their expectations (MANY games don't make it anywhere near the 5 year mark). This game is still going strong and I'm not convinced that stuff like this is even on their radar anymore.
They pay a team of full-time workers to work on balance. Might as well get the most bang for your buck by creating as balanced a game as possible. You're not going to lose players with more balance. You only stand to gain players/lose fewer.
I guess that depends whether the aim is to make everything equal or to keep things interesting by gradually moving the meta.
The meta hasn't changed much.
Top DPS has shuffled between NB, sorc, and templar.
DK has been the BiS tank since 2014.
Templar has been the BiS healer since 2014.
Magden has been the bottom DPS class for 2 years now.
Didn't you hear? Magdens are now better than magblades. Isn't that all that anybody wanted?
1 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: »Bouldercleave wrote: »Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps the combat team isn't all that interested in complete equality of all the classes and really don't care if more people play Stamina vs Magicka?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I'm not sure that anyone at ZoS REALLY cares that there are more of one class over another or if the DPS is equal across all the classes.
They mat tell you they care, but what really matters to them is the total number of players that keep logging in. As long as that number is acceptable and remains acceptable, why would they prioritize changes? If there are 1,000,000 players (just an example number) would they really care that 990,000 of them are the same?
This game is still raking in big bucks for them and may have already outlasted their expectations (MANY games don't make it anywhere near the 5 year mark). This game is still going strong and I'm not convinced that stuff like this is even on their radar anymore.
They pay a team of full-time workers to work on balance. Might as well get the most bang for your buck by creating as balanced a game as possible. You're not going to lose players with more balance. You only stand to gain players/lose fewer.
I guess that depends whether the aim is to make everything equal or to keep things interesting by gradually moving the meta.
The meta hasn't changed much.
Top DPS has shuffled between NB, sorc, and templar.
DK has been the BiS tank since 2014.
Templar has been the BiS healer since 2014.
Magden has been the bottom DPS class for 2 years now.
Didn't you hear? Magdens are now better than magblades. Isn't that all that anybody wanted?
They just joined us at the bottom. They'll leave eventually, while we stay here. Probably until the servers get taken down. Maybe magcros will keep us company.0 -
ecru✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magsorc has been really good since they buffed the pets, so for awhile now. It tends to overperform in raids because the pet literally never stops DPSing, so you've always got that extra edge even when you have a second of downtime or lag or whatever else. Doesn't help that the pet does a ridiculous amount of damage too.
Magcro is going to be under-represented in SS because Siphon doesn't hit any bosses, but then again that goes for the stam siphon too so I guess it isn't hurting stamcros. Boneyard is also still broken (three weeks now and no fix, thanks I guess?) and blastbones is still unreliable/inconsistent.
I don't expect any real changes though. Whoever is doing the class balancing really loves their magsorc, and not just in pve (i'm kidding.. kinda). Bug fixes would be nice though.Edited by ecru on June 4, 2019 12:46AMGryphon Heart
Godslayer
Dawnbringer2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: ».MLGProPlayer wrote: »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.
Good for you. However, some of your comments relating to how you have interpreted the data are called into question. The most obvious is the quote I provided below.
.MLGProPlayer wrote: »We have a DPS gap between the top and bottom class that is ~50%. Balance has never been worse in this game.
Not sure what firing Wrobel accomplished.
The SS you provided in the OP do not show any class getting only 50% of the damage of the top class. You would have to use the WW parses to back up your comment here and WWs are clearly not a class.
Granted, I do agree those SS do show to much difference between the classes that hopefully Zos will learn from, but your overall analysis has flaws as has been pointed out in this thread. As a MLG Pro player I expect you can see some of these points.
72k is the average parse for stamcro. 47k is the average parse for magden/magcro. That's a 53% discrepancy.
50% =/= half (if that's what you're thinking).
47k is 65% of 72k based on the old fashion math I learned way back in elementary school. That does not look like it is even close to 53% you are suggesting unless you are massaging the numbers.
50% of 72k would be 36k 36+36=72 It seems pretty simple.
Maybe you can detail that fancy math you are learning in your PhD program so us less learned people have a chance at understanding these funny numbers you are tossing around.
Again, I am not suggesting Zos is doing a great job managing this game. I think Matt has shown a lack of leadership skills. I am just pointing out the most glaring discrepancy of your analysis which is what some are calling into question here in this thread.
We are talking about the difference between two numbers...
Let's simplify things:
You need to increase magden/magcro DPS by 53% to get it to 72k (47k*1.53=72k). No one is saying that magden/magcro deal 50% of stamcro DPS. What's being said is that there is a 50% difference between them.
What're you're calculating is a 100% difference.
To be very clear, that is not what you were saying in what I quoted. Not even close. Writing is just as fundamental as the reading part but without the first worded properly the latter will gleam a very different meaning and appropriately so.
It does seem I have made my point clear and that you are beginning to understand the difference and that if you essentially flip things you have it right. Glad I could help.Edited by idk on June 4, 2019 2:13AM0 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: ».MLGProPlayer wrote: »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.
Good for you. However, some of your comments relating to how you have interpreted the data are called into question. The most obvious is the quote I provided below.
.MLGProPlayer wrote: »We have a DPS gap between the top and bottom class that is ~50%. Balance has never been worse in this game.
Not sure what firing Wrobel accomplished.
The SS you provided in the OP do not show any class getting only 50% of the damage of the top class. You would have to use the WW parses to back up your comment here and WWs are clearly not a class.
Granted, I do agree those SS do show to much difference between the classes that hopefully Zos will learn from, but your overall analysis has flaws as has been pointed out in this thread. As a MLG Pro player I expect you can see some of these points.
72k is the average parse for stamcro. 47k is the average parse for magden/magcro. That's a 53% discrepancy.
50% =/= half (if that's what you're thinking).
47k is 65% of 72k based on the old fashion math I learned way back in elementary school. That does not look like it is even close to 53% you are suggesting unless you are massaging the numbers.
50% of 72k would be 36k 36+36=72 It seems pretty simple.
Maybe you can detail that fancy math you are learning in your PhD program so us less learned people have a chance at understanding these funny numbers you are tossing around.
Again, I am not suggesting Zos is doing a great job managing this game. I think Matt has shown a lack of leadership skills. I am just pointing out the most glaring discrepancy of your analysis which is what some are calling into question here in this thread.
We are talking about the difference between two numbers...
Let's simplify things:
You need to increase magden/magcro DPS by 53% to get it to 72k (47k*1.53=72k). No one is saying that magden/magcro deal 50% of stamcro DPS. What's being said is that there is a 50% difference between them.
What're you're calculating is a 100% difference.
To be very clear, that is not what you were saying in what I quoted. Not even close. Writing is just as fundamental as the reading part but without the first worded properly the latter will gleam a very different meaning and appropriately so.
It does seem I have made my point clear and that you are beginning to understand the difference and that if you essentially flip things you have it right. Glad I could help.
That's exactly what I said in the post you quoted. As usual, you were wrong, and are now desperately backtracking.
Enjoy:MLGProPlayer wrote: »We have a DPS gap between the top and bottom class that is ~50%.gap [ gap ]
noun
a wide divergence or difference; disparity: the gap between expenses and income; the gap between ideals and actions.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/gapEdited by MLGProPlayer on June 4, 2019 3:35AM0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Wow, you still have it backwards. The lowest class dps is not 50% of the highest dps and you are just trying to back end your calculations to force the numbers to meet your agenda. That is bad statistics plain and simple. Twist it however you want but you are wrong.
BTW, I am not going to reply to your next attempt to say I am wrong, you can have the last word. Should have let you have it with your last post since it really did not say anything.Edited by idk on June 4, 2019 8:14AM0 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Wow, you still have it backwards. The lowest class dps is not 50% of the highest dps and you are just trying to back end your calculations to force the numbers to meet your agenda. That is bad statistics plain and simple. Twist it however you want but you are wrong.
BTW, I am not going to reply to your next attempt to say I am wrong, you can have the last word. Should have let you have it with your last post since it really did not say anything.
Dude, we're talking about grade school math here...
This wasn't ever a debate. You are completely and unequivocally wrong. You can't make up how math works.
[removed baiting comment]
50% of 72k is 36k.
The DIFFERENCE between 47k and 72k is 53%.
There are plenty of things to critique about the data (see the last 8 pages). I may not agree with it, but those are all sound arguments. [removed baiting comment]Edited by ZOS_JesC on June 4, 2019 2:19PM1 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭[removed quote]
Except you're presenting it the wrong way. A DIFFERENCE is always relative between two numbers, and when presented in proportions, it should always mention the reference.
"The difference between 47K and 72K is 53%" is a meaningless sentence, plain and simple.
You should say :
47K is 35% lower than 72K (since 47K is 65% of 72K)
OR
72K is 53% higher than 47K (since 72K is 153% of 47K).
The incorrect presentation of variations in percentage has been used forever by people trying to confuse people and make their biased point in the most impressive way possible.
Like, for instance : price of A rises from 10 to 10.1 from year0 to year1. And then to 10.3 from year1 to year2.
Honest people will say "price of A has risen by 3% from year0 to year2.
Manipulators will say that "the rise in price of A has increased by 100% from year1 to year2" !!
Looks to me that you've chosen the vaguely presented "53%" option because it was convenient for you to make your point.
That being said, would you please answer my question (which was repeated in varying forms by other posters in this thread) : Why does class balance matter in PvE ?
Top players/ min-maxers will choose the "best" class even if the difference was 0.001%, and for the rest of players, all classes can pull 45K DPS, which is more than enough to clear the entire game content, even in vet HM and whatnot.
Why should ZOS, in your opinion, care about class balance in PvE ?
Edited by ZOS_JesC on June 4, 2019 2:20PM1 -
Juhasow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I miss the good old days when people were able to look at the graph and understand the context of it plus make a small research to make data presented in said graphs reliable before jumping into conclussions.Edited by Juhasow on June 4, 2019 11:16AM2 -
Koronach✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: »This thread is the perfect demonstration of how people in the world perceive facts. Extremely biased and only in the direction of the person's own interest. Source criticism seems to be the hardest thing to learn.
What's the context of the data? Who are the players? What buffs were available? How good are they at their role (and how do you even measure that?)? Consistency? When I see this graph 100 questions pop up in my mind, questions that needs answers before I can draw an even somewhat precise conclusion. Without that information, the data is worthless.
But yeah, the world is burning, everything is a mess, nothing ever gets better, it was all better before, come and vote on my extremist conservative party and all the world's troubles will be solved. It has worked perfectly fine everywhere, I promise you
It's trials data from the top 1% of performers. It's extremely telling, looking at both raw performance numbers and usage rates, that there is a huge discrepancy between classes.
Yeah probably just as telling as the doomsday Altmer nerf you so happily spread across the forums for over a month, like a prophet in black robes. And look how that turned out.
I'm sorry if I'm sounding harsh, I don't know you in real life, but by the you you always sound here on the forums, talking negatively on a lot of stuff that turns out to be not even remotely as bad, gives me a hard time to take you seriously.
Racial balance was (and still is) an issue that needs attention.
Class balance has been an issue since day 1. We just have more tools than ever before to pinpoint the problems. Before ESO Logs, all we had to work with was in-game leader board data and personal anecdotes. Now we have raw evidence to support those personal anecdotes. The issues can't be ignored anymore.
I get that fanboys/girls will always say that issue X isn't an issue and that people should just shut up and play the game. But that's how games turn to ***. There needs to be informed discussion on the issues.
Racial passives has never been this close, you can say what you want about that. And all races will never perform equally good on all roles. What's the fun in that anyway?
Yeah, we need to have a discussion based on real facts, statistics and tests. You're not really contributing to that. If players like Liko, who standardize his tests with the same debuffs, and obviously are very consistent in his skill and rotation, can pull far better numbers than your graph can, what conclusions can be drawn by that? That your graph and data does not represent consistent player skill, buff uptime, gear, racials, and a million other variables.
You draw conclusions based on shallow facts. And you are spreading misinformation.
Now if they would just fix the racial passives they changed that broke some races lore in ESO.0 -
BrokenGameMechanics✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »[
Magicka deal their damage from range. Ranged DPS is safer than operating in melee range, which stamina characters are forced into.
Magicka also have shields, which are generally safer than dodging/blocking/evading.
There are always these standard replies that are never challenged but, to me anyways, do not make sense if you play the game. Stam EASILY outshines Mag in ranged combat. Not even a contest. The Bow line has greater range and greater damage with far more effects then any MagXXX except maybe MagSorc.
My lord how many times have you been 1,2,3 shotted in PvP with Poison Inj, Snipe, Focused, ... how many times you been dropped from a Magden's Birds. Is a Magden vastly superior over a Stamden at range? A Magen has birds, a Stamden has Birds PLUS the Bow line.
Can we just stop with the Mag can out damage at range meme? Magsorc ok, but for all other Magxxx builds it is not even close to being true.
With regard to shields after they were reworked. Shields are now "extensions" to your health. In essence a 5k shield is just somewhat better than a 5k burst heal. Is a 5K shield better than a Stam Med build able to move substantially faster, shrug off CC, Block with a (real) shield and Dodgeroll? Not in my opinion. Is the difference between a 5k shield vs a Med armour, fast moving, gap closing, S&B back bar wielding, dodgerolling, CC breaking toon SOOOO large that their DPS should be THAT much lower????
In my opinion what ZOS is trying to do, and not very well unfortunately, is to have Magxxx builds be more well rounded and utility and support oriented and Stamxxx builds be more straightup damage oriented. This just a wild guess and honestly you can't really SEE this when you look at the skill lines. And that is the problem, you SHOULD be able to look at the Skill lines and Passives and CLEARLY see the Strengths and Weaknesses, what it does well and what it does not so well.
All we can know at the moment is after YEARS of experience with this game the Combat Design Team designed from the ground up two recent classes, Warden and Necro, and in both instances the Magxxx versions of both are widely held by everyone as "lacking" and do so be a wide margin. Clearly ZOS's Combat group know this as well and so what they are are doing is deliberate and part of some as yet unknown to the community at large design goal. The big question, the one that is baffling the entire playing community is what is ZOS seeing has far as yet to be discovered builds and play styles that would make these builds effective that the entire community is and cannot figure out? It would be far easier if ZOS's Combat group just stated outright why Magden's and Magcro's are and will remain lacking from a DPS perspective.
For example, I thought that the "secret" for an effective Magden was the Ice Mage play style. But as soon as that became explored and understood by the community and started to gain a bit of traction it was immediately quashed by ZOS's Combat folks. It is like they were saying "nope, we are not allowing you to do that, the secret to an effective Magden is still out there to be discovered by everyone and we are not going to tell you."
Edited by BrokenGameMechanics on June 4, 2019 12:36PM4 -
DyingIsEasy✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »The DIFFERENCE between 47k and 72k is 53%.
The difference of 72k and 47k is 25k.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtraction4 -
Kihra✭✭✭I wouldn't pay much attention to these numbers yet. Although I have flipped this feature on for Sunspire, the number of parses is still quite low, and the site is heavily biased towards logging enthusiasts at the moment. In addition, the majority of people are still logging Sunspire privately.
Give the site some time to grow and wait to see how numbers look for target dummies, vMA, other trials and dungeons (as I bring support online for all of these) before jumping to conclusions.
2 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »[removed quote]
Except you're presenting it the wrong way. A DIFFERENCE is always relative between two numbers, and when presented in proportions, it should always mention the reference.
"The difference between 47K and 72K is 53%" is a meaningless sentence, plain and simple.
You should say :
47K is 35% lower than 72K (since 47K is 65% of 72K)
OR
72K is 53% higher than 47K (since 72K is 153% of 47K).
The incorrect presentation of variations in percentage has been used forever by people trying to confuse people and make their biased point in the most impressive way possible.
Like, for instance : price of A rises from 10 to 10.1 from year0 to year1. And then to 10.3 from year1 to year2.
Honest people will say "price of A has risen by 3% from year0 to year2.
Manipulators will say that "the rise in price of A has increased by 100% from year1 to year2" !!
Looks to me that you've chosen the vaguely presented "53%" option because it was convenient for you to make your point.
That being said, would you please answer my question (which was repeated in varying forms by other posters in this thread) : Why does class balance matter in PvE ?
Top players/ min-maxers will choose the "best" class even if the difference was 0.001%, and for the rest of players, all classes can pull 45K DPS, which is more than enough to clear the entire game content, even in vet HM and whatnot.
Why should ZOS, in your opinion, care about class balance in PvE ?
What are you talking about? The percentage difference between two numbers and the proportion of a number are two completely different things.
47k*1.53 = 72k
72k/1.53 = 47k
Nothing is being misrepresented...
And why shouldn't ZOS care about PvE balance? It's just as much a part of the game as PvP.
People should have a reason to take every class into endgame content. If a class' damage isn't competitive, then it should have the utility to make up for it.
The fact that only 59 players, out of 8,000+, felt the need to take a magicka warden into the trial is a huge problem.Edited by MLGProPlayer on June 4, 2019 4:48PM0 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭T3hasiangod wrote: »MLGProPlayer wrote: »T3hasiangod wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »
Sigh, 16k dps difference, "same numbers"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.
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.
Let's assume team A goes with 8x magsorcs
Team B goes with 8x magdens
That's a 56k loss to team DPS. You're effectively losing a 9th DD by going with 8x magden. That makes a difference at any level, whether it's score pushing or progression.
Except when Team B is full of top grade magdens and when Team A is filled with only half-decent magsorcs, Team B will still mop the floor with Team A.
...and your point is...? That skill matters? Okay, thanks for reminding us of that. How is that relevant? Yes, player skill disparity is greater than class disparity. But this thread isn't about player skill disparity. It's about class disparity, which needs to be evaluated in the context of equal player skill.Nightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorOther Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »[removed quote]
Except you're presenting it the wrong way. A DIFFERENCE is always relative between two numbers, and when presented in proportions, it should always mention the reference.
"The difference between 47K and 72K is 53%" is a meaningless sentence, plain and simple.
You should say :
47K is 35% lower than 72K (since 47K is 65% of 72K)
OR
72K is 53% higher than 47K (since 72K is 153% of 47K).
The incorrect presentation of variations in percentage has been used forever by people trying to confuse people and make their biased point in the most impressive way possible.
Like, for instance : price of A rises from 10 to 10.1 from year0 to year1. And then to 10.3 from year1 to year2.
Honest people will say "price of A has risen by 3% from year0 to year2.
Manipulators will say that "the rise in price of A has increased by 100% from year1 to year2" !!
Looks to me that you've chosen the vaguely presented "53%" option because it was convenient for you to make your point.
That being said, would you please answer my question (which was repeated in varying forms by other posters in this thread) : Why does class balance matter in PvE ?
Top players/ min-maxers will choose the "best" class even if the difference was 0.001%, and for the rest of players, all classes can pull 45K DPS, which is more than enough to clear the entire game content, even in vet HM and whatnot.
Why should ZOS, in your opinion, care about class balance in PvE ?
Thank you. That is essentially what I have been saying. It is about how the information is presented that makes it a credible reporting of the data or just looking like it is being massaged to meet an agenda or for dramatic purposes.1 -
MLGProPlayer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »[removed quote]
Except you're presenting it the wrong way. A DIFFERENCE is always relative between two numbers, and when presented in proportions, it should always mention the reference.
"The difference between 47K and 72K is 53%" is a meaningless sentence, plain and simple.
You should say :
47K is 35% lower than 72K (since 47K is 65% of 72K)
OR
72K is 53% higher than 47K (since 72K is 153% of 47K).
The incorrect presentation of variations in percentage has been used forever by people trying to confuse people and make their biased point in the most impressive way possible.
Like, for instance : price of A rises from 10 to 10.1 from year0 to year1. And then to 10.3 from year1 to year2.
Honest people will say "price of A has risen by 3% from year0 to year2.
Manipulators will say that "the rise in price of A has increased by 100% from year1 to year2" !!
Looks to me that you've chosen the vaguely presented "53%" option because it was convenient for you to make your point.
That being said, would you please answer my question (which was repeated in varying forms by other posters in this thread) : Why does class balance matter in PvE ?
Top players/ min-maxers will choose the "best" class even if the difference was 0.001%, and for the rest of players, all classes can pull 45K DPS, which is more than enough to clear the entire game content, even in vet HM and whatnot.
Why should ZOS, in your opinion, care about class balance in PvE ?
Thank you. That is essentially what I have been saying. It is about how the information is presented that makes it a credible reporting of the data or just looking like it is being massaged to meet an agenda or for dramatic purposes.
Applying grade school math to describe the percentage difference between two numbers isn't "massaging" the data. Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it misleading.0
