What is the highest dps check in the game?

AinSoph

Brenticus12 wrote: »

Avoranti wrote: »

I wasn’t going to name drop any content creators specifically. But since it was mentioned. Most of Xy’s builds, although not meta, absolutely can be used in the hardest endgame content. And often, he demonstrates such. That is very important. Other content creators I’ve seen usually just show their builds and you never see them in actual content.

As for meta, I’ve never been a meta player. I feel too many gear options get overlooked because of this and thus, I prefer theory crafting and such. Which is partially why I think devs keep changing gear stuff. Trying to break the meta. But there will always be a meta in ESO. However, in the prog team I’m a part of, I did have to compromise for the group or otherwise I would have been excluded. Which is unfortunate. One of my characters is an Argonion Necro healer, when I created it, I was told “why did you make that? No trial group would let you play. Should have made a Templar or warden”. And now, Necro healers are one of the best and looked for in end-game.

When talking about “scripts” I’m not referring to 3rd party nonsense. I’m talking about the actual formula written in the game code and when referring to dps check of 30k I think we all know that any player who understand gear, class and skills would naturally have a higher dps without even trying.

There was an “all about mechanics” video of vhof about a year ago where it was commented that a group completed it with DD’s who had just 27k dps and that high dps wasn’t necessary but helps the fight go faster.

In the conversation I had with another player they were referring to dps check formulas that the game uses in the source code to determine mechanics and difficulty and I was told that this formula is the same for every group content and is based around the 3-6mil vs 21mil. The only difference is the mechanics and timed mechanics for each piece of content. They also referenced the 3-6mil dummies and why the 21 mil was added and it’s intended use vs what it’s being used for today. While the meta seems to be the 21 mil trial dummy, it seems that parsing as a whole gives false results. Because the dummies do not move or attack, there aren’t any mechanics where the player has to move or anything that happens in actual combat. Some old school players might have more insight to those references.

There was another comment regarding VAS and the recent update. Suggesting that groups have been relying on brute force rather than mechanics and such. This made me wonder how many end-game completes have been relying on brute force to bypass mechanics rather than just playing them out? It also had me curious as to if those same groups could get those same completes playing mechanics rather than using brute force? Seeing how weapon dmg and crit seem to continue to take a hit each patch, is it possible the devs are trying to eliminate the brute force tactic and force players into learning and playing mechanics more?

I think you're speaking from a position with limited knowledge and should do more research before you make these kinds of comments first. Especially in regards to Xynode, how builds work, how content optimisation works, how dissemintation of endgame build information works, how meta works, how DPS checks work, how dummy testing works and what it means to "skip" vAS mechanics.

FYI mini skipping in vAS, which I'm assuming is what you meant by "skipping through brute force" requires you to be very, very finely tuned with the mechanics of the trial. The only thing you're skipping with a mini skip is the enrage mechanic from the minis. If the minis enrage and you're not close to killing either the boss or the mini (Which goes inactive for a couple of seconds), then it's a wipe regardless. There are no "additional" mechanics in play because a mini enrage, it just means their attacks will one shot regardless of whether you block them.

I can guarantee you that the groups in vASHM that do mini skips regularly are 100x better players and more knowledgeable about the intricacies of every vASHM mechanic than the players who can't mini skip.

Don't forget that mini-skipping in this Trial's context is beating the HM in 3 minutes which is their enrage timer.

MemeDankExtra

I haven't really seen any math for Xalvakka HM in this thread so here it is:
On platform three you have about 3 and a half minutes (210 seconds) to kill her before the lava overtakes you and wipes the group. The boss is at 95.2m health, and you'll also have to kill 3 Volatile Shells at about 7.4m each, for a total of 117.4m health. 117.4m / 210 = ~560k group dps, which translates to 70k per person. Granted, about half of that damage will be to the boss while it's in execute range, but when you factor in the time running from boss to shell and back again several times, having to dodge deathstars, less than ideal uptimes, et cetera, I think it's fair to say that if you can't hit 70k on the iron atro you're not going to have a good time on this fight.

Oreyn_Bearclaw

Avoranti wrote: »

Nchuleftingth wrote: »

The two highest DPS checks in the game to my knowledge (assuming you're just going for a clear, not something like a trifecta) are vSShm portals, and Xalvakka HM.

The mini in the portal has about 11m health, which means that divided by the 3 DPS and 90 seconds, each DD needs to be pulling about 41k dps in the portal while avoiding mechanics, unpinning, self healing, etc.

Xalvakka's DPS check in HM execute is very high, for a rough guess it's about ~50k dps.

So, if the mini in the portal requires 41k dps while avoiding mechanics and such. But the trial lead is requiring 80k+, is it then stand to reason that we ARE talking about brute force vs mechanics. And you suggested Xal in HM execute is roughly around 50dps?

This is the type of answer I was looking for.
So, if this is true, then the high dps reqs that often get asked for are really to avoid mechanics and to use brute force to get the complete. Which is what I suspected was happening anyway. Sure, I understand about achievements, leaderboards and such. And I get that a player should want to play at the best they can efficiently and effectively to benefit the team.

————————————————————

Isn’t it possible that these high dps instances in trials specifically are likely a large part of why they bug out so often? And likely a reason why stats like crit keep getting nerfed? Maybe the game has issues trying to calculate such high numbers and the bypass of mechanics? ZoS has often suggested that players are still too powerful and thats their justification for the nerfs. But isn’t this a smaller part of the player base, mostly end-game? If players played as intended and not chose to use brute force is it possible we would have never seen as many nerfs?

If this continues there will be a point where some of the highest parses will no longer be obtainable or players like me, who can only achieve 85k dps wont be able to maintain those numbers and end up being left out. Seems like the parse requirements are coming from a small player base (pc) and everyone else just copies it and thats how it becomes the meta. Much like other metas. But console has a disadvantage that I think our prog leads forget. We, for whatever reason, have performance working against us. Especially with the templar class and all trials. Also, this meta eliminates creativity with gear, skills and removes a large amount of players from even having the opportunity to play end-game.

We are seeing gear changes by the devs thats intended to open up the possibilities but its also going to create toxicity because trial groups are still going to demand specifics without ever giving the players build a chance. Often, I feel because of gear meta’s that progression groups have become closed minded.

CP 2.0 was designed to give players options and force us to make harder choices, buts its the same meta as CP 1.0. Mag players all use the same slottables. Stam players all use the same. Etc. The only slight difference I see is from pvp builds.


Sorry, I had a lot if thoughts to express.

If you cant pull 80K on a trial dummy, you aren't pulling 41k downstairs on VSS HM. Trial Dummies are an extremely useful benchmark because they standardized buffs, so it is easy to objectively compare parses, but this is really apples to oranges in this situation. When DPS numbers get thrown around, context is important. I would assume an 80k req from a trial leader is a 21 mil dummy parse.

A much better benchmark for that specific fight would be something like a 6 mill dummy, perhaps with Major Breach added to it, because that is about the extent of the buffs you will have down there. That part of the fight also requires some movement, unpinning, etc, which will always lower your DPS to some degree. If you Can't hit 50k on a 6 mil with breach, my guess is you would fail the DPS check. Now of course, only 3 of your 8 DPS need to be able to do it. Truthfully, I think 80k on a trial dummy is easier than 50k on a 6 mil.

Also, we are talking about some of the hardest content in the game. I won't call 80k on a trial dummy a bad parse, but it is not a great one. You can mangle a damage rotation pretty hard and still break 80k. A decent weave, pace of about .8casts/sec and a static rotation will break 80 on every class. Save the last few trails on HM, 80k (as measured on a trial dummy) across the board is more than sufficient for all Vet trial content. That said, if 80k is really your average parse, you are going to struggle in VRG and VSS HMs. It's not an obscene requirement by any stretch if those are the objectives. Now if we are talking about non HMs or some of the earlier trials, well, it might be overkill, but it would make for relatively smooth clears, which very well may be the goal.

pelle412

The counter to complaining on the forums about DPS requirements and meta sets is to become a raid leader yourself. You can then set whatever you want as policy and requirements.

DPS requirements can also be viewed as mitigating risk. Will I be able to complete the trial in 2 hours with X DPS requirement? Can I possibly run it twice in 2 hours if I change the requirement? How many more players will want to join my team if we increase our efficiency?

thorwyn

As others already pointed out, you seem to be making conclusions and assumptions without the wearing the "Been there, done that" T-Shirt.
There is a huge difference between self sustained DPS and fully buffed DPS. You can easily feel the difference by doing a full parse on a raid dummy and a 6m dummy. I can reliably parse 100k+ on my Sorc but on the 6m dummy, I am struggling to get past the 40-45k mark for various reason. Basically, the DPS loss is somewhere around 50+% and keep in mind, that this is parsing. We have not even started adding mechanics to the equasion.

So, being able to handle the vSS portals more or less automatically means a raid dummy DPS of 80k ++ (which is not stellar by any means). And that is just the hard DPS check. There are also soft DPS checks in vSS hm, the Atros at Lokkestiitz comes to mind. If you are unable to kill them quick enough, they will eventually get out of hand and kill you.

As for "skipping mechanics" in vAS. There are few goups that are able to nuke the boss while ignoring the minis and the only reason why those groups are able to pull that off is because they know what they are doing and they are 100% optimized. The vast majority of progress groups who are going for IR are playing the minis fair and square. However, same thing is true here. It is absolutely neccessary to deal with the minis as fast and efficient as possible to avoid overlapping mechanics and enrage. You simply can not afford to take them down with 200k group DPS. That principle hollds true for almsot any trial except maybe the basic Craglorn trials btw.

But regardless of your observations and arguments, it is not up to you or anyone else to discuss raid leader requirements. If someone is running a group and wants everyone to wear smurf outfits while scoring 145k DPS with sword and shields, it is their decision. You can either accept that and join them or say no thanks and go look for another group that suits your ideas of a trial group. All the points about "but it can be done with X DPS as well" are irrelevant. If you don't like the requirements, form your own group.

Kwoung

ZOS stated a while back, that all content was designed for and could be done by level 35 players with no CP I think? I believe this to be highly outdated though. There are a few actual DPS checks in the game as mentioned above, but ESO is mostly mechanics based. You "should" be able to complete all content with 30K DPS if you absolutely nail the mechanics and no one screws up, which in the case of folks doing what is considered very poor DPS by todays standards (for raiding), chances are someone will screw up and everyone will die.

All that said, raid guilds want high DPS because it makes things easier, allows you to completely skip many of the more annoying mechanics and generally makes things go smoother... and there are leaderboards, which you aren't getting on with a group pushing crummy DPS.

Also, a DPS requirement for some guild/groups, isn't strictly about DPS. It is meant to weed out the folks who have not managed to learn their class, rotations, timing, etc... so they are probably a liability on a raid once you bring in all the stuff you need to know there as well.

raegun

to answer the original topic the hardest dps check right now is vRG HM if you want to get a trifecta you need almost 100k dps threw mechanics any less and you'll have a death on the first boss because there will be no more cleans pads for poison and the heal check is to much on number of people poisoned.

that said most people arn't going for trifectas they're just looking for a team. as a raid leader I look for 70k dps on the trial dummy or 35k dps on the 6m. i go for this number because if i don't know you and i've never run with you i need some metric to tell if you have a basic understanding of your class and rotation. I ask that you send me a parse every patch with major combat changes to ensure that you are keeping up with what is going on in the game and are willing to adapt, grow and change with the game. It also helps weeds out people who won't work with me on other things like basic optimization and strat differences.

I personally am rather flexible with my dps requirements sometimes if I like your personality and you have lower dps I will work with you to help you make the requirements but if you cant or wont put in the work then we have other issues. many raid leads don't have time to work with you and need to ensure some competence level its not always about big bad gatekeeping.

Eormenric

tmbrinks wrote: »

There will ALWAYS be a "meta" in a game where everything is not exactly equal.

Now, can there be lots of builds that are very close to the same, yes.

When you're in a trial group, you have to also be considerate of the other 11 people in that group. And if you want to bring a build that is significantly "off-meta" and statistically does less damage (or healing output, or is less survivable as a tank), unless everybody else in the group is okay with it... I feel that's being somewhat selfish. You are making it so they have to do more to make up for the shortcomings of that build.

Just having a build "clear" content, doesn't mean necessarily that it really can "clear" content. To test, you'd need a whole raid using those builds, as the person in the off-meta setup could have simply been carried through the content by the other 11 players making up for their build's shortcomings. (I've run with some other content creators... I KNOW their builds work... as our group has gotten Godslayer, TTT, Dawnbringer, etc... with them... on those builds )

That said, there are probably hundreds of DPS builds that can clear any and all content in the game.

I guarantee you could take any end-game raid group, put the entire group entirely in crafted sets and they could still clear most, if not all, of the HMs in the game.

I like that you pretty much point out that skill and some level of build expertise is necessary to clear all content in the game. I agree with that. I disagree with your perspective on off-meta, though. It seems you're looking at non-meta builds as inherently handicapped. But in what way? Damage only, yes? But that's not the only concern in group content. What else might that build offer that makes up for less damage--provided the necessary damage is still reached?

Some meta builds require that other roles use meta builds because there are holes in the damage dealer's build--e.g. lack of sustain, critical damage, squishy, etc. If everyone works together to plug these holes, then you got yourself a very effective group. I argue that this can be achieved with a full group of non-meta builds, because they work off of one another. The issue with talking meta/non-meta is that one makes assumptions about the other. Simply equipping meta gear does not mean one can achieve the highest damage. How they play with that build is key and that's the same argument to be made for non-meta.

Curiously, I have never seen a content creator push towards builds for each encounter--a way to perfectly optimize self-buffed output depending on the situation. For this boss fight, use this build, for this boss fight, use that build. There only seems to be focus on "use this build for everything and be good with it". My hope is that these non-meta builds have this in mind, are filling gaps in their groups gear/behavior, or are done because they meet the true necessary requirement to clear content while not becoming boring or repetitive for the player. If someone loves playing meta because it gets the biggest numbers, go for it. But that's not the only way to play the game and it isn't selfish to say, "I'd like to enjoy what I'm doing." Again, if they meet the requirements to clear the content and aren't a bother in other aspects (e.g. dying to mechanics) then no one is going to fuss--at least they shouldn't, boy have I gotten kicked as a tank because someone said "Hey, where's my minor courage?!" Utterly pathetic...

karekiz

Non meta sets do less dmg.

Why have 2 apples when you can have 5?

Franchise408

Eormenric wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

There will ALWAYS be a "meta" in a game where everything is not exactly equal.

Now, can there be lots of builds that are very close to the same, yes.

When you're in a trial group, you have to also be considerate of the other 11 people in that group. And if you want to bring a build that is significantly "off-meta" and statistically does less damage (or healing output, or is less survivable as a tank), unless everybody else in the group is okay with it... I feel that's being somewhat selfish. You are making it so they have to do more to make up for the shortcomings of that build.

Just having a build "clear" content, doesn't mean necessarily that it really can "clear" content. To test, you'd need a whole raid using those builds, as the person in the off-meta setup could have simply been carried through the content by the other 11 players making up for their build's shortcomings. (I've run with some other content creators... I KNOW their builds work... as our group has gotten Godslayer, TTT, Dawnbringer, etc... with them... on those builds )

That said, there are probably hundreds of DPS builds that can clear any and all content in the game.

I guarantee you could take any end-game raid group, put the entire group entirely in crafted sets and they could still clear most, if not all, of the HMs in the game.

I like that you pretty much point out that skill and some level of build expertise is necessary to clear all content in the game. I agree with that. I disagree with your perspective on off-meta, though. It seems you're looking at non-meta builds as inherently handicapped. But in what way? Damage only, yes? But that's not the only concern in group content. What else might that build offer that makes up for less damage--provided the necessary damage is still reached?

Some meta builds require that other roles use meta builds because there are holes in the damage dealer's build--e.g. lack of sustain, critical damage, squishy, etc. If everyone works together to plug these holes, then you got yourself a very effective group. I argue that this can be achieved with a full group of non-meta builds, because they work off of one another. The issue with talking meta/non-meta is that one makes assumptions about the other. Simply equipping meta gear does not mean one can achieve the highest damage. How they play with that build is key and that's the same argument to be made for non-meta.

Curiously, I have never seen a content creator push towards builds for each encounter--a way to perfectly optimize self-buffed output depending on the situation. For this boss fight, use this build, for this boss fight, use that build. There only seems to be focus on "use this build for everything and be good with it". My hope is that these non-meta builds have this in mind, are filling gaps in their groups gear/behavior, or are done because they meet the true necessary requirement to clear content while not becoming boring or repetitive for the player. If someone loves playing meta because it gets the biggest numbers, go for it. But that's not the only way to play the game and it isn't selfish to say, "I'd like to enjoy what I'm doing." Again, if they meet the requirements to clear the content and aren't a bother in other aspects (e.g. dying to mechanics) then no one is going to fuss--at least they shouldn't, boy have I gotten kicked as a tank because someone said "Hey, where's my minor courage?!" Utterly pathetic...

100% agree with all the things you said.

I am the trial leader / trial tank in my guild, a position I got by working hard to improve my builds, and my understanding and execution of mechanics. I've never once equipped a meta set on my tank. Never once been asked to by my former trial leader, and I never have since I've become the trial leader. I've never asked a single member of my guild to bring meta sets on our trials. I've never asked for a single parse. I never got better by blindly throwing on meta sets, I got better by doing the content, and sometimes struggling for long periods of time through it. Those experiences gave me the knowledge I needed to know what was needed to clear content, where my deficiencies were in my own builds, and what to do to overcome them. I figured out the answers to those questions in my own way. I figured out how I wanted to solve those issues in a way that was fun and enjoyable for the type of character I wanted to play. As it stands, my current main tank is a Breton Necromancer wearing Crimson Twilight, Grave Guardian, and Lord Warden, with a restoration staff back bar. Nothing you'd ever see in an end-game discussion, but it has absolutely worked for me and my group. In fact, my build setup is exactly what my group wants. I have all the meta sets. I have Yolna, and Alkosh, and Galenwe, and all the others. My guild has specifically asked me to stick with my build and not go meta, because they know that I will be self sustained and sturdy, and they can focus on damaging / buffing / healing. We might not have the most fully optimized group set up, and our clears might take us a little longer to get (but we do get them), but people get to come in and play and see what works well and what doesn't, and experience the content, and my methods of doing it have helped to grow my guild's vet trial group, because people don't feel so much drama and pressure to be top notch. And just as I did, they can improve their performance through practice, and I am noticing huge improvements from my team, but in their damage and in their navigation of mechanics.

Non-meta doesn't mean ineffective. It's a different strategy, and not everything has to be maximum optimization at all times. This game is meant to be fun, and that comes first.

tmbrinks

Eormenric wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

There will ALWAYS be a "meta" in a game where everything is not exactly equal.

Now, can there be lots of builds that are very close to the same, yes.

When you're in a trial group, you have to also be considerate of the other 11 people in that group. And if you want to bring a build that is significantly "off-meta" and statistically does less damage (or healing output, or is less survivable as a tank), unless everybody else in the group is okay with it... I feel that's being somewhat selfish. You are making it so they have to do more to make up for the shortcomings of that build.

Just having a build "clear" content, doesn't mean necessarily that it really can "clear" content. To test, you'd need a whole raid using those builds, as the person in the off-meta setup could have simply been carried through the content by the other 11 players making up for their build's shortcomings. (I've run with some other content creators... I KNOW their builds work... as our group has gotten Godslayer, TTT, Dawnbringer, etc... with them... on those builds )

That said, there are probably hundreds of DPS builds that can clear any and all content in the game.

I guarantee you could take any end-game raid group, put the entire group entirely in crafted sets and they could still clear most, if not all, of the HMs in the game.

I like that you pretty much point out that skill and some level of build expertise is necessary to clear all content in the game. I agree with that. I disagree with your perspective on off-meta, though. It seems you're looking at non-meta builds as inherently handicapped. But in what way? Damage only, yes? But that's not the only concern in group content. What else might that build offer that makes up for less damage--provided the necessary damage is still reached?

Some meta builds require that other roles use meta builds because there are holes in the damage dealer's build--e.g. lack of sustain, critical damage, squishy, etc. If everyone works together to plug these holes, then you got yourself a very effective group. I argue that this can be achieved with a full group of non-meta builds, because they work off of one another. The issue with talking meta/non-meta is that one makes assumptions about the other. Simply equipping meta gear does not mean one can achieve the highest damage. How they play with that build is key and that's the same argument to be made for non-meta.

Curiously, I have never seen a content creator push towards builds for each encounter--a way to perfectly optimize self-buffed output depending on the situation. For this boss fight, use this build, for this boss fight, use that build. There only seems to be focus on "use this build for everything and be good with it". My hope is that these non-meta builds have this in mind, are filling gaps in their groups gear/behavior, or are done because they meet the true necessary requirement to clear content while not becoming boring or repetitive for the player. If someone loves playing meta because it gets the biggest numbers, go for it. But that's not the only way to play the game and it isn't selfish to say, "I'd like to enjoy what I'm doing." Again, if they meet the requirements to clear the content and aren't a bother in other aspects (e.g. dying to mechanics) then no one is going to fuss--at least they shouldn't, boy have I gotten kicked as a tank because someone said "Hey, where's my minor courage?!" Utterly pathetic...

It all depends on the level of "off-meta" that we're talking about. Which is why I used the word "significantly"

Even the raid group I'm in, while we are mostly in meta sets, we are definitely not in meta classes, and meta races. If your build meets the requirements that are set by your group, it doesn't matter what you run.

But, if you run a S+B dps in a trial and it "clears" vSS HM, that doesn't mean that a whole raid group would be able to clear with 8 S+B dps. That's the point I was making.

Running a different build and doing 3% less DPS than meta is not what we're talking about. But losing 40%/50% by running a S+B and still expecting to be welcomed with open arms in a trial group is a whole different argument.

I don't agree with kicking a tank because they're not providing minor courage... unless that's the expectation of the group, as it's a significant buff to the group's DPS.

Avoranti

Brenticus12 wrote: »

I think you're speaking from a position with limited knowledge and should do more research before you make these kinds of comments first. Especially in regards to Xynode, how builds work, how content optimisation works, how dissemintation of endgame build information works, how meta works, how DPS checks work, how dummy testing works and what it means to "skip" vAS mechanics.

FYI mini skipping in vAS, which I'm assuming is what you meant by "skipping through brute force" requires you to be very, very finely tuned with the mechanics of the trial. The only thing you're skipping with a mini skip is the enrage mechanic from the minis. If the minis enrage and you're not close to killing either the boss or the mini (Which goes inactive for a couple of seconds), then it's a wipe regardless. There are no "additional" mechanics in play because a mini enrage, it just means their attacks will one shot regardless of whether you block them.

I can guarantee you that the groups in vASHM that do mini skips regularly are 100x better players and more knowledgeable about the intricacies of every vASHM mechanic than the players who can't mini skip.

A brief history:
I’ve completed every vet trial in the game except Rockgrove. I only parse around 85k and I’m in Xy’s guild. I understand group optimizations for specific content. I have 18 characters (tanks, DD’s and two healers) and many of them are meta. Ive also been playing for many years and have learned a lot over them. I’m still learning though.

I’ve seen groups with lower dps than what’s asked for complete content and have read about such as well. But that is what sparked my original post. If what was been said about dps checks is true then why the high parse requirements when content can be completed with much lower dps? (I’m talking completes. Not trifectas). Doesn’t this just put more strain on the players? It was ZoS who said players are still too powerful and keep nerfing stats, cp and gear sets. It was another content creator who suggested players were using brute force to bypass mechanics in end-game content and that is likely the reason for some of the changes. Implying that the devs want players to play mechanics and not steam roll their way through content.

I think any player who can understand their class, skills and gear will naturally have higher dps than say, the casual players who just stay in overland. So they won’t have 30k dps. Probably more around 70k. At least from what I’ve seen. But those same players get left out of end game often because they don’t meet the 80-95k requirements I’ve seen lots of progs ask for. Even if they pick up on mechanics quickly.

And in no way am I suggesting I know it all or that I’m right and all of you are wrong. I’m just looking for better understanding on some things. Just wanting a discussion. What happens in the PC community often transfers into the console community but I think people sometimes fail to remember they are not 100% the same game. We don’t have all the add-ons. We constantly have to battle performance issues like frame drops and lag. So much lag. Game crashes. Even when just parsing. Some classes feel clunky (my poor templar). I think consoles have more game bugs too. Seems like the console community still pushes for the same standards as pc spite all the issues which on one hand is good because it can help make us even better players but on the other hand I think it really holds us back.

Thanks for the comment.

Avoranti

pelle412 wrote: »

The counter to complaining on the forums about DPS requirements and meta sets is to become a raid leader yourself. You can then set whatever you want as policy and requirements.

DPS requirements can also be viewed as mitigating risk. Will I be able to complete the trial in 2 hours with X DPS requirement? Can I possibly run it twice in 2 hours if I change the requirement? How many more players will want to join my team if we increase our efficiency?

I don’t think anyone was really complaining. I personally don’t have the time available to run lead myself or else I would be doing so. The thought has crossed my mind though. I understand your point in the mitigation risk. Thanks for the comment.

Avoranti

Franchise408 wrote: »

I am the trial leader / trial tank in my guild, a position I got by working hard to improve my builds, and my understanding and execution of mechanics. I've never once equipped a meta set on my tank. Never once been asked to by my former trial leader, and I never have since I've become the trial leader. I've never asked a single member of my guild to bring meta sets on our trials. I've never asked for a single parse. I never got better by blindly throwing on meta sets, I got better by doing the content, and sometimes struggling for long periods of time through it. Those experiences gave me the knowledge I needed to know what was needed to clear content, where my deficiencies were in my own builds, and what to do to overcome them. I figured out the answers to those questions in my own way. I figured out how I wanted to solve those issues in a way that was fun and enjoyable for the type of character I wanted to play. As it stands, my current main tank is a Breton Necromancer wearing Crimson Twilight, Grave Guardian, and Lord Warden, with a restoration staff back bar. Nothing you'd ever see in an end-game discussion, but it has absolutely worked for me and my group. In fact, my build setup is exactly what my group wants. I have all the meta sets. I have Yolna, and Alkosh, and Galenwe, and all the others. My guild has specifically asked me to stick with my build and not go meta, because they know that I will be self sustained and sturdy, and they can focus on damaging / buffing / healing. We might not have the most fully optimized group set up, and our clears might take us a little longer to get (but we do get them), but people get to come in and play and see what works well and what doesn't, and experience the content, and my methods of doing it have helped to grow my guild's vet trial group, because people don't feel so much drama and pressure to be top notch. And just as I did, they can improve their performance through practice, and I am noticing huge improvements from my team, but in their damage and in their navigation of mechanics.

Non-meta doesn't mean ineffective. It's a different strategy, and not everything has to be maximum optimization at all times. This game is meant to be fun, and that comes first.

I love this. I’m big into theory crafting and off-meta builds. I think because of the meta a lot of gear sets and skills get overlooked and in turn the players who use them. I’m also a player who likes to go into a dungeon or trial blindly and figure it out. Yes, it might take longer but it is so satisfying when that “ah ha” moment happens. I prefer self sustained tanking but the meta has tanks as support roles. All the tanks buffs/debuff’s in the world don’t mean anything if the tank is dead. Tank first- support second. Besides, in many games over the years (classic rpg’s) it has always been the healer that uses buffs and debuffs, not the tank. At least in the games I’ve played.

This would be the kind of group I’d want to run with though. Best of luck to you and the team.

Franchise408

Avoranti wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

I am the trial leader / trial tank in my guild, a position I got by working hard to improve my builds, and my understanding and execution of mechanics. I've never once equipped a meta set on my tank. Never once been asked to by my former trial leader, and I never have since I've become the trial leader. I've never asked a single member of my guild to bring meta sets on our trials. I've never asked for a single parse. I never got better by blindly throwing on meta sets, I got better by doing the content, and sometimes struggling for long periods of time through it. Those experiences gave me the knowledge I needed to know what was needed to clear content, where my deficiencies were in my own builds, and what to do to overcome them. I figured out the answers to those questions in my own way. I figured out how I wanted to solve those issues in a way that was fun and enjoyable for the type of character I wanted to play. As it stands, my current main tank is a Breton Necromancer wearing Crimson Twilight, Grave Guardian, and Lord Warden, with a restoration staff back bar. Nothing you'd ever see in an end-game discussion, but it has absolutely worked for me and my group. In fact, my build setup is exactly what my group wants. I have all the meta sets. I have Yolna, and Alkosh, and Galenwe, and all the others. My guild has specifically asked me to stick with my build and not go meta, because they know that I will be self sustained and sturdy, and they can focus on damaging / buffing / healing. We might not have the most fully optimized group set up, and our clears might take us a little longer to get (but we do get them), but people get to come in and play and see what works well and what doesn't, and experience the content, and my methods of doing it have helped to grow my guild's vet trial group, because people don't feel so much drama and pressure to be top notch. And just as I did, they can improve their performance through practice, and I am noticing huge improvements from my team, but in their damage and in their navigation of mechanics.

Non-meta doesn't mean ineffective. It's a different strategy, and not everything has to be maximum optimization at all times. This game is meant to be fun, and that comes first.

I love this. I’m big into theory crafting and off-meta builds. I think because of the meta a lot of gear sets and skills get overlooked and in turn the players who use them. I’m also a player who likes to go into a dungeon or trial blindly and figure it out. Yes, it might take longer but it is so satisfying when that “ah ha” moment happens. I prefer self sustained tanking but the meta has tanks as support roles. All the tanks buffs/debuff’s in the world don’t mean anything if the tank is dead. Tank first- support second. Besides, in many games over the years (classic rpg’s) it has always been the healer that uses buffs and debuffs, not the tank. At least in the games I’ve played.

This would be the kind of group I’d want to run with though. Best of luck to you and the team.

Thank you! We are making progress, it's been a fun adventure. I love seeing the growth and progress that my guild is making.

I'm a proponent of saying that it's META - Most effective tactic available, NOT OETA - Only effective tactic available

I, too, prefer self sustaining tanks. That's what makes tanks fun. I do give buffs to my party, via Grave Guardian, Lord Warden, Agony Totem, and Empowering Grasp, on top of the normal resistance debuffs and Major Vulnerability via Glacial Colossus, but some meta-heads will trash on it because it's not DPS buffs. Oh well *shrugs*

Rudrani

MemeDankExtra wrote: »

I haven't really seen any math for Xalvakka HM in this thread so here it is:
On platform three you have about 3 and a half minutes (210 seconds) to kill her before the lava overtakes you and wipes the group. The boss is at 95.2m health, and you'll also have to kill 3 Volatile Shells at about 7.4m each, for a total of 117.4m health. 117.4m / 210 = ~560k group dps, which translates to 70k per person. Granted, about half of that damage will be to the boss while it's in execute range, but when you factor in the time running from boss to shell and back again several times, having to dodge deathstars, less than ideal uptimes, et cetera, I think it's fair to say that if you can't hit 70k on the iron atro you're not going to have a good time on this fight.

Imagine you are Xalvakka.

You have 12 people trying to kill you.
You can melt them all in lava.
You wont die in the lava.
Instead of going DOWN into the lava, you go UP.... away from the lava. TWICE.

:shrug:

Rudrani

You have to be a certain type of person to get a very high score on a DPS dummy.

What kind of person?

A person who is willing to practice for hours.
A person who learns minute details, and sets up their gear (etc) optimally.
A person who comprehends the basic principles of combat skills, or can at least memorize someone else's rotation.

That is the kind of person you want in your Trials Roster, if you are doing anything serious and care about completing it well.

1) A person who will practice the trial for hours
2) A person who learns the details of what is going on in the trial
3) A person who can at least memorize what they are supposed to do in the strategies the team uses.

So the bottom line is that DPS scores REALLY ARE a very effective way of measuring who should be on an end game team.

Many people are arrogant and uncooperative, but that has no direct corrolation to having or not having a high dps test score.

Rudrani

Personally, for my teams, I allow people to obtain ranks EITHER by DPS parses OR by showing me PoV of them completing significantly difficult content effectively.