Is Arcanist Beam too powerful?

MJallday

its not powerful enough. needs another 20%

Stx

Beam should be direct damage as it’s a spammable. That at least would reduce the craziness of the necro DOT passive.

spartaxoxo

In comparison to what other classes can do, sure. But this game has been ramping up the adds being spammed in fights for a while now but class kits are largely not designed around that. The beam is actually pretty meh against a single target. Other classes need better aoe spammables. They don't all have to be as easy as use as Arcanist. But if you're going to spam us with adds, we should have strong aoes that can reasonably react to the increased mobility of all of these adds by being able to be repositioned.

Major_Toughness

Has been since Arcanist was launched, this isn't news.

Anyone voting no just doesn't want their accessibility class nerfed.

LukosCreyden

Arcanist beam is very powerful, but I do not know how you could change it without completely ruining Arcanist. Maybe change it from a beam into a fire and forget projectile, like a big orb or something? Just one, big, single hit attack that does an AoE splash on impact. I dunno, that'd probably have a load of issues of its own, too.

Zodiarkslayer

Major_Toughness wrote: »

Anyone voting no just doesn't want their accessibility class nerfed.

Or they know that outside of the beam, there is little to no reason to play the class ...
Arcanist has two support skill lines that offer no damage outside Herald of the Tome. Only buffing/debuffing.
And even the rest of Herald of the Tome offers no damage comparable to the beam.

It is a blessing and a curse at the same time. So, if you take damage from Fatecarver away, you'll have to put it somewhere else in Herald of the Tome skill tree.

chongguang

Arcanist is the most powerful class right now for sure even the new non-sorcerer base class heavy attack meta would also use the herald of tome as the skill line.
Eg. HA NIGHTBLADE: Assassin ,daedric summoning , herald of tome.
So this topic is a rhetorical question

Ezhh

Arc has the ridiculous combo of big cleave, big range and ease of-play. All due to beam. This is already a problem on live.

To bring it in line with other classes for PvE, something had to give. I suspect subclassing was intended as the answer because any complaint that "arc is too far ahead of my class" can now be met with "just subclass beam then". (Of course, arcanist still comes out on top due to class mastery, and only the two other class - NB and cro atm - which happen to have the skill lines that buff beam the most, will be able to subclass to the optimal combo, but this is another issue...)

The problem is that beam isn't just another spammable. It's a whole different way of playing the game that is slower paced and (at least to some of us) way less engaging. This leaves those of us who want to be able to do damage using a faster playstyle in a really bad spot, because while we can indeed "play as we like", we can't do so while in the content we would like to play - unless we plan to effectively troll our groups.

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

Or they know that outside of the beam, there is little to no reason to play the class ...

This is hugely true. I know a lot of people, myself included, who would probably love arc if runeblades had ever been worth using instead of beam. To fix the "beam problem" arcanist as a whole needs a rework, but that would of course generate its own round of complaints and problems and angry players. I don't know if there is any way to balance beam that could work at this point.

Xarc

the problem is : it's one clic damage.
It's super frustrating for all the players who make the effort to set up a perfect rotation in their dps cycle.

RlyDontKnow

Xarc wrote: »

the problem is : it's one clic damage.
It's super frustrating for all the players who make the effort to set up a perfect rotation in their dps cycle.

Have you ever played arca? To hit 120k+ you still need a very clean rotation. Much like a jabbing Templar with its old jabs channel time you have different challenges like weaving cleanly, bar swapping properly, etc. - all the joys that come with longer channels and cast times that throw you out of the usual pattern. You need to mix different kinds of weaving, etc. which is far more challenging to do cleanly. So instead of focusing on what to cast and just keeping the rhythm, the what is kinda easy and the dynamic rhythm makes it challenging. And in content you’ll have a whole host extra challenges like not being able to block cast, being less mobile while beaming, etc.

Yes, it’s a different playstyle. Yes, it works different. So why is that a good problem? Why do you feel that only the constant rhythm dynamic rotation should be able to do good damage?

If your group is considering it trolling then you’re either playing at the very top or your group is just making unreasonable and unjustified demands. If it’s the first: adjusting to whatever playstyle is currently the best and adopting it is part of playing at the top. For everyone else: try a different group.

I’ve been introduced to raid leads making unreasonable demands. And their raids were terrible, anyway. Because their problem wasn’t that people weren’t running meta builds or suboptimal gear or whatever. It was people not doing mechanics. And that’s largely still true now. If you think it’s trolling that you come with something that you like playing and that will help you focus on doing the mechs and that is perfectly capable of clearing the content then you should work on your attitude.

BretonMage

My issue with the beam is not that it's easy or complex. It's that it's boring. And I say this as an Oakensoul user. Fatecarver's animation is very static, and you can't even react while you're beaming. It's just not fun.

Of course, I make zero judgment on whether it should or should not get the damage numbers it does, just that I don't like it and we should all have equivalent skills in other classes that are just as impactful.

Ezhh wrote: »

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

Or they know that outside of the beam, there is little to no reason to play the class ...

This is hugely true. I know a lot of people, myself included, who would probably love arc if runeblades had ever been worth using instead of beam. To fix the "beam problem" arcanist as a whole needs a rework, but that would of course generate it's own round of complaints and problems and angry players. I don't know if there is any way to balance beam that could work at this point.

Yes, isn't runeblades fun? I love sparkly, whizzy things that go boom! Ah, if only.

But really, if only the skills we liked were worth as much as the beam. Then we could really play how we wanted.

Major_Toughness

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

Major_Toughness wrote: »

Anyone voting no just doesn't want their accessibility class nerfed.

Or they know that outside of the beam, there is little to no reason to play the class ...
Arcanist has two support skill lines that offer no damage outside Herald of the Tome. Only buffing/debuffing.
And even the rest of Herald of the Tome offers no damage comparable to the beam.

It is a blessing and a curse at the same time. So, if you take damage from Fatecarver away, you'll have to put it somewhere else in Herald of the Tome skill tree.

This is about Fatecarver, not the entire class. In which I agree with you, but is irrelevant.

Ezhh

Feels like some of this is directed at what I said, not the person you're quoting, so will reply.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Have you ever played arca? To hit 120k+ you still need a very clean rotation. Much like a jabbing Templar with its old jabs channel time you have different challenges like weaving cleanly, bar swapping properly, etc. - all the joys that come with longer channels and cast times that throw you out of the usual pattern. You need to mix different kinds of weaving, etc. which is far more challenging to do cleanly. So instead of focusing on what to cast and just keeping the rhythm, the what is kinda easy and the dynamic rhythm makes it challenging. And in content you’ll have a whole host extra challenges like not being able to block cast, being less mobile while beaming, etc.

Skill at the top end with arc still requires actual skill to push the dps to its ceiling. I've never disputed that. But the class is way easier to play to an acceptable level. The floor is higher. You don't need to weave or have perfect uptimes on any other skills to get the same damage on an arc that a lot more effort is needed for at beginner or mid level on most other classes. Survivability is less of an issue in the majority of content as well because arc players can stand further back while still landing almost the entirety of their damage, and at this level they'll often be shield beaming too.

There's also plenty of scenarios where it's impossible for most other classes to deliver the same level of cleave as arcanist. The range on beam does all the work for you.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

If your group is considering it trolling then you’re either playing at the very top or your group is just making unreasonable and unjustified demands. If it’s the first: adjusting to whatever playstyle is currently the best and adopting it is part of playing at the top. For everyone else: try a different group.

Trolling is the term I, not my group, choose to use because that's how it would feel to me if I showed up for trifecta prog (talking things like MM and Unstoppable here for clarity) on a parse DD that isn't an arcanist. There's a couple of edge cases where another class can slip in, but you only need to look at logs to see that arc is the go to DD. I don't know if you'd consider the level I play at to be what you call "the very top" or not, and to me this issue kicks in even for the higher end of mid level groups, but I guarantee the issue isn't "bad groups". Putting DDs on arc simply makes sense the moment you are attempting any achievement the group doesn't already have. It's not about toxicity or trying to force people to do what the raid lead wants - it's about the raid lead making choices to give the best chance of success.

That leaves adjusting playstyles to fit. Yes, I've done that, personally by moving to support roles and retiring from DD. Doesn't make the problem that is arc beam suddenly okay or something that should be ignored.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Yes, it’s a different playstyle. Yes, it works different. So why is that a good problem? Why do you feel that only the constant rhythm dynamic rotation should be able to do good damage?

Same questions back at you, but in reverse. (I love the rhythm of playing plar on live btw).

We all just want to be able to play the game, at any level, in a way we enjoy and feel engaged by. At the moment, beam is overpowered to the point that no other spammable comes close to what it can do, so any other playstyle, most of which were part of the game for way way longer than beam, suffers as a result.

Zodiarkslayer

Major_Toughness wrote: »

This is about Fatecarver, not the entire class. In which I agree with you, but is irrelevant.

Both are connected. That's my point. You cannot nerf Fatecarver without seriously buffing and restructuring the entire class.

They did the same with Jabs and ever since Templar is like a radiating survivor of a nuke.

XSTRONG

In PvP Yes but in PvE No

Vrienda

It's not too strong, the other classes are too weak. Every class but arcanist feels horrible and dated to play. They're slow, clunky and don't seem to do much damage comparitively. I'd say they need to do a full redesign of all the pre-Arcanist classes to bring them up to modern standards.

RlyDontKnow

Ezhh wrote: »

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

If your group is considering it trolling then you’re either playing at the very top or your group is just making unreasonable and unjustified demands. If it’s the first: adjusting to whatever playstyle is currently the best and adopting it is part of playing at the top. For everyone else: try a different group.

Trolling is the term I, not my group, choose to use because that's how it would feel to me if I showed up for trifecta prog (talking things like MM and Unstoppable here for clarity) on a parse DD that isn't an arcanist. There's a couple of edge cases where another class can slip in, but you only need to look at logs to see that arc is the go to DD. I don't know if you'd consider the level I play at to be what you call "the very top" or not, and to me this issue kicks in even for the higher end of mid level groups, but I guarantee the issue isn't "bad groups". Putting DDs on arc simply makes sense the moment you are attempting any achievement the group doesn't already have. It's not about toxicity or trying to force people to do what the raid lead wants - it's about the raid lead making choices to give the best chance of success.

Yes, going for the trifecta in the latest trial is pretty much high end. At that level you always had to ajdust to the current meta. Raid leads wanted mostly necro for colossus rotation before. Or even before that before payed classes people might have wanted full on Stam groups for more DPS, so mag got left out. Or or or... If you want to play at a level where min-maxing matters, you just do that and stop being attached to individual classes or playstyles (at least imo).

For mid end and a bit higher (say going for a trifecta in an older trial like AS or KA at best) it doesn't make sense to force everyone to play optimal setups. If people would like to to make their life a bit easier: sure, go for it. But you shouldn't force them. Because at that level your most important task is keeping the group together long enough to actually achieve your goals. It's a lot more about people paying attention to mechanics, etc. Theoretically optimal group compositions don't help you while people are still learning mechs and can't keep buffs up. And neither do "optimal" builds that people hate to play. At that point you optimized the fun out and people will start leaving.

noneatza

Make beam a 0.8s channelled ability (similar in cast time to jabs, flurry, lethal arrow, etc), keep it's range and aoe aspect so it's the same long "narrow" line with a 6target cap, change it to direct damage and have it do all it's damage at once so it's a big bonk laser.

Keep the crux interaction but perhaps lower the % dmg bonus, this so the beam can still maintain it's status as best thing since sliced bread but if there are beam protesters they won't be shunned for not using it.

Make exhausting snare and apply offbalance
Make pragmatic give a heal over time


There you go, beam is now a balanced spammable, the subclassing option of nb+arc is now very viable(bowproc), relequen is now a viable option on arcanists, velothi is now also not a must-have anymore and people can use monster sets if they wish to.


One can dream....

StarMightyMaster

Soarora wrote: »

It did not need a damage buff or a cost increase. It’s weak single-target compared to other classes but vastly outcompetes in AoE, which is… most fights. Either every class needs an AoE component to a spammable or fatecarver’s AoE potential needs nerfed.

? I does 90k single-target not so sure that is weak or less than the other lol

BretonMage

Vrienda wrote: »

It's not too strong, the other classes are too weak. Every class but arcanist feels horrible and dated to play. They're slow, clunky and don't seem to do much damage comparitively. I'd say they need to do a full redesign of all the pre-Arcanist classes to bring them up to modern standards.

I think this is very subjective. I personally thought Arcanist (especially the beam) felt horrible and clunky to play. But yes, other classes need to be brought up to Arcanist's level of damage.

Finisherofwar

It has a 6 target cap now and that will hurt it greatly. I think the discussion should actually be if that cap is too low and should be raised instead.

Maggusemm

no it isnt too powerful. The nerf making it more expensive and limiting it to 6 targets is doing well and making it a realistic skill for all classes now in subclassing.

Well done, subclassing will be a success with it.

Ezhh

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Yes, going for the trifecta in the latest trial is pretty much high end. At that level you always had to ajdust to the current meta. Raid leads wanted mostly necro for colossus rotation before. Or even before that before payed classes people might have wanted full on Stam groups for more DPS, so mag got left out. Or or or... If you want to play at a level where min-maxing matters, you just do that and stop being attached to individual classes or playstyles (at least imo).

I'm just more of the belief that a game should be fun no matter the level you play at. If something is massively outperforming other options then it's an issue regardless. Saying end gamers will play whatever is best so their enjoyment of a playstyle doesn't matter (an argument I've been given) makes no sense to me. We could also say certain other groups of players are not doing content where their dps matters very much, so their preferences (think the people who want slower paced gameplay) don't need to be considered when balancing. I'm sure you've seen the argument that HA sorcs /arc beamers get damage more easily and it's not fair because it's less skilled. (I'm not saying I agree with that, just to be clear.) There is always a way to try spin an argument that some group or another has less right to complain if they are not enjoying the gameplay but... here's the thing, there are other games to play. I and many others played this game and invested in this game because we liked the gameplay. Now it's been taken away year after year. Yes, we will speak up about it. How ZOS respond will determine what we'll do next.

So again: Either beam is too strong, or there needs to be alternatives that perform at a similar level.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

For mid end and a bit higher (say going for a trifecta in an older trial like AS or KA at best) it doesn't make sense to force everyone to play optimal setups. If people would like to to make their life a bit easier: sure, go for it. But you shouldn't force them. Because at that level your most important task is keeping the group together long enough to actually achieve your goals. It's a lot more about people paying attention to mechanics, etc. Theoretically optimal group compositions don't help you while people are still learning mechs and can't keep buffs up. And neither do "optimal" builds that people hate to play. At that point you optimized the fun out and people will start leaving.

I'd say with this it all depends on the group. Arc for example is way safer to play than let's say a stamblade. Why? You can stand at range, not in the stupid in many cases. The rotation (to get acceptable damage, not talking top end damage here) is simple, so you can pay more attention to those mechanics and not become absorbed as much in struggling with which buttons you are pressing. Arc provides most of the buffs it needs for itself, so you're also less dependent on the supports to have good uptimes, which is less likely in such groups). And finally the damage does matter at these levels too. You might get to skip an extra mini in AS, or do one less portal in CR, or suddenly be able to kill Falgraven before the healers can't keep up. Then there's the cleave. Something that can make every difference in fights like Lokke, Vrol and so on. Suddenly they get way easier when the adds are getting pushed even while people focus the boss..

If you want to achieve something that is a challenge for your current group, at any level of progression in the game, going arc can make the difference. I've seen it myself where I've been in groups and the lead has asked people to change to arc, and suddenly everything got way easier.

Beam enables people to push further into the game than they could before, which isn't a bad thing, just an imbalance compared to other skills.

Skjaldbjorn

I have been running trifectas since Morrowind, effectively. I have most of them, and have been in progs for all of them at one point or another. I've played through countless metas and climates that made a variety of classes viable or garbage depending on what the devs were smoking that week.

I've been through the year-long dev-enforced NB meta of Summerset where you'd basically get memed out the door if you weren't a magblade with path because the healing was absurdly strong.

I've been through the year-long dev-enforced Stamcro meta where you'd basically get memed out the door if you weren't a cro because major vuln was new and exciting and ungodly broken, particularly at release, and uptimes on it were paramount.

I've been through the Thrassians meta, the DK meta, the dot meta, the changes have been utterly exhausting. Having said all that, while I have taken breaks from ESO in the past, usually for other games, no other class has pushed me to retirement more than Arcanist, and by extension, subclassing.

No other class has been so utterly dominant for so long with zero light at the end of the tunnel. While exceptionally skilled players on other classes could definitely compete before, the ceiling vs floor in skill level vs production was just...goofy. The CPMs tell the story a lot of the time. You'd see Stamdens or Stamplars or Stamcros busting off 120-140 CPM pulls just to be tied with an Arc chilling at ~50-70 CPM.

If you're a talented player who enjoys the frenetic, fast-paced combat of ESO, Arcanist puts you to sleep. It's exhausting to play because you literally zone tf out. I enjoyed Arc for a few months, and then I realized I'd rather just quit than play it. So I moved on to finding ways to compete elsewhere, and I did! I've been pretty successful in that scope.

However, with subclassing? Forget it. Beam is king. Arc/NB/Cro probably isn't even finding competition, much less something stronger. A "zoo" build with daedric prey at least had the potential to utterly dumpster it single target, but Zos ensured that died before it ever saw the last of day.

Beam is, functionally, the core reason why Arc is so absurdly strong and so hard to balance. It requires little to no skill to actually pull competitive numbers. At least in the current meta, DKs, Cros and Templars have a lot of value. Their single target is much higher potentially than Arc, and there are fights where that is incredibly important. With subclassing, I feel fairly confident in saying those days are gone. Beam is just so absurdly powerful, got buffed by ~8%, now it gets ~15% on top from the mag BB effect, along with the passive from siphon, the NB ult, the list goes on and on.

No other class has a skill you can just invest literally every slot on your bar to buffing and have it hard carry your damage the entire fight. It was a bad idea at design and aged like milk because Zos refused to handle it appropriately. If the subclassing doesn't see drastic change before release, I will be hanging up my ESO boots permanently.

RlyDontKnow

Ezhh wrote: »

It's fine for you to have your opinion. I'm just more of the belief that a game should be fun no matter the level you play at. If something is massively outperforming other options then it's an issue regardless. Saying end gamers will play whatever is best so their enjoyment of a playstyle doesn't matter (an argument I've been given) makes no sense to me.

Is it massively outperforming, though? The huge parse on PTS we see right now is using a ST set to get that high. A well built necro also does massive cleave while doing similar/even more damage. If you want too ST, then non-beam builds perform even better.
If you want to play differently, that is an option in principle. That’s all I’m saying. If you hate beaming that much, then don’t use it. It’s not like you’re forced to. Even less so with the new build options.

Ezhh wrote: »

I'd say with this it all depends on the group. Arc for example is way safer to play than let's say a stamblade. Why? You can stand at range, not in the stupid in many cases. The rotation (to get acceptable damage, not talking top end damage here) is simple, so you can pay more attention to those mechanics and not become absorbed as much in struggling with which buttons you are pressing. Arc provides most of the buffs it needs for itself, so you're also less dependent on the supports to have good uptimes, which is less likely in such groups). And finally the damage does matter at these levels too. You might get to skip an extra mini in AS, or do one less portal in CR, or suddenly be able to kill Falgraven before the healers can't keep up. Then there's the cleave. Something that can make every difference in fights like Lokke, Vrol and so on. Suddenly they get way easier when the adds are getting pushed even while people focus the boss..

If you want to achieve something that is a challenge for your current group, at any level of progression in the game, going arc can make the difference. I've seen it myself where I've been in groups and the lead has asked people to change to arc, and suddenly everything got way easier.

Beam enables people to push further into the game than they could before, which isn't a bad thing, just an imbalance compared to other skills.

So the terrible easy rotation that everyone hates because it makes them fall asleep is an advantage? Yes, if you build for simplicity and ease of play you may get good (albeit suboptimal) damage while being able to pay a lot more attention to the fight making things easier. And doing a simple rotation very cleanly is easier and may net many players better DPS than doing a complicated rotation badly. That is exactly the point of having such a build. That is what Templar used to provide before it got nerfed into the ground.

That doesn’t mean it’s overperforming and that there’s no alternative. I also disagree that you’re less reliant on your supports. Even less so with the changes that make sustain a lot more relevant. Armor debuffs definitely matter big time. So do other common buffs and debuffs. So does sustain with the changes. You can still run more complicated builds to achieve better results. It just makes it easier to get - as you put it - acceptable results. And it sounds like your experience is that people may need those more accessible builds to get acceptable results.

So where is the issue here? That people have a build that gets acceptable results which makes a lot of content accessible to them? That people get better result when they opt for simplicity? Should there be nothing between HA sorcs and your average endgame build with complicated rotations because timers don’t really align, anymore?

The only way that the existence of a simpler build that clears the bar of being good enough is not an issue according to your reasoning is if it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t need to be the best. As long as it’s good enough people will get further by being able to pay more attention and thus progress further. So the only option to fix your issue is to nerf the good enough build so hard into the ground that it’s not good enough, anymore.
As someone who has been building off-meta for many years and has always been building for simplicity, I’m precisely asking to not do that (again).
We’ve been through this before with Templar. It was nerfed into the ground so much that it became unusable (at least for this purpose). But people still wanted a build like that. So we got Arca which is old Templar on steroids. Now it got tuned down quite a notch to be a bit below other competitive classes, but not quite there.

So… just leave it around there. It doesn’t need the buff it got PTS week one. And if people agree it needs a slight nerf (say 5%), sure, go for it. I couldn’t care less. But don’t change so drastically it becomes useless (like turning it into direct damage, huge damage nerf, or other similar “just get rid of it” suggestions). It’s nowhere near that strong.

Wereswan

Don't forget the passives:

Fated Fortune: Warp fate when you generate or consume Crux, increasing your Critical Damage and Critical Healing by 12% for 7 seconds.

You'll be constantly generating and using Crux to pump up the beam. Two other active abilities in this line (Runeblades and its morphs, and Tome-Bearer's Inspiration and its morphs) generate Crux, as does the Cephiliarch's Flail morph of Abyssal Impact.

Harnessed Quintessence: You master the warp and weft of your very soul. When you are restored Magicka or Stamina, increase your Weapon and Spell Damage by 5% for 10 seconds.

Recuperative Treatise procs this, and also gives Major Brutality and Major Sorcery when slotted.

Psychic Lesion: [With a Herald of the Tome ability slotted] Your attacks wound the mind with heretical knowledge, increasing the damage dealt by Status Effects by 15% and Status Effect Chance by 55%.

You'll definitely have Fatecarver slotted if you took this line, and at least one other skill to generate Crux.

Splintered Secrets: What they don't know can kill them. Increase your Physical and Spell Penetration by 991 per Herald of the Tome ability slotted.

You can reach nearly 15K pen on a light armor build with all six active abilities slotted on one bar, and that's with a precise staff.

The thing that makes it so evil is that everything you need to pump it up to horrifying levels of power is right there on one skill line—and now you can pick and choose two more skill lines worth of damage-boosting passives to make it even nastier.

RlyDontKnow

Wereswan wrote: »

Don't forget the passives:

Fated Fortune: Warp fate when you generate or consume Crux, increasing your Critical Damage and Critical Healing by 12% for 7 seconds.

You'll be constantly generating and using Crux to pump up the beam. Two other active abilities in this line (Runeblades and its morphs, and Tome-Bearer's Inspiration and its morphs) generate Crux, as does the Cephiliarch's Flail morph of Abyssal Impact.

Harnessed Quintessence: You master the warp and weft of your very soul. When you are restored Magicka or Stamina, increase your Weapon and Spell Damage by 5% for 10 seconds.

Recuperative Treatise procs this, and also gives Major Brutality and Major Sorcery when slotted.

Psychic Lesion: [With a Herald of the Tome ability slotted] Your attacks wound the mind with heretical knowledge, increasing the damage dealt by Status Effects by 15% and Status Effect Chance by 55%.

You'll definitely have Fatecarver slotted if you took this line, and at least one other skill to generate Crux.

Splintered Secrets: What they don't know can kill them. Increase your Physical and Spell Penetration by 991 per Herald of the Tome ability slotted.

You can reach nearly 15K pen on a light armor build with all six active abilities slotted on one bar, and that's with a precise staff.

The thing that makes it so evil is that everything you need to pump it up to horrifying levels of power is right there on one skill line—and now you can pick and choose two more skill lines worth of damage-boosting passives to make it even nastier.

For PvE penetration is really a non-issue as it’s almost completely sourced from supports. So for PvE this is a semi-dead passive.
That leaves 5% weapon damage, 12% crit damage and status effect damage.
Crit damage is also mostly sourced externally from supports in PvE and you already get minor force from Velothi, so you don’t need to bring a whole lot. But at least you don’t really need to worry like that.
That leaves the weapon damage and status effect damage. Nothing to scoff at, but not exactly huge compared to other classes.

Compare that to assasination on PTS:
* massive crit
* crit damage
* Even more weapon damage
And you don’t even need to do anything to get those other than flank (which is very easy in PvE).

Even aedric spear:
* crit damage
* weapon damage
* Free damage from burning light
* Minor berserk
* Some armor because why not

There are builds with rune instead of fatecarver that do more ST damage.
The main attraction here is really abyssal impact for the unique damage taken buff while doing decent damage.
If you go beam, you go flail + beam. Else you’ll use rune to build crux and get a stronger damage taken debuff.

Ezhh

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Is it massively outperforming, though? The huge parse on PTS we see right now is using a ST set to get that high.

There is no other spammable in the game that can compare. It's not just about ST damage or any specific parses on PTS right now. It's an issue on live too and subclassing + an 8% base damage increase are inflating the issue.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

If you hate beaming that much, then don’t use it. It’s not like you’re forced to. Even less so with the new build options.

This is extremely unhelpful.

If you personally think imbalances are fine because "you don't have to play a certain way" then please try to understand that people might want good performance and the ability to play the playstyle they prefer at the same time.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

So where is the issue here? That people have a build that gets acceptable results which makes a lot of content accessible to them? That people get better result when they opt for simplicity? Should there be nothing between HA sorcs and your average endgame build with complicated rotations because timers don’t really align, anymore?

I haven't said any of that anywhere. I'm a big supporter of the game having playstyles that cater to everyone.

And in "end game" outside of maybe the very tiny worldrecord socrepushing minority and support DDs, it's a bit of a strain to find any case of "complicated rotations because timers don’t really align". The average end game build (for people trying to do the last few trifectas) is an arc beamer.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

The only way that the existence of a simpler build that clears the bar of being good enough is not an issue according to your reasoning is if it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t need to be the best. As long as it’s good enough people will get further by being able to pay more attention and thus progress further. So the only option to fix your issue is to nerf the good enough build so hard into the ground that it’s not good enough, anymore.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I don't care if arc beam is as good as other playstyles and can do the same content. It should be able to. What I care about is that it's so far ahead in almost every single scenario. (So we are very clear, a large part of this is due to the range and cleave on beam).

Someone getting the same damage numbers on a simpler build than me is 100% acceptable, since in that scenario I have chosen to use the more complicated build. What isn't okay is that there are many situations where someone can objectively play extremely well on another class/playstyle and it will be practically impossible for them to hold their own with an arc. (Again, ranged cleave is a big part of this. The design of recent trials has heavily focused on situations where cleave is really important. If there'd been more ST focused fights in recent trials, the situation on live would be different.)

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

So… just leave it around there. It doesn’t need the buff it got PTS week one. And if people agree it needs a slight nerf (say 5%), sure, go for it. I couldn’t care less. But don’t change so drastically it becomes useless (like turning it into direct damage, huge damage nerf, or other similar “just get rid of it” suggestions). It’s nowhere near that strong.

If you check some of my previous comments, you'll see I've actually pointed out the difficulties and issues with "nerfing" beam in a way that doesn't break the class and create the same problem but in the other direction (beam no longer keeping up with high CPM gameplay). What I'd actually love to see is simply some alternatives to beam that enable ranged cleave without a long channel time. Either way, to balance this isn't a simple issue and I don't envy the hole ZOS dug for themselves with this.

alpha_synuclein

Ezhh wrote: »

If you check some of my previous comments, you'll see I've actually pointed out the difficulties and issues with "nerfing" beam in a way that doesn't break the class and create the same problem but in the other direction (beam no longer keeping up with high CPM gameplay). What I'd actually love to see is simply some alternatives to beam that enable ranged cleave without a long channel time. Either way, to balance this isn't a simple issue and I don't envy the hole ZOS dug for themselves with this.

The biggest issue is that zos don't seem to see arca as an issue. Beam covered a lot of problems that were the aftermath of u35 and teleported enough people into endgame to keep it somewhat alive. Enabling subclassing with beam as it is now on pts is an indication that they gave up on balancing.

RlyDontKnow

Ezhh wrote: »

There is no other spammable in the game that can compare. It's not just about ST damage or any specific parses on PTS right now. It's an issue on live too and subclassing + an 8% base damage increase are inflating the issue.

That's because it's not a spammable per se. You can't just spam it, you have to build the crux first. A flail flail beam combination lands at ~1.76 Damager per Power. A flail beam combination lands at around 1.89 Damage per Power.
But to even use those you need another DoT runnning and for just flail beam the banner. And the stars need to align so banner doesn't hit before the DoT after consuming crux or you'll be down to flail flail beam instead (part of the nuissances of actually playing an Arca). Factoring in inspired scholarship we're at ~1.95 Damage per Power.
So for the 1.95 Damage per Power you are using 4 skill slots.

For comparison: the pre-nerf (U34) Jabs had ~1.58 for Jabs + 0.63 for Burning Light for a combined 2.21 and you could actually just spam that without keeping anything up. Cleave damage was half damage and it was melee, but in return you got a very strong self-heal.

Ezhh wrote: »

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

If you hate beaming that much, then don’t use it. It’s not like you’re forced to. Even less so with the new build options.

This is extremely unhelpful.

If you personally think imbalances are fine because "you don't have to play a certain way" then please try to understand that people might want good performance and the ability to play the playstyle they prefer at the same time.

I don't think imbalances are fine. But the discussion about Arcanists is not just imbalances. It's about how much worse an easier playstyle should be. I'm perfectly fine if beam gets turned down a notch. But this isn't what people are calling for. And the templar treatments in the past have shown that this isn't where it stops. So the question is: what is the actual issue here?

Let's take a look at live necro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GK69RxnGIY - particularly the alternatives setups past the actual parse.
The skills are all AoE. Even in AoE gear (which hits slightly lower dummy numbers) this performs around the same level as Arca in ST and Cleave. In turn you have to be melee and the targets shouldn't move around too much. Neither of those should be a major issue in an organized group. In return you get some target debuffs.

Apparently this still qualifies as "no alternative to Arcanist". So my question is: what qualifies as alternative? What exactly are you asking other classes to get?

Ezhh wrote: »

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

The only way that the existence of a simpler build that clears the bar of being good enough is not an issue according to your reasoning is if it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t need to be the best. As long as it’s good enough people will get further by being able to pay more attention and thus progress further. So the only option to fix your issue is to nerf the good enough build so hard into the ground that it’s not good enough, anymore.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I don't care if arc beam is as good as other playstyles and can do the same content. It should be able to. What I care about is that it's so far ahead in almost every single scenario. (So we are very clear, a large part of this is due to the range and cleave on beam).

Someone getting the same damage numbers on a simpler build than me is 100% acceptable, since in that scenario I have chosen to use the more complicated build. What isn't okay is that there are many situations where someone can objectively play extremely well on another class/playstyle and it will be practically impossible for them to hold their own with an arc. (Again, ranged cleave is a big part of this. The design of recent trials has heavily focused on situations where cleave is really important. If there'd been more ST focused fights in recent trials, the situation on live would be different.)

I agree it's unfortunate that there's so much focus on cleave lately. I have to admit I haven't done that much of the most recent trials as I just recently got back into the game, but where exactly is there so much need for *ranged* cleave?
I agree that range can be an advantage in some cases, but most trials don't need range (especially not from everyone).

Ezhh wrote: »

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

So… just leave it around there. It doesn’t need the buff it got PTS week one. And if people agree it needs a slight nerf (say 5%), sure, go for it. I couldn’t care less. But don’t change so drastically it becomes useless (like turning it into direct damage, huge damage nerf, or other similar “just get rid of it” suggestions). It’s nowhere near that strong.

If you check some of my previous comments, you'll see I've actually pointed out the difficulties and issues with "nerfing" beam in a way that doesn't break the class and create the same problem but in the other direction (beam no longer keeping up with high CPM gameplay). What I'd actually love to see is simply some alternatives to beam that enable ranged cleave without a long channel time. Either way, to balance this isn't a simple issue and I don't envy the hole ZOS dug for themselves with this.

I don't think this will satisfy anyone, really. If you look at Templar U34 or even older you had a very similar build to what arca is today (simple rotation, good damage, etc.) with the following differences:
* 1s channel instead of 5.5s channel
* melee instead of range
* reduced cleave damage, but with self-heal instead of full cleave damage
* a self-heal during execute to rescue the day
* some other defensive passives (notably minor protection, extra armor, it paired well with high-elf which provides extra damage reduction while chanelling) that made it quite tanky
At that point there were plenty alternatives providing similar or better power and most fights were ST or with very little adds.

And yet: there were the exact same complaints about Templar. It's too strong, it's too easy, you have it - and it got nerfed so hard it never recovered.

But if you want some alterantives to the hard nerf hammer:
Take the beam's range away and make it 8x6m (jabs size) or something like that. It already qualifies as melee, anyway. So let it actually be melee.
Buff templar back to what it was, so we have a 1s channel alternative to Arcanist with different trade-offs.

But I'm pretty sure people will keep complaining about arcanist until it's so far behind other classes that it's just unplayable. Because as long as simple builds are good enough (say 5-10% behind others with no DPS checks requiring this extra damage), people will play them.