royo wrote: »

The vast majority of score pushing dds are not nightblade mains. Most of us consider our main "best" class to be something else. However, it seems like you just don't want to believe in the collected work of a couple hundred people who use trial splits and fight times to figure out the most efficient method to do hard mode trials, and that's fine.

I don't think there is a point debating something with someone who has no clue what they are talking about...

John_Falstaff wrote: »

@hedna123b14_ESO , that's what you say. And by the way, I'm not even one who mentioned tests showing equality - @royo 's own words. As for 80k parses we're speaking about, they're all stack'n'burn here. If we talked about something other than those, sure, I can agree that NB has the edge due to burst, but it already has nothing to do with parses. If we go that route, we'll soon come to vAS+2 / vCR+3 and how stamblades (or stam-anything) perform there.

And now that our numbers are down to 2-3k between top classes, this I can imagine easily. Pretty much within how parses above would scale. And I'm not sure if that level of imbalance bothers anyone including ZOS, considering that racial passives give bigger spread than that.

Please dont twist words. You were the first one to mention that classes are close, before royo even joined the discussion. The difference between top stamdens and top stamblades is over 5k. The difference between good stamdens and AVERAGE stamblades is 2-3k. No one is debating that player skill determines performance the most, however if skill is equal, stamblades tend to perform substantially better.

All fights that arent stack and burn (there arent many) also have stamblades performing substantially higher than any other class. That's a fact.

John_Falstaff wrote: »

@hedna123b14_ESO , why should I forget that the one I'm talking to have agreed with me on their own accord? Let's not omit things. And speaking of that, now you're twisting your own words; not sure if those who you consider to be top (since your stamblades are average) have generated enough data that is available.

And again, not sure if we're to bring content design into it. By the way, first you said stamblades perform better in trial scenarios because of burst, and now you're saying that aren't many fights are stack and burn - that's contradicting yourself. If we look, again, at two latest mini-trials, picture is different, not sure if it lets us say that stamblades are underperforming in trial scenarios. Of course class performance is context-dependent, no question about that.

Top Nightblades are the 20-30 people who play them on NA and probably around 40-60 who play them on EU and have produced parses which have been similar in nature. Those same players who usually main other classes and tried those classes in content that they know well, were highly disappointed in the results they achieved.

What data do you have to corroborate your statements?

As to your last paragraph:
1. Fact: stamblades perform better in all trials where stam is used (non mini trials) because even when burst isnt necessary the combination of incap as an ultimate, bloodthirsty as well as killers blade all stacking together produces insane results in long or short fights.
2. Fact: in those few fights that require burst damage (such as Archcustodian) nightblades shine even more because they have Incap which is a short burst ult which significantly augments their damage. Not sure.

Not sure how points 1 and 2 contradict eachother...

Stam isnt used (yet) in mini trial competitive runs, so again stamblades are out of that discussion.

Again to reiterate: If your statement is that player skill determines dps results, then it's a 100% accurate statement. However in endgame progression the skill level is more or less of a similar nature, and I promise you that there is no ambiguity as to the fact that all other classes perform significantly worse than stamblade, when player skill is taken out of the equation as it is in competitive endgame.

RusevCrush wrote: »

Stamnb should always be top dps imo. It's a simple risk/reward thing. What would be the incentive to play them otherwise?

What do you risk on a stamblade that you dont on a stamplar who has a channeled spammable?

Corpier wrote: »

RusevCrush wrote: »

Stamnb should always be top dps imo. It's a simple risk/reward thing. What would be the incentive to play them otherwise?

Risk/reward should make a difference in dps, so should selfish/enabling dps. Stamina Nightblade is actually one of the lowest risk stamina classes. They get major defensive buffs from their spammable. They have the sustain to not need to heavy attack and don't have any channeled abilities to get stuck in. They have better sustain and survivability in combat than most other classes in most situations (not all, especially if you count magicka and minitrials). If you want to get into enabling dps, with its cheap ultimate Incap it can buff its group with War Machine.

Stamsorc may have similar survivability from Hurricane, but lack the sustain and enabling dps. Stamplar can enable dps with Power of The Light and War Machine with the Sweep ult, but lacks survivability and sustain. Stamden has good sustain and can enable dps with the bear and War Machine (and can provide Minor Toughness without a Warden Healer), but lacks survivability. DK lacks it all.

By my personal gameplay philosophy that risk/reward and selfish/enabling attributes of a class should effect how much dps it does, stamina nightblade should not be the highest preforming dps while having low risk (for stamina) and high enabling dps.

Ideally the reason to play one class over another should be a multilayered question and should function like: Does a class have more survival tools (sustain/mitigation/self-healing/mobility) built into their damage dealing abilities but do less damage overall? Then its probably better for beginners that don't know mechanics and don't need the dps since they aren't pushing score. Does the class offer buffs or utility for the group? Is someone already playing that class and providing that buff or utility? If not maybe I should play it, if so maybe I should play a class that will provide a different buff or utility, or play a more selfish class with slightly more damage.

P.S. And yes, I think classes/builds that enable more dps should do slightly less dps themselves. When it works well the buff provided often increases group dps much more than the penalty on the individual. If you want to think of it practically, then the amount of dps one person enables for the group could pretty much be added to their own parse as it is that valuable to the group when done right. So in my ideal model for a group, only 1-3 players would play the top dps class, and those would be the best dps in the group after other enabling dps buffs are provided by others, so that it would maximize the give/take and sacrifice/gain mentality that should exist in good group play.

This....so much this

Davadin wrote: »

Ragnarock41 wrote: »

reprosal wrote: »

StamDK is actually still pretty strong. It is just not the ‘meta’.

Just another word for meh. Because how good or bad something performs is decided by comparing it to the rest. When I look at stamDk as a PvE DD, I see that it doesn't have anything that sets it apart. No utility whatsoever, decent damage but not the best, decent sustain but again not the best. (In fact, the only quality that set stamDK apart was the easy heavy attack rotation but still competitive damage, which is completely butchered by heavy attack nerfs.. I guess too much diversity for us huh.)

On top of all this I can't even proc my own utility passives because there is not a single earthen heart ability that fits a stamDD's build. It used to be molten armaments(ironic, a skill not even designed for stamDDs). Now not even that.

PvP I use either Fossilize or the exploding armor one. gives me minor brut.
PvE i realy on my group to pull up molten armaments or something.

But he's talking about competitive PvE, so neither armaments nor Foss has anything to do there. In fact, Minor brut is given by the Tank. Any point in using armaments if you have a DK tank?

Masel wrote: »

Stam Necro is the best.

Cant wait

Corpier wrote: »

RusevCrush wrote: »

Stamnb should always be top dps imo. It's a simple risk/reward thing. What would be the incentive to play them otherwise?

Risk/reward should make a difference in dps, so should selfish/enabling dps. Stamina Nightblade is actually one of the lowest risk stamina classes. They get major defensive buffs from their spammable. They have the sustain to not need to heavy attack and don't have any channeled abilities to get stuck in. They have better sustain and survivability in combat than most other classes in most situations (not all, especially if you count magicka and minitrials). If you want to get into enabling dps, with its cheap ultimate Incap it can buff its group with War Machine.

Stamsorc may have similar survivability from Hurricane, but lack the sustain and enabling dps. Stamplar can enable dps with Power of The Light and War Machine with the Sweep ult, but lacks survivability and sustain. Stamden has good sustain and can enable dps with the bear and War Machine (and can provide Minor Toughness without a Warden Healer), but lacks survivability. DK lacks it all, and I would advocate should have the highest potential dps if its rotation wasn't so mindnumbingly easy.

By my personal gameplay philosophy that risk/reward and selfish/enabling attributes of a class should effect how much dps it does, stamina nightblade should not be the highest preforming dps while having low risk (for stamina) and high enabling dps.

Ideally the reason to play one class over another should be a multilayered question and should function like: Does a class have more survival tools (sustain/mitigation/self-healing/mobility) built into their damage dealing abilities but do less damage overall? Then its probably better for beginners that don't know mechanics and don't need the dps since they aren't pushing score. Does the class offer buffs or utility for the group? Is someone already playing that class and providing that buff or utility? If not maybe I should play it, if so maybe I should play a class that will provide a different buff or utility, or play a more selfish class with slightly more damage.

P.S. And yes, I think classes/builds that enable more dps should do slightly less dps themselves. When it works well the buff provided often increases group dps much more than the penalty on the individual. If you want to think of it practically, then the amount of dps one person enables for the group could pretty much be added to their own parse as it is that valuable to the group when done right. So in my ideal model for a group, only 1-3 players would play the top dps class, and those would be the best dps in the group after other enabling dps buffs are provided by others, so that it would maximize the give/take and sacrifice/gain mentality that should exist in good group play.

You saved me so much time. Thanks for the well written post.

Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »

Corpier wrote: »

RusevCrush wrote: »

Stamnb should always be top dps imo. It's a simple risk/reward thing. What would be the incentive to play them otherwise?

Risk/reward should make a difference in dps, so should selfish/enabling dps. Stamina Nightblade is actually one of the lowest risk stamina classes. They get major defensive buffs from their spammable. They have the sustain to not need to heavy attack and don't have any channeled abilities to get stuck in. They have better sustain and survivability in combat than most other classes in most situations (not all, especially if you count magicka and minitrials). If you want to get into enabling dps, with its cheap ultimate Incap it can buff its group with War Machine.

Stamsorc may have similar survivability from Hurricane, but lack the sustain and enabling dps. Stamplar can enable dps with Power of The Light and War Machine with the Sweep ult, but lacks survivability and sustain. Stamden has good sustain and can enable dps with the bear and War Machine (and can provide Minor Toughness without a Warden Healer), but lacks survivability. DK lacks it all, and I would advocate should have the highest potential dps if its rotation wasn't so mindnumbingly easy.

By my personal gameplay philosophy that risk/reward and selfish/enabling attributes of a class should effect how much dps it does, stamina nightblade should not be the highest preforming dps while having low risk (for stamina) and high enabling dps.

Ideally the reason to play one class over another should be a multilayered question and should function like: Does a class have more survival tools (sustain/mitigation/self-healing/mobility) built into their damage dealing abilities but do less damage overall? Then its probably better for beginners that don't know mechanics and don't need the dps since they aren't pushing score. Does the class offer buffs or utility for the group? Is someone already playing that class and providing that buff or utility? If not maybe I should play it, if so maybe I should play a class that will provide a different buff or utility, or play a more selfish class with slightly more damage.

P.S. And yes, I think classes/builds that enable more dps should do slightly less dps themselves. When it works well the buff provided often increases group dps much more than the penalty on the individual. If you want to think of it practically, then the amount of dps one person enables for the group could pretty much be added to their own parse as it is that valuable to the group when done right. So in my ideal model for a group, only 1-3 players would play the top dps class, and those would be the best dps in the group after other enabling dps buffs are provided by others, so that it would maximize the give/take and sacrifice/gain mentality that should exist in good group play.

I agree with everything you said. The only thing missing from the analysis is difficulty of rotation, which I also think needs considered. For example, i could probably teach my little sister to break 40k on a DK before I could on a stamblade. Now at some point, we are talking about min/maxed groups and it's assumed that rotations are all performed efficiently, but some classes are way easier on the fingers than others and to a beginner, that matters.

But that is a different problem. DK and sorc are simply boring to play. Their rotation is a giant circle as you say. While I think it's fine to be able to play a class like that, they should at least have a more interesting
possibility.




This is a summary of classes and their abilities that can be used effectively by a stamina build, and it shows pretty clearly why stamplar, stamden and stamblade feel unique and interesting.

They have a skill that their rotation centers around and are able to use low cost ultimates, while dk and sorc have no possibility of doing so...

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

@Masel you don't have the storm atro under Stam sorc but you have flames of Oblivion under stamdk, isn't the storm atro the best single target ulti the Stam sorc has? You also have leaching strikes but not crit surge.

Then I'd also have to list all ultimates. I only included dedicated stamina morphs cause they all scale with highest stats. I only included regular abilities that scale with highest stats.

@Masel

The premise behind that last graphic is a good one, but I think it could be cleaned up quite a bit. For instance you list 7 NB abilities but then say they use 4 of 6, should be 5 of 7.

Donnasnowheart_ESO wrote: »

Who even has rotation difficulty at that level of PVE? Rotation difficulty shouldn't be a major factor when its not even something special to the class. NBs being top need to stop using that as a reason when literally the main special mech they have is being rewarded with big burst for weaving something every single class has to be doing to reach top numbers.

The funny part is that they DON'T have a hard rotation when it matters. Their pre-execute rotation has to be timed well, but they reason they do well is because of execute. A warden parses on par or better prior to the execute phase, but in execute the NB just explode with dpsand at that point their rotation actually becomes the easiest in the game.

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Donnasnowheart_ESO wrote: »

Who even has rotation difficulty at that level of PVE? Rotation difficulty shouldn't be a major factor when its not even something special to the class. NBs being top need to stop using that as a reason when literally the main special mech they have is being rewarded with big burst for weaving something every single class has to be doing to reach top numbers.

The funny part is that they DON'T have a hard rotation when it matters. Their pre-execute rotation has to be timed well, but they reason they do well is because of execute. A warden parses on par or better prior to the execute phase, but in execute the NB just explode with dpsand at that point their rotation actually becomes the easiest in the game.

Exactly. A non-scaling execute with 300% Bonus damage after 25% is insane (. Any other execute either doesnt scale or scales with 150-175% bonus damage at that time (executioner). Radiant has 240%, but you miss a light attack and front bar enchant procs at 25% so you land roughly where others are.

Looking at the abilities one by one:

Impale/Killers Blade:

Deals immediate damage in the amount of 0.052 Stamina and 0.542 Weapon Damage. Impale has the same, just with magicka. Deals 300% more damage to targets below 25%, meaning that from 50-0% health, it does an average of 150% additional damage if you'd be dumb enough to start using it early.

Executioner has the same skill coefficients of 0.052 stamina and 0.542 weapon damage. If you used it from 50% to 0% it would be 175% extra damage, which makes it better than killers blade, right?

In practice executes have opportunity costs. You give up either a DoT or a spammable for using them, and they only start outperforming a spammable after a certain percentage. Take surprise attack as an example: 0.103 Stamina and 1.084 weapon damage. Youd be dumb using executioner before 28-27%%, because the tooltip would be weaker than the one of surprise attack anyway and you should use your spammable until then. So even though executes look balanced when compared from 50% to 0%, they are not when you take the opportunity cost into account. Before 27-28%, you wouldn't use an execute anyway, and that is why killers blade/impale is so strong. It starts performing twice as well at that point because it just has a lot higher bonus damage than the other executes.

Sorc execute is pitifully weak. It doesn't scale and starts incredibly late. Look at the skill coefficient:

0.178 magicka and 1.85 spell damage which doesn't scale. This includes initial hit and the explosion. At 20% impale has coefficients of ~0.3 magicka and ~3.15 spell damage, so 70% more damage. And you can weave in between both of them, so no difference there.

Radiant oppression for example is different, since you lose one light attack per cast. It has 0.116 magicka and 1.223 spell damage. Since it does the damage over 2 seconds (1.8+the 0.2ms cooldown after channels) you'd have to halve the tooltip to match impale and deduct one light attack+a possible enchantment proc. It scales to 480%, meaning that it would have an average 240% from 50-0%, and 360% from 25% to 0. So you trade a light attack for 60% execute damage per cast, not taking the additional 20% bonus from oppression into account.

Radiant is the only one that yields somewhat comparable damage, but it has practical limitations, since it snares, cannot be used in block and is more clunky.

So tl;dr, NB execute is just vastly superior to other options...