An unrefined rotation that removed triplicity all together allowed runemage 2.0 caster 54k and one that involved triplicity 54k.
If both rotations can achieve the same dps then you need to weigh the pros and cons:
Triplicity pro: (potentially??? Not even sure if it can) do slightly more sustained dps.
Con:
Tile uptime
Tile consistency
Costs 2 spells to cast
Smaller margin of error
Loss of affliction towards end of triplicity.
Not using triplicity:
Pro: can do the same dps if not higher than with triplicity.
Consistent tiles
Higher and more consistent affliction and debuff up time
Doesnt cost 2 spells to cast
Less useless spells (lagg)
Con: it doesnt look as cool
More on topic, though:
Zen switching to archer is exactly as I mentioned before. Just like in other MMOs, why play a DPS with a 14 button rotation when you can play one that has a 5 button rotation and does the same damage and effects?
But ya mage might be the hardest, who knows, no-one has the time to be perfect in multiple disciplines to find out which is hardest. But at the same time if mage was harder. It isnât that much harder that it automatically deserves twice the damage as reward. That is not how much harder mage isâŚ
Back om the triplicity nerve thing, I have to calculate more tomorrow. With the amount of factors that it has I couldnât find enough time on finishing having an opinion on that today. (Mainly focussing on will triplicity be worth it vs no triplicity)
I agree that all classes should be viable, and to my understanding before this patch, mage was equally as viable as ranger.
This patch is tantamount to drastically lowering scoundrelâs curve bonus and giving higher base damage to raise the minimum damage and make it more accessible, as one person mentioned. However, in doing so youâre both indirectly hurting players that have practiced those curves and have practiced rotations with curves being the most important thing, since that was a large portion of their damage. If you were to nerf the curve bonus to 2% per rank (extreme example, but nonetheless), the 10% bonus wouldnât be worth even trying for because the DPS loss from missing a curve would be more than just shooting straight the entire time. If you were skilled enough, then yes you could get that extra damage, but would it be worth it to practice 100+ hours of just curving for a 10% bonus that would likely be the largest difference between an experienced and newer player? Because at that point, once you learn to shoot straight in VR and which cards to use/burn, then youâre already 85%-90% through the learning curve of the class. The only things left are tiles (5% as a quick Google search) and curving for that last 10% damage.
This is the same problem with mage now, voiced in unison by, from what I understand, is every top mage in the game. Their rotation is now a few spells, tiles, and learning to cast quickly.
Last time I checked, my level on archer is higher than your level on mage. Does that make my opinion on the subject more valuable than yours since I have more experience on both classes?
Yknow you seem to play mage a lot, maybe itâs just time for a new class? If you explore enough Iâm sure more will peak your interest. And I may just be wrong, but they did this for a reason.
It should. If every class did the exact same damage, then everyone would play the easiest class. Harder classes should have far more damage than easier ones.
