until the dracthyr have other classes on them i will continue to use the arguement that evokers have low range without a single gain because it is the dragon tax. we wanted to play as dragons so blizzard monkey pawed us as usual and said ok you can play as a dragon but its gonna be 25 yds and your gonna look like a lizard not a dragon. once other classes are playable ill just change it to bad developers working on the class
3 Likes
In a one in a million instance where you get CCâd in the microsecond window for this to happen. Iâm not ignoring that this is technically possible in a very literal sense. You are being monumentally disingenuous by pretending it is a meaningful possibility, given its rarity.
No it doesnât.
No, that is the logical conclusion of you and others saying we are less 15 yards of range without any compensation for it. If that were true it would have an impact on our holistic performance, and if it had an impact on our holistic performance that represented a critical flaw, the spec would be performing poorly. Not middling. Poorly. It has not performed poorly in any content so far this expansion. We have done fine everywhere. We just havenât been S tier anywhere.
Given the reality weâve observed, it is utter nonsense to claim that our kit is wholesale lacking the ability to work within our range limitations. We have the tools. Are they perfect? No. But again, that is a balancing issue and not a design issue.
There arenât clear flaws. There are things you personally dislike. These are not the same thing. The design of the spec is coherent. There is nothing problematic or unworkable about it. It simply requires the correct tuning and support, which we mostly have. The spec is not some untenable monstrosity, or even remotely close to being that.
The spec is more fluent with the 10.1 changes, but nothing fundamentally changed about its playstyle. It received some of the fine-tuning it needed, and hopefully sees some more of the same. What it does not need are changes to its core design.
This may shock you, but I do the things I can do instead of fuming at the things I cannot do. This is literally as silly as complaining about not being able to do those things as a melee. Instead of doing the job of the artillery I do the job of the mid-range caster that I am. When Iâm in one of those horrifically designed BGs that devolve into a clusterfork of two mobs throwing grenades at one another, I heal and attack overextended targets until I can stack my cooldowns for a bomb run with Deep Breath into my biggest Dragonrage burst and then being as disruptive as possible until I die.
That being said those epic BGs are the worst possible PvP experience for any spec and should never be a balancing consideration for anything. Arena matters. Normal BGs matter to some degree. Epic BGs are irrelevant, though luckily itâs only AV and Ashran that consistently devolve into deathballs. IoC and WG generally have plenty of skirmishing available, and AV does as well sometimes.
For you. I find it immensely enjoyable, and I promise you Iâm not alone in that. Youâre also describing nothing that is a flaw, or an insurmountable balance issue. If those are actual issues there are answers to them that work within our design.
Multiple people can be wrong at the same time.
Anything without a reasonable failure condition is skilless by definition. Seismic Slam has no practical failure condition. Might as well say that chewing is a skill because every ten thousand chews you bite your lip.
Buffing the healing range to the upper-end of mid-range doesnât contradict the design. Devastation was fine all last season with its original range.
Melee canât either. Thatâs not a flaw. Mid-range means we arenât going to be able to do all the things artillery ranged can do.
This isnât a flaw. The spec is supposed to be in a more vulnerable position and then use the tools it has to work around that. As we can see by the actual reality that actually transpired the class is doing just fine with its current range.
The core design is among the best the game has seen. Itâs incredibly elegant and thoughtful. Iâd love maybe one more button to press, but the combination of a channeled spender on a mid-range caster and significant CWM uptime is engaging and refreshing. Feels like dancing through the raindrops to execute your rotation perfectly while avoiding fight mechanics.
As for the other issue, Iâve always been shocked when people talk about having trouble while solo because that was never even slightly an issue for me. Not when I played Preservation during the prepatch and not at any point in the last six months of playing Devastation. Even now, at the low-end of this seasonâs gearing curve, I can solo most Zaralek rares and serve as the tank for the rest. We donât have the infinite kiting necessary to kill large groups of elites, but we can burn them down two-by-two quite efficiently.
Finding deathballs fun even on an artillery ranged is certainly one way to live your life. For me, outside of the initial novelty of casting Stormkeeper CL into a large group for the fireworks show, even on my Ele shaman it got boring after a few minutes. But hey, if you enjoy them on artillery casters that is your prerogative. Evokers are not artillery casters. We arenât a traditional ranged class. We are going to have an experience that is closer to that of melee in those situations.
This isnât your role as a devoker. You are not an artillery caster. You are a nimble combat mage with a complimentary range for the role. Feels rather childish to throw an obstinate tantrum just because not everything is designed for you. Blizzard didnât pull a fast one on you; the class delivered on exactly what was advertised.
Being sour and spiteful isnât a good look on anyone Iâm afraid. Youâve caused all your own misery by dedicating time to a class that you donât actually like at its core. Youâre apparently mad at me because I chose to play a class I enjoy instead of choosing one I didnât and then lobbying to have it fundamentally altered to suit my tastes.
It is possible that Iâd quit the class were the range to be increased. Not a guarantee, but possible. Luckily I wonât ever have to actually think about that because they arenât going to rebuild the class from the ground-up when the core is perfectly functional and just in need of the same balancing as most classes are. A bit more, being a new class, but within the same ballpark. They arenât going to significantly alter the range (I could see bumping the damage spells also up to 30, however) and they arenât going to move on from Disintegrate being the spender and channeled.
True. I know two and two makes four and you think it makes five. Very surmountable hill once you learn the difference between your subjective opinion and what is objective reality that exists external of yourself and is shared among everyone. As a final reiteration: it is valid to dislike the playstyle of the class, but you are objectively incorrect that that playstyle is actually flawed. You not liking something does not make that thing flawed. Until you can separate the two you will always look silly as you lash out through an emotional, muddied haze.
2 Likes
Oh look, another âwhatever I donât like isnât engaging or funâ thread.
You arenât special, go play a different healer. They are all different for this specific reason.
Yes, letâs just ignore that Scorch does 23% spell power compared to Living Flameâs 161%, and that Living Flame can also be used to heal allies for 230% Spell Power.
Wow, such an honest take from the forums.
Do you make it super duper difficult or screw everyone over? Nah. But the question remains unanswered:
Why do Evokers have significantly lower range than any other character that can fit their role? Where is the logical reasoning?
Is anyone actually going to answer this, or keep lying about how the issue is subjective? Either be honest and make some sort of attempt to justify the disadvantage, or spare everyone the bull s h i t.
"We probably will never agree and thats okay.
later."
Good choice to not waste your time with garbage people like this who fight fervently against obvious facts. Never argue with an idiot. The will drag you down to their level and beat you soundly with experience.
2 Likes
it bugs me that you know how to multiquote, since you literally did it in your first post, yet still made 4 back to back posts.
I love the knee jerk reaction by a mage.
3 Likes
Lying is sad in any case, but this lame of an attempt at lying is outright pathetic.
The purpose of our low range is to specifically put us in more danger and force us to actually use our mobility. Ever played League, or Overwatch, or Spellbreak? In League terms Evokers are the Lucian to the Caitlyn of Fire mages. Our range is short but we have the tools to work within that range via our mobility and our unparalleled ability to cast while moving. Our range is low and Disintegrate is vulnerable as a channeled spell, and that is the point.
The challenge of some specs comes from keeping up with a piano rotation, like Windwalker monks. The challenge of Devastation, on the other hand, is more based on timing. Our rotation is less complex in a target dummy situation, but it is relatively more difficult to pull off our rotation in actual combat scenarios. If we had the same range as other casters, Hover would become a reactive button instead of a rotational one, and our rotation would be dull in the context of greater safety.
Every spec and class has their own challenges to overcome and work within, and for Evokers a shared challenge of the class is our mid-range identity. If that is not a challenge you enjoy dealing with then the class is not for you, much like if you didnât enjoy the restrictions of being melee then warriors arenât for you. The core design of the class is incredibly coherent, and Blizzard is not remotely the first developer to use it. Mid-range, mobile, and vulnerable is a common kit archetype across many games. It is perfectly functional and simply needs the proper supporting kit to enable it. Evokers of all specs have a very solid foundation for it. Are they an entirely completed project? No. But they are far closer to done than not.
Every time I ask my mage to move in he stacks ranged mechanics on the melee. Suffering
2 Likes
None of this really justifies why an objectively stronger spell deserves the same treatment. Even at 100% crit chance itâs doing less than 1/3rd the damage of living flame and needs to be cast twice to proc an instant pyro that does the same damage as living flame.
Leave it there, itâs kind of embarrassing.
1 Like
The thing is, you donât want to play it. You want it to be changed into something you want. So, yes thanks, be decent.
1 Like
They really need to make a few adjustments not everything needs to be 40yds this is what Iâd like to see happen hopefully much sooner rather then later.
I play Perservation but most abilities overlap on specs
40 yd Spells
- Living Flame (coming in 10.1.5)
- Reversion
- Echo
- Emerald Blossom
- Verdant Embrace
30 yd Spells
- Azure Strike
- Disintegrate
- Pyre
- Shattering Star
- Eternity Surge
- Dream Breath
- Fire Breath
I think all healing spells need to be 40yds, but dps spells and empower spells even just at 30yds is huge quality of life improvement. It might not seem a lot but the extra 5 yds on dps abilities is great.
Realistically Iâm never max range due to Tail Swipe and Wing Buffet, I think 30yds for dps is that sweet spot. 40 yd Verdant Embrace would be a godsend for mobility and positioning especially when it comes to range, and lets be honest which is about 90% of the range players who constantly at max range.
2 Likes
Because while other classes lose their damage dodging mechanics, we can pop hover and continue to dps while avoiding said mechanics.
I have 0 issue with the range. The only issue i have is the lack of solid defensives to keep myself alive. If you cant dodge mechanics at 25 yards, youre not dodging them at 40.
As for pvp, you need to use pillars and/or bait gap closers then use hover and other skills to keep them distanced. Almost all casters will be playing within 25 yards in arenas due to the nature of the arena itself.
Mentioning not being able to kill a turret is one of the most pedantic things ive read. I personally dgaf about turrets enough to get upset over them, because im defending the glaives or in the airship⊠ive hardly seen a game where killing turrets was remotely needed.
1 Like
Beast Mastery says hello. Hell, most range DPS isnât even hard casting all that much anymore. Then there is the fact the entire argument falls apart when the âmobileâ Evoker has to then nail its feet to the floor to use any of its biggest damaging moves because they are all tied to Empower.
Those elements are far closer related than you may think.
Why then is Evoker representation in nearly every avenue of PvP in the absolute sewer, especially Devastation? You even have folks like Shamblewing, one of the few crazy diamonds who actually can get Devastation to a high rating saying how much the spec needs help.
Ignoring the frankly insane argument of âWell I donât attack the enemy base so it doesnt matter at allâ, you are just making excuses for poor workmanship. Blizzard decided to make a 25 yard ârangedâ class nearly two damn decades in to the gameâs lifespan so it is up to them to make all expected avenues of the game workable with said class. What gets me is the why of it? Why would anyone defend such complete sloppy work for no perceivable gain whatsoever?
Never settle for mediocrity.
2 Likes
While I donât disagree with the rest of your post, I really donât like this idea of compromising when we still are not given an answer to what exactly our crippled rangeâs tradeoff is exactly. It isnât superior damage, it isnât superior healing and it sure as hell isnât superior defensives.
It is the penalty for the sake of being âuniqueâ and nothing more.
3 Likes
Its not settling for medeocrity, its understanding that this was the intention for the class, and the focus to better it shouldnt be in extending range when most of the same issues will still be glaring issues at 40 yd as they are at 25.
In pve, if youâre dying at 25, youâre dying at 40. In pvp, where we are one of the bottom tier, if youâre getting trained, 15 yards isnât going to help. Youre almost never at 40 yd in an arena, bg etc due to speed and gap closers.
What needs to be evaluated is our defensives and our mastery, not the range of our casts. If they want the class fantasy of a close range mobile caster, they need to commit to that, which means increasing overall defensive and possibly an immunity like other casters have. The only other caster that struggled with this was ele shaman and they recently got burrow which is pretty substantial.
Range is an ancedotal answer and a seemingly glaring issue when the flaw isnt that, but the class itself. I get pain trained on my lock and spriest as well, the difference is in their abilities to mitigate said damage, and in pve im hardly ever teetering at max. But running a mid key, you can feel the difference in innate defensives and requiring cds which seemingly dont help.
1 Like
Iâve been fighting for Evoker since August last year when I got into the Alpha/Beta.
Iâll be honest Iâm worn down and compromising is the only hope I have left. 
.
3 Likes
You just typed up two huge paragraphs agreeing with me, which proves youâre arguing for the sake of argument.
If the difference between lock, spriest, and evoker is the ability to sustain damage while managing defensives while being trained, an additional 15 yards isnât going to stop you from getting your crap shoved in, stronger defensives and the ability to deal damage without having to channel are (or at the very least, offering channel protection), which is why again, its not a range issue, its a core design and kit issue.
I can log into my spriest right now and get trained every match. Im reliant on my dot damage, dispel, and defensives to survive and dish out as much damage while i have two melee running an eiffel tower on me, and hopefully during my big defensive, they target swap long enough for me to blow a burst rotation, which is strong enough to 100-0 someone if left untargeted. Because the defensives are that strong, i can do so while baiting them mid or pillar humping to minimize damage. On evoker, its impossible, they dont have the CC and survival tools to do so.
So at the end of the day, as someone who loves the class, i will call attention to where its needed and say no, im in the same situations with evoker as i am on my shaman, spriest, lock and boomie, but the other classes have stronger mitigation via defensives and the ability to do instant damage effectively whereas evoker does not. If tomorrow they added our range to even 50 yards, we would still have the same glaring issues weve always had, especially in pvp. Evoker is held down against melee classes for this reason. Against casters they can hold their own decently.
1 Like
You and me both.
I get where you are coming from, I just am not a fan of trading a penalty for slightly less of a penalty without even knowing what exactly I am paying the penalty for in the first place. There is nothing either spec of Evoker does that another healer/DPS doesnât do better at a longer range which begs the question of âWhy are we even bothering with this 25/30 yard nonsense?â
3 Likes