The same reason why people want melee classes to remain melee, I envision instead of having people say “won’t you enjoy it more with 40 yard range on everything?”
More range is objectively stronger.
Because there are other aspects to the game than raid.
^This.
Imagine you’re fighting a boss that has groups of adds spawning. They spawn 45 yards out and run in. In our current state, we’d have to hover into range to get into our dps rotation. If we have 40 yards, we could instantly precharge a full FB into a tipped ES to nuke the pack.
Any similar situation like that instantly makes you have more dps when you get the extra range. This is why (though people don’t like to hear it) hover is the equalizer for our range. Managing it well overcomes our range in most scenarios, it just requires using it proactively/understanding the encounters to know when you’ll need to have it.
Because it’s not only braindead easy, but it also has zero uptime penalty and can do a good portion of its damage while not attacking itself.
It’s that we are literally performing well now and the range issue that people have is legitimately just not liking the evoker playstyle, though the class fantasy somehow makes them masochistic enough to play something they don’t enjoy.
As Faux said, there are so many other options if the range is a deal-breaker. The spec performs very well, has all expansion, and despite fear mongering and doomsday content s***posters, Blizzard isn’t going to all of a sudden start designing fights that evokers just straight up can’t do because of range.
Name all of the evokers not named Preheat that have come out to say that the range doesn’t work. Even Preheat knows it works, since he presented intentionally misleading data in his post to try and prove that we have low uptime while casting.
So your ultimate point is that even though the dps specs work well as designed, and people chose the class knowing it was 25 yards, and even though there are already people that very much enjoy the playstyle as designed/advertised, it should be changed to something different to placate the people that made their evoker knowing full well that it was mid range and decided they don’t like it?
You also have zero idea what the overall percentage of people that think they NEED 40 yds is. This forum is not an accurate sample size to attribute the amount of complaining on here to the actual opinions of the overall population.
Seems incredibly fair to the people that already are enjoying the class as intended/designed, right?
1 Like
The preservation evokers in the evoker Discord complain about 40 yards too, I think they should just play something else.
(Real way to get pres representation up is to remove aug.)
1 Like
I am imagening I am fighting a boss with groups of adds spawning. They spawn out at a range designed for ranged classes to start nuking them straight away. Indeed, in our current state, we are the only ranged who can’t start attacking them. Doesn’t this confirm the argument for evokers range to be adjusted to meet encounter design?
This still doesn’t answer the question. Why does a class being easier with higher uptime mean that it should be weaker? As I asked before, are you suggesting that damage output should be directly correlated with how easy a class is? If so, a huge amount of tuning would be required for many classes. Why are you singling out BM and not things like demonhunter, frost DK and ret?
As I’ve stated previously, I don’t think that people are calling for the range increase for the sake of damage and performance. See previous posts for further explanation.
Yes, which is why I literally asked the question:
Can you explain why the data was misleading and then present data which shows a true reflection of uptime with casting the optimal rotation?
And this brings us back around to an earlier question. Why do you believe that having an increased range on evoker would make you enjoy it less?
2 Likes
I hope that this is satire xD
The table he posted is literally ‘time spent casting while moving’ without hover considered. When you consider hover, the uptime is literally more than doubled and only behind fire mage and both ranged hunter specs.
I cannot present the table because I can’t post images in the forums, but I know Battlecruisr has posted it (maybe in this thread, not sure).
Edit: see Battle’s post below–click on the actual post to see the table as I can’t link it.
Just because you covered your bases by being on both sides of the fence doesn’t change that you claimed to know what the majority of the playerbase wants.
No, it doesn’t, because we have hover to get into range. People not understanding how to overcome the range does not necessitate more range.
What encounter design do we currently need adjustments to our range to meet?
Then why do the dps specs need more range? If people are refusing to play something else with 40 yards because they want it on evoker, and Evoker already performs well without it, there’s literally no reason to increase the range other than “bEcaUsE i WanT iT”.
Because I understand that more range would come at the cost of mobility/uptime, and I prefer our current toolkit as it is. I also recognize that the kit has everything we need to play our positioning well, and the majority of people complaining are refusing to get better and learn it. Almost without exception, those who actually post on their evokers instead of hiding on forum alts have shown very low hover uptimes vs our potential, are almost exclusively self-casting VE instead of using it to reposition, and don’t use rescue or Time Spiral either.
I have zero desire for our class to be changed because people refuse to get better at it. Improving is a large part of what makes this game fun. I’m totally on board with a change to a melee classification as far as mechanics are concerned, but not an arbitrary increase in range that is unneeded.
And before we go down this rabbit hole again, this isn’t about ‘good’ or ‘bad’ parses, it’s about skill usage.
I have a TON of improvement to make on evoker myself and I am not a world-class performer by any stretch of the imagination. I recognize that my shortcomings are just in my own ability and are not limited by the range or design in any way.
This is why they should make a choice node between hover and 40 yds and be done with it. Anyone unwilling to give up hover for 40 yds is unreasonable and doesn’t understand that range is power. As the table shows, we still wouldn’t be the least mobile caster spec with 40 yds and without hover, so it seems completely fair to me.
2 Likes
You’ve made some pretty solid points here. I can absolutely get behind the idea that many dev enjoy using their mobility toolkit in a smart way to perform well. I think many of the range-sayers would be for that too so long as Bliz continue to fully consider evoker range in fight design so as not to disproportionately punish dev in certain fights to the point where it feels like it’s out of our hands and frustrating. I think the design of the tier set this season has compounded the issue considerably. However, I also think that for pres especially, range remains more of an issue.
I think that the table Battlecruisr posted still works in the favour of those who are arguing for increased range, because it still shows that there are more mobile classes with longer range, ergo, mobility alone can’t be used as an argument against range. I never had the impression that Preheat was arguing that evoker was one of the worst classes for mobility and uptime.
So, if we were able to find out, and the majority of evokers DID want increased range, would you change your stance?
I’ve heard that a lot of dev players find nymue can be pretty frustrating. Also, rather than it being an issue with this specific fight, it may be that it’s triggered alarm bells that if this fight seemed to have so little consideration for Dev, then this trend may continue and future raids might not consider dev in the same way that the earlier dragonflight raids did.
I would honestly be absolutely fascinated to see, if they added a node which reduced damage but increased range to 40ft, and had no mobility changes, how many people would take that node and how much damage they would be prepared to lose for that range.
1 Like
100% it’s probably the worst encounter, and yet we are top 50th percentile for dmg as dev. There are countless fights that are crappy for melee because of uptime, but we get ONE fight out of TWENTY SIX that isn’t ideal for our range as dps, and suddenly it ‘doesn’t work’?
Not every fight is going to be ideal for the toolkit or profile of a spec, and that’s perfectly okay. Especially when it represents less than 4% of the fights in an entire expac. I could name far more fights that suck for other dps classes.
See this is an absurd argument, imo. Someone has to be the top dog in any category like this. Just because it isn’t us doesn’t mean we need more range, lol. Does everyone that isn’t first in dps in the raid need to be buffed? Wouldn’t that just create a new #1? It’s okay not to be the best at something, especially if you’re very good (which we are).
The chart is still also a completely skewed set of data. Consider that overall we have quite a few less dps abilities than a fire mage, and two of those abilities (empowers) require us to stop and cast. Those two spells have an outsized negative impact on the percentage and our place in this graph.
If you changed that graph to “% of damage that can happen while moving” it would likely look different, because it would essentially only eliminate the up front dmg of fire breath, and non-Tip the Scales eternity surge casts (which are basically all of them). Looking at my sim, only about 6-8% of my damage HAS to come from standing still.
I would be interested too, but as most of the people arguing for range see absolutely NO concession that they should have to make to get it, I strongly doubt that this would be well received.
I wouldn’t change my stance whatsoever, but at least I would know the actual data. I wouldn’t even be surprised to learn that over 50% want more range, but they want it with zero concessions made.
There’s a massive difference between a poll that says ‘would you like evoker better if it had 40 yd range’ and 'would you be willing to give up dps/mobility in order to have 40 yd range on evoker?"
I would like to see the class have an increased range to be honest. Especially in pvp. Being “mid-ranged” is the least engaging part of the class by a long shot. Feels like a weird hill to die on when arcane mage exists in the way that it does and specs like BM get to exist doing an entire rotation on the move. Don’t think increased range on evoker would break the game. For me could even burn a hover charge for all i care if that’s what it takes. Don’t think its necessary but i would prefer a world at 40 range with something like 1 charge hover, time spiral and then allow disintegrate/eruption to be cast while moving during essence burst similar to mage and clearcasting missiles. Love being a dragon whos peepee breath only shoots like 2 yards in front of me. Real cool class fantasy if you ask me.
Also visage form permanent and pick a visage race appearance when.
1 Like
Very well reasoned arguments, Blankwave. You’ve helped me understand far more about why people might want to keep range as it is.
I think I’d personally still enjoy having longer range more, but also I would not want mobility to be touched and would rather take the hit to my damage with an optional node.
Were I trying it myself, I’d make a node for: 5yrd increased range for 2% reduced damage / healing, up to 3 points (subject to tuning).
Top tier players would still most likely want to keep short range (except for some specific fights) in order to min-max, and it would still provide an option for people who want the chill and easy life.
1 Like
Couldn’t agree more, and respect you actually being able to have an intelligent discussion as opposed to many on here that just repeat the same arguments no matter what is said or how they’re disproven.
I’m all for people getting more range if they want it, but it needs to come with concessions and it needs to leave the current playstyle intact for those that enjoy it/feel comfortable with it.
2 Likes
Okay, let’s just give evoker 40 yd range without changing their mobility or damage to compensate. Now a dragon is disintegrating you from 40 yds away behind a pillar for 90k ticks and 120k scintillation procs and there’s literally nothing you can do about it.
And any time you connect with this dragon it slips across the map with hover while being immune to slows, gets to another pillar, and does the same thing over and over. Is this what you want? A completely broken class with literally no thought behind it? You just press buttons, cast while moving, have insane mobility, have full caster range, do insane damage, respectable healing, very tanky for a non plate, all for free?
I think what you want is a brain dead class, friend. The reduced range is what allows us to have all the mobility and damage in the first place, you have to give in order to take. If you want 40 yds, you either need to gut mobility to account for the range plus damage or you need to gut the damage since you’re going to have 100% uptime regardless of positioning because of the baffling mobility you have as a 40 yd range caster.
In my honest opinion, this class is already easy. There’s small nuance here and there in simply knowing the correct priority for procs/CDs, but that’s it. The rest comes from managing your use of hover in order to get the maximum amount of up time possible and positioning yourself correctly in fights. What you’re saying is you want NO thought behind that at all, and tbh that’s just boring. At that point just play a BM hunter
It’s hard to say if I would swap off of my evoker if they gave them 40 yd range because I love this class, however I can tell you with 100% certainty I would either get over the change I didn’t like or I’d play something else if it bothered me that much, something that seems to be a foreign concept for some of you.
Oh, and forums do not represent the majority lul
1 Like
It’s cute he made an alt so he can make all of the same bad arguments again.
2 Likes
So, your first points are all about pvp balance, and that is something which can be balanced separately. Arguably, the ability to continue channeling when out of line of sight is an issue in itself and has always felt like it is almost an exploit to me. I would agree that a compromise would be needed to ensure balance, such as disintegrate dealing less damage for every 5 yrds further away a target is over 25yards. We don’t need another arcane mage in pvp.
Also keep in mind that our mobility and uptime while moving, though good, is not enough alone to justify the shorter range.
As far as people desiring what you call a ‘braindead class’ - there is a very good reason why so many people, when given the option where everything else is equal, will choose an easier class or spec to play. Keep in mind that the majority of wow players are casuals who never touch the very sweaty high end content, and many are playing for fun and enjoy a more chilled experience. It’s a significant contributor to why classes like BM and DH have had very high populations. I don’t think the desire to have a more simple playstyle should be discredited when there is such a big demand for it.
2 Likes
There are classes with simple playstyles. Why does every class need to have something?
I still say let Living Flame be cast on the move. Single change that would give Evoker a better feeling of true mobility. You still would need to stop to cast Empowered spells and have Hover to help in oh **** moments.
1 Like
living flame could be a big problem as it is also a healing skill.
but I believe that disintegrate should be used on movement, after all it is our main essence spender
1 Like
After playing an entire expansion as evoker (I don’t do high-end content like mythic raid or super high m+ dungeons, like 25~30), I don’t think we need greater Range, we simply need some passive form of damage motivation, something that mainly help against explosive damage.
I do think I’d really enjoy the feel of disintegrate always being usable while moving, and I guess it would bring us more in line with ret which is probably the closest comparison we have for range vs uptime while moving.
Do you mean why does every class need to be simple? I don’t think anyone was suggesting that. Also, it’s important to recognise that simple doesn’t mean that it won’t be fun or potentially have a high skill cap. Take dev, aug and demonhunter - currently some of the most simple classes to play to get good results at entry level. Most players wouldn’t be a patch on the RWF players because of the subtle nuances with these specs, and team synergy in high-end content.
1 Like