Well, you may think I haven´t answered but I really did. Same type of damage, similar type of gameplay (mainly dot based RDPS), similar access to CCs (given that you can just apply 1 of each and they all have access to snares). Is the dps output different? Well yeah, given that we are talking about healers vs a dps class I think that it is justified that a dps would have bigger output and the healer bigger sustain.J0t4ro wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2026 6:42 pm
I mentioned sustain once, to describe the hybrid's strength, not as benchmark a magus needs to match. That's not the same as making sustain part of my argument, and it doesn't touch my actual point: similar gameplay pattern doesn't establish similar output or capability.
Saying "yes they're not the same class, but gameplay is similar, hence comparison" a third time doesn't answer why pattern similarity should mean capability parity. That's the actual question you keep skipping.
So once again, what is the point you are trying to make here? That all the variables are not the same? Obviously not.
The reason why I brought the comparison up is because in terms of gameplay there are more similarities than differences. Just compare videos of these healers roaming to one of a Magus and you can clearly see what I mean.
Let me see if I get this right. The thread opener and every other person in the thread (including you) can just dump their claims/statements/opinions here but I have to be the one providing spreadsheets of data to prove/demonstrate/backup mine? xDJ0t4ro wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2026 6:42 pm
On cleanse: "healers playing well and using few resources" and "cleanse spend proves threat" aren't mutually exclusive, a class can be dangerous enough to require exactly that kind of efficient response.
You're also asking me to compare it to how hard it is to do the same to an MDPS, but you haven't actually shown MDPS require proportionally more resources either, that's asserted, not demonstrated.
And "ask healers how afraid they are of a magus" is anecdotal, not evidence. If you've got parses or real numbers behind the "100% more effective" claim, or behind the idea that MDPS take comparatively more resources to shut down, i'd actually like to see them, that would settle this properly instead of anecdotes on either side.
It is funny how every argument I make is either "asserted, not demonstrated" or "anecdotal, not evidence". The same could be said about yours I think xD.
If you want my reason/opinion on why MDPS are stonger/effective/bigger threats than rangeds atm here it is: Tanks and MDPS have far greater sinergy. Everything is easier (assisting, coordinating...). For me, that is one of the more basic reasons.
Yes, I know that I probably have opened another can of worms with this statement but hey, you are asking for it.
I think I have been pretty consistent on how I present my arguments. However, I have been trying to make an effort on remarking that I am just stating my opinions in the last posts because it seems that it was not obvious enough.J0t4ro wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2026 6:42 pm
On facts vs opinions: sure, everything is technically an opinion, that's not what i said. The point was that you stated "100% more effective" and "goes down the toilet" with total confidence, then called a similar type of claim "obviously just an opinion" a few posts later.
That's not a philosophical point about the nature of opinions, that's an inconsistency in how confidently you present your own claims depending on which one you're making.
Regarding the statements that you highlighted, I stand by my initial claim. I really believe that classes with access to strong Heal Debuffs are 100% more effective than those who do not. 50% incoming/outgoing debuffs are huge. A group without them is 100% less effective on their output. Simple math, in my opinion. As for the "goes down the toilet" is simple. If one of the strengths of you class is access to a wide variety of CCs but they share the same inmunities not only among themselves but with other group members, the claim is easily understood.
From my perspetive, one is the consecuence of the other. If the class gradually loses power/effectiveness then at some point other classes become better choice. In my opinion this makes the class in its current state not able to compete with other dps.J0t4ro wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2026 6:42 pm
On the solo/small/big scale framework, this is the first time you've laid this out clearly, and i don't disagree with the general shape of it. But your "never top of any group content" claim doesn't actually fit your own model.
If power gradually decreases with scale like you're describing, that leaves room for the magus to still be competitive at small scale, just less dominant than solo.
Your "never top of any group content" is a much flatter, more absolute claim than the gradual scaling model you just laid out, so which one is it: gradual decline, or never competitive at all?
This decline does not just happen with CCs and inmunities. When a good chunk of your damage comes from DoTs that means that there is a point where the DoT become too slow in compasison with classes that have more direct damage output. Another constraint is the pet. Having to constantly spend gdcs + aps on repositioning it at some point becomes a waste in comparison to what other classes bring to the table. When you put all together is just too much, in my opinion



