Higgings

You said it right - dynamics. That doesn't necessarily mean 1vs1 or arena. The game offers several other aspects.

Quite too generic honestly. Comparing a class in your sense means testing it on one aspect only. I am just seeing different perspectives before judging one. Plus, I could simply say that a class is objectively weak in a certain scenario and strong in another without mentioning any other specific class. Not for this I'm saying that the Class X is stronger than the Class Y, thus comparing classes. As I said in my previous statements, I am making an analysis of the class' attitude on different generic scenarios and eventually compare it with other similar classes.

Comparing their strenght alone is no different than saying "Sham stronger than BD" or in this case "Charmer stronger than Mage", Forgetting that the game allows (or actually, invites) to bring someone else on your side to fight the said threat. Wrong method all in all. A class' strength should be compared taking the environment into account and not other classes: how good that class is on GvG, Arena, PvE content etc... eventually comparing how similar classes do in that same environment. This way you can see whether a class is strong or not. A class which requires one single build to run any content in the game needs to be nerfed. One class which can't run a specified content even when the owner has studied skills accordingly to the environment needs a buff. With that I'm simply saying that you need many factors and scenarios to tag a class as "overpowered", and liniting the judgement basing it on "its strenght against other classes" is a wrong method to valuation.

Comparison between classes is a lost cause. They are different each other and that's the way it should be. They are not considered as mobs. Rather as players, since Ferocity works on them. If Fero works, then Resi does as well.

We are also assuming that a rogue shall wait and allow said charmer to summon several dogs... it kinda makes no sense in such "competition", and that's still a further variable we shall take into account. There is no logical reason for a charmer to say "I'm a stronger damager" if the same charmer probably requested the rogue to "please wait until my area is full of dogs". It's a biased result.

Don't take that bar too seriously. There are too many variabilities which can influence the meaning of that bar, starting from the type of class, ending with the Richness of the user. Charmer's damage construction requires time (dogs still have to be casted and must survive) whereas rogue's is instant. In this sense, in an ammount of time equals to (example) 10 seconds, a rogue will definitely do more damage than a chamer.

I could assure you that my Physical Dmg DK could make far more damage than a Magic Damage built DK, and the reason is pretty simple: some of those skills can be resisted or avoided and you're forced to wait again for the CD time of the skill, whereas You just need 2 seconds ~ (mace user) to strike another hit, should your first one get missed or blocked.

Agree for the resilience part but disagree on the damage part. They are stronger than doggos in terms of usefulness ( ranged attack, possibility to use with a single build...) just a higher CD.

This is because MCs have overall gained an incredible strenght many vs many wise (hence pvp scenario). As a result, MCs have got now several classes who can be competitive even without PvP set, and that's wrong. Definitely not an excuse to let MCs win this way. However... this doesn't mean that elves should remain untouched. If MCs have got a noticeable strenght in many vs many, a battle with Elves in arena remains a troll (like seriously... 3 templars in seals or even 2x2. Or 3 druids on Crucible; classes you can't litterally kill due to a ridiculous surviving mechanism a simple skill provides). In this sense, charmer is exactly what they need in order to face these problems, as sending a pet to its fate is definitely more safe than sending the creator of such pet to his fate, don't you think? This is also very true and I agree fully with this statement.

In total. Written this way is a wrong meter which leads to biased results. (If you mean the Army skill) Don't add books or anything (for the sake of a more accurate analysis of the class). The only 2 classes having an anti stun capability on mc side are Barbarian and Chieftain. MCs suffer of stuns way more than you imagine. Not a case that now the only side MC fears the most to have as opponent is its own side, since (in terms of debuffs and this is a consequence of Elf side having tons of Debuff Ignoring skills aka Resist) MCs have got a lot of debuffing AoE skills and generally low Resisting Skills. In terms of PvP (many vs many), they have indeed gained a lot. It's 6 seconds, to be completely Fair. Big thumb up. Answering your doubt, Doggos do take some of their owner's statistics as their own, thus including resilience among them. Different story applies to skeletons, where they are considered as Players with 0 resilience; you'll deal full damage to them. @AmceRe @Fabr although I would love to see points being discussed about different classes I have to invite you formally to speak about that somewhere else, as Off Topic goes against our rules. From this post, everything not related to Charmers and their Dogs (+ Suggestiond and Opinions) shall be deleted. Of course, the story changes if you are making a well reasoned topic including a way to defeat charmers by using other classes: Good example : we have tried with [CLASSES] (specifically designed to fight Charmers in many scenarios) with this Build [x], but the result was terrific; none of our efforts were useful... Bad Example : Charmer broken in 1vs1. [CLASS] max lv with [SKILL BUILD] can't kill. Need urgent nerf because it's not fair that MC side wins only with a Zoo around them!! Have a pleasant Chat. I'm watching you!

A similar topic exists already.

Have you tried bringing players with you or your attempt is killing a charmer alone? Anyway, I would agree with you in terms of big scenarios such as GvG and War of Territories, where dogs represent a big problem for sentinels to come across.

There's nothing wrong in running away from a futile fact. If yours is a matter of pride then it's a different story and definitely not a reason to nerf a skill. Any comparison in 1vs1 scenario is a wrong method to judge whether a class is strong or not. The same doesn't apply to Chiefs cause all of them are different classes from each other. Although I wish this was true... no, big giant no. You would have to build a class based on a statistic which helps you on dealing damage, neglecting completely the already few skills it has got to defend himself.

Hmm yes, I believe as well that these skills should be nullified if Templar is under skills which make him untouchable. The same story goes for every single class capable to cast a ground skill under invincibility circumstances. Similar cases have been sorted out and considered bug, so it might happen the same with Templars. Not sure though if an adjustment of this kind will take place soon or in a month :/ (or if it will be corrected at all - it's all on devs)

It's a wrong statement. You can always try to run away from that skill. Chieftain is a damage class. It has been designed to help the Legion side to challenge the Sentinel side in terms of movements and damage. Nerfing its damage output without giving another mean capable to replace the nerfed skill is like removing one of the healing abilities of a Healer because "it heals too much" and replacing it with no skills. Yes, we have seen classes who have received such nerfs, but they then received a mean to either compensate or simply they received a buff on other skills of theirs. (See wardens) 1vs1 doesn't show the strenght of a class for two reasons: 1. Game (whether you like it or not) is not designed for 1vs1, and a class strong in 1vs1 might suck in many vs many , the exact same scenario which sees DKs as protagonists. 2. According to this logic, every class capable to kill BD 1vs1 needs urgently a nerf: it's clearly not the way it works, don't you think? One nerf I would make is on Thrashing skill, as 50% dmg reduction AoE + Roots sounds quite broken for a primary skill buffable with relics.