Dantheman.3589

> @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > @"Dantheman.3589" said: > > Stealth thief builds didn’t specifically get nerfed, but I think it’s more likely for sw/d build to take thief place- ie deadeye and s/d daredevil. These builds can sometimes win 1v1s and can snowball team fights where things like dhs and power revs might be. > > Why would you play a poor duelist who performs even worse in teamfights? Thiefs purpose hasnt changed, its still a decap and +1 bot. And there is nothing that made D/P specifically worse at that than other builds (And Deadeye is not going to work as long as projectile destruction and reflect is as abundant as it is, and DJ is as unhittable as it is). You wouldn’t play a poor duelist- you would be playing a build that hard counters dh and power revs that has much improved mobility from d/p builds that can not only 1v1 better than other s/d builds but do more damage- just how Sa dp would do at least as much damage as Da dp, but with much improved sustain Edit: I forgot to specify, but I’m think acro s/d is gonna take the poor Da sd builds place- becuz acro does more damage as long as your zerker amulet and has more utility- plus it can farm dh and if traited have some of the best condi cleanse in the game.

Stealth thief builds didn’t specifically get nerfed, but I think it’s more likely for sw/d build to take thief place- ie deadeye and s/d daredevil. These builds can sometimes win 1v1s and can snowball team fights where things like dhs and power revs might be.

The real question is- would ppl be complaining about any rune with 0 icd on skill usage. Think would a power wells chrono with perma quickness + cc + nonstop damage in team fights just snowballing nonstop in ranked and ats be a problem? I’m sure it would be as it wouldn’t have counter play unless you can cc the chrono- but then they might just use stealth- QQ.

> @"Damocles.4908" said: > > @"Dantheman.3589" said: > > This seems so inaccurate- you mostly listed bad play, but it’s also inaccurate in places such as the jump pad thing. Bots cannot discern los from normal pathing in many cases so bots will just attack over and over even if you sit on los. > > What happened was, I was fighting a scrapper and it played exactly the same combo over again but the dead give away was the bot/character just froze as I went over the jump pad while I am shooting with a rifle it just stood there did noting to block, reflect or aoe shock stun, and as soon as it moved off point I can down, I mean like 1 split second it left I’ve seen what are supposedly actual bots- in fact 3 of them were on the other team and they were all run to the same node to attack ppl and never cap nodes, when I kite away from them onto a non port spot, this was at the start of the match btw, and they sat below the los using the same exact auto+ skill cycle for the rest of the match, a whole 13 mins, without decapping the node or getting me below 99% hp. Sometimes when ppl kite a roamer will just leave since they cannot kill a bunker, so that’s normal but just afking because a bot program thinks they are attacking is different

This seems so inaccurate- you mostly listed bad play, but it’s also inaccurate in places such as the jump pad thing. Bots cannot discern los from normal pathing in many cases so bots will just attack over and over even if you sit on los.

Just ban pvp- ez

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > In order to actually apply any meaningful damage, a DH's target has to stand still for at least 3 seconds. > > > > > > Therefore, there are only 2 circumstances under which a burn-DH can actually get a kill: > > > > > > 1) Enemy is brain-dead and stands still in middle of traps, symbols, SoJ > > > 2) Enemy is trapped in Dragon's Maw > > > > > > Assuming you aren't brain-dead, kill-condition 1) is not viable. > > > > > > Therefore the ONLY kill-condition for a burn-DH is 2), i.e., Dragon's Maw. > > > > > > If you save a durational block, a durational evade, an invuln or a teleport for Dragon's Maw, the DH simply cannot kill you. > > > > > > The current "fashion" for burn-DH's comes down to this very basic lack of knowledge from those playing against it. > > > > > > Nevermind the fact that the current build runs 0 stunbreak, 0 stability, 0 insta-cast saves, which means it can be chain-CC'd from 100 to 0 with absolutely no way of doing anything about it, and has only 1 cleanse on 25s CD which is easily interrupted. > > > > > > As soon as people start learning how to counter this, it'll disappear as quickly as it appeared. > > > > you can defend it. But you cannot deny its being popular in MATs, Teapots areana final both team has a burn DH. Yes, it is indeed that the current fashion for burn DH comes down to this very basic lakc of knowledge from R55, Lakers, and other very competence teams. > > Yes, even very good players can get memed if going up against something they weren't expecting or haven't yet had time to figure out a strategy against. > > Did you watch today's mAT? Burn DH's having pretty minimal impacts, dying *alot*, and the winning teams on both EU and NA didn't have them. That's because now we're 6-8 weeks into this trend people are starting to figure out how to counter. Burn dh is a solid build that can meme consistently in ranked on sides or in team fights, but it’s quiet literally useless against a competent heal breaker who can pump out resistance and enough sustain to shrug off full trap + sword memes, which is why I predicted that it wouldn’t appear in this mAT nearly as much as the hype led on, keep in mind many believed it would quickly make its way as a meta build

> @"ollbirtan.2915" said: > > @"Dantheman.3589" said: > > Condition builds are just cancer on the pvp community. They have reduced some condis but still no one wants them, but again I’ll admit some condi builds aren’t too bad, still on average they are fairly bad. > > Sure. like literally no one wants them, that's why there are condi builds being played in ranked. Please, do us a favour, and speak for yourself. > Extra fun fact - we are in the power meta now. Not condi. Idk about it being a power meta. If it were a true power meta for example- I’d be doing a good job taking a toughness amulet as a side noder, but that’s not the case as I’d be hurting myself by doing that. Me taking menders is because damage is fairly mixed with some super annoying condi builds and even the power ones I’ll face are gonna put out a lot of hybrid condi damage so even against them menders is a solid choice. At least for me playing a build, which is power, specd to fight only power damage would not work 90% of the time- the other times I would probably even think of cele amulet before a toughness one just for a tiny bit extra sustain to burst builds

Condition builds are just cancer on the pvp community. They have reduced some condis but still no one wants them, but again I’ll admit some condi builds aren’t too bad, still on average they are fairly bad.

> @"Falan.1839" said: > Both options are kind of bad honestly, the pre-Feb meta might have been more explosive and mechanically challenging, but it was extremely narrow. Holo had been forced out of it with the stability nerf and Scourge was kind of gone aswell. So it was basically just a bunch of Power Revs and DP thieves stealth- and/or portengaging people for oneshots and a quick snowball. The meta right now actually has a wider variety of viable classes and specs. The major issue with the February changes is that the nerf in sustain that should have followed the dps nerfs never really came for many builds. The TTK on the overall hp pools and even immunity frames isn't to high in most cases. There is just too many builds still kitten out sustain left and right without even using their healskill and that is what makes the meta dull in many cases. Make a bunch of skills and traits do nothing and the meta becomes less narrow- pepeclap ?. Not as of the only thing keeping classes that were meta alive was making new builds already.

> @"Anomaly.7612" said: > > @"Dantheman.3589" said: > > Your thief section is way off my friend. A short analysis of what they’ve done to thief weapons recently is summarized as neutering front loaded damage but keeping good back loaded damage on everything but stealth attack skills. This is maybe the number one reason why dp sees play because all it needs for front loaded damage is the stealth attack meanwhile s/d needs auto damage and larcenous etc to be good but only larcenous is decent and even then it’s only decent while autos are kitten poor. > > > > Looking at your post you described staff as bad, but what if I told you staff is one of the least nerfed? Would you be shocked, or would u realize it’s just not seem becuz they put a bad taste on it- basically the stealth attack is useless and the staff2 combo is fairly weak as well as mug, so the deadly arts staff suffers, but vault is insanely good rn. Basically acro was neutered so vault spam is out the door and that’s the only reason staff is bad. > > > > Looking at the main purpose of your post though- initiative changes are what’s killing the weapon sets themselves- the main victims are actually S/p with it’s huge initiative cost for the only actually useful thing in the kit. Most would say this isn’t viable, but are only partially correct becuz s/p damage and stun are 1 thing that can unstale this boring meta- so it’s actually really good just unstable becuz of cost, but reduce it back to normal and it’ll be a meta contender for sure. Rifle has been completely neutered as well but this was an over time change literally meant to neuter it- which I hate, it is only still viable in the hands of a good deadeye who spams rifle 2, which sucks but can unstale the meta at least in ranked > > > > There’s my full thief weapon analysis- hope it helps > > Except backstab hits for an average of like 4.5-4.8K while running zerker/divinity AND has a cooldown AND positional requirements and is easily mitigated by a block or evade. One block or evade or blind or just running back and forth to prohibit them from getting behind you and no more backstab. The range on it is so bad too. Literally have to be up the person's kitten to make contact It's so much easier to pull off 4.5-5K in front loaded damage on so many other classes that it's just a joke to bring backstab up imo. I mean like true it’s not one shotting anyone, but it’s like a full larcenous combo and the only thing hitting harder is vault on thief- also on the meta dp build ppl just get by spamming backstab and heart seeker + shadow shot. My analysis is still completely correct. I’m not gonna argue about how strong it is, as if actually argue that thief is insanely weak rn on average since it’s been gutted really hard in areas but it’s 100% true that weapons are being back loaded w/ a decent stealth skill as we can clearly see from dp and pd thief builds and other not as strong ones.

It does make you a better player or at least give you a reason to try new things. The main problem is when ppl don’t spend enough time getting good at 1 thing, which for some ppl isn’t a problem but for someone like me who plays in plat3+ and gets home around midnight every day can be a problem.

Your thief section is way off my friend. A short analysis of what they’ve done to thief weapons recently is summarized as neutering front loaded damage but keeping good back loaded damage on everything but stealth attack skills. This is maybe the number one reason why dp sees play because all it needs for front loaded damage is the stealth attack meanwhile s/d needs auto damage and larcenous etc to be good but only larcenous is decent and even then it’s only decent while autos are piss poor. Looking at your post you described staff as bad, but what if I told you staff is one of the least nerfed? Would you be shocked, or would u realize it’s just not seem becuz they put a bad taste on it- basically the stealth attack is useless and the staff2 combo is fairly weak as well as mug, so the deadly arts staff suffers, but vault is insanely good rn. Basically acro was neutered so vault spam is out the door and that’s the only reason staff is bad. Looking at the main purpose of your post though- initiative changes are what’s killing the weapon sets themselves- the main victims are actually S/p with it’s huge initiative cost for the only actually useful thing in the kit. Most would say this isn’t viable, but are only partially correct becuz s/p damage and stun are 1 thing that can unstale this boring meta- so it’s actually really good just unstable becuz of cost, but reduce it back to normal and it’ll be a meta contender for sure. Rifle has been completely neutered as well but this was an over time change literally meant to neuter it- which I hate, it is only still viable in the hands of a good deadeye who spams rifle 2, which sucks but can unstale the meta at least in ranked There’s my full thief weapon analysis- hope it helps

I misclicked my vote- the February patch literally destroyed the mechanics of every single class in the game. Our classes are now replaced with boring versions of themselves, also I didn’t want the more frequent patches- so I’m glad they didn’t stick to that since more changes will just destroy the game even more

Not even actual bug fixes- the thief on was part of the change to ammo based system and the ranger gs is to make sure knockback hits even foes who were behind them- not to actually hit multiple times.

> @"DogMD.9182" said: > PvP posts should display the authors same in game badge to delineate what tier player is making this post Would that just put fuel on the fire and assign players to unadjustable teir for everyone- even non moderators to judge?

> @"Quadox.7834" said: > this is just the return of shoutbow Yes it is. It just came with the trade off of gutting w.e was viable before .

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > > they should for sure balance for mAT as it's the highest current level of play. doesn't mean they shouldn't balance for ladder too. > > > > > > honestly, the best example was and will probably always be dragon hunter. > > > > > > the build was strong but not overly so, it was just relatively easy to play to a certain extent. let's say everybody could play it to 80% effectiveness right off the bat. in high level play, the build was only good not broken. > > > > > > now take a build that is harder to play, and you might only achieve 40% effectiveness right off the start. compared to dragon hunter, this build will most pikely perform worse on ladder but might very well be much stronger than dragon hunter on 100%. > > > > > > what's the right thing to do here? nerf dragon hunter? nerf the fictional build that is harder to play? > > > > > > it's actually quite simple. > > > > > > is dragon hunter too strong at the top level? > > > yes -> nerf > > > no -> buff if needed > > > > > > is dragon hunter too strong at lower levels? > > > yes -> don't nerf it, but increase the skill cap by making the skills more interesting. this could even become a buff because the build might become more flexible. > > > no -> leave it > > > > > > if the fictional build i'm talking about is too strong st high level but weak at low level you have two pathes you can take. nerf it, or nerf it and up the skill floor a bit. > > > > > > something that anet often does and i really hate is the following: > > > > > > they see a build that does something that it's not supposed to do or a build that is very uninteractive to play against (minions, turrets, bunker thief). instead of changing the build or making it less obnoxious they just whack it so hard with the nerf hammer that people stop playing it, thus ruining build diversity. > > > > > > > > > > There is more that goes to it than that. You cannot only balance around the top 0.25%. You need to consider the top 10%. But even in the top 0.25%, how you measure top performing can be highly misleading. > > > > IMO (and I go this from another game devs) the best indicator is to aggregate results by winning composition. What this means you see what class/elite compositions have the highest win percentage in 1,500 and mAT. Then you look for how often you see a specific elite. If holo shows up 8 times in the top 10 compositions, clearly it is over performing. If mirage shows up 1 time, it clearly is under performing. > > > > You would then look for feedback from players and experience (if devs play the game, which at this point I am pretty certain rarely, if ever happens), and hone in on what is causing the class of over/under perform. > > > > Honestly though, this is not really going to work well now. sPvP as a whole has been fundamentally broken since Feb patch. This is what happens when you through away 8 years of balancing then do a half kitten-ed job trying to implement new values for everything. First step is to remove whoever is responsible for this fiasco. Second, get close or at, where we were before. Then do the steps above, while also keeping an eye on what happens in gold. > > i agree with what you say. you shouldn't balance only around top" 0.25%". honestly, i don't even know if the remaining players are a good enough standard nowadays but top "0.25%" should be where you can see what's the near absolute maximum output of a build. this is only one part of the equation. the other 99.75% show you how the build performs for the low to average to above average player. if you have one build that heavily outperforms everything else in those 0.25% it is probably too strong. doesn't mean it is too strong for the rest of the game, but if it's problematic for the top it needs to be changed in a way that nerfs it for the "0.25%" but keeps it the same for the rest, which quite frankly is really hard to achieve unless you just say, welp we nerf it for high level and the other players need to "git gud". > > i touch on that subject about team comp in a different post i made aswell. holo is a simple example because it is a side noder and it's quite clear it is overperforming. but sometimes it isn't necessarily a single build but rather a combination like for example support firebrand + scourge + blood scourge. that's more tricky. maybe none of the three are broken but the combination is, that's where you need to find a way to nerf something without making them unviable individually. > > the stuff i'm talking about is very simplified so don't take everything for bare value. there's much more to balance than just looking at numbers. sometimes it's just about the feeling of a build too. i mean, look at mirage. yes mirage is weaker now with only one dodge, but it feels incredibly bad to play and will feel bad even if it was (i'm not saying it is) numerically overtuned. on the other hand it's also wrong to nerf around stuff, something anet really loves to do with holo changes. just because you nerf other stuff doesn't mean what you should be nerfing gets less broken, the result might be the same in the end, the build will be weaker, but it will feel terrible to play. The top .25% or what your actually talking about tournaments- doesn’t represent how good builds actually are in the hands of “pro” players. They represent how popular a comp or class. Plenty of ppl would prefer to play different stuff any time of day example during ranked, but then you run into the same type of problem. We Cannot balance around the players themselves, that’s just not how game companies make good balance.

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > they should for sure balance for mAT as it's the highest current level of play. doesn't mean they shouldn't balance for ladder too. > > honestly, the best example was and will probably always be dragon hunter. > > the build was strong but not overly so, it was just relatively easy to play to a certain extent. let's say everybody could play it to 80% effectiveness right off the bat. in high level play, the build was only good not broken. > > now take a build that is harder to play, and you might only achieve 40% effectiveness right off the start. compared to dragon hunter, this build will most pikely perform worse on ladder but might very well be much stronger than dragon hunter on 100%. > > what's the right thing to do here? nerf dragon hunter? nerf the fictional build that is harder to play? > > it's actually quite simple. > > is dragon hunter too strong at the top level? > yes -> nerf > no -> buff if needed > > is dragon hunter too strong at lower levels? > yes -> don't nerf it, but increase the skill cap by making the skills more interesting. this could even become a buff because the build might become more flexible. > no -> leave it > > if the fictional build i'm talking about is too strong st high level but weak at low level you have two pathes you can take. nerf it, or nerf it and up the skill floor a bit. > > something that anet often does and i really hate is the following: > > they see a build that does something that it's not supposed to do or a build that is very uninteractive to play against (minions, turrets, bunker thief). instead of changing the build or making it less obnoxious they just whack it so hard with the nerf hammer that people stop playing it, thus ruining build diversity. > > They shouldn’t balance based off of mats or ladders. For one saying this is the “highest level of play” is a huge meme considering basically anyone can do that. The problem is if you just watch a video of an auto tournament or take in info from a streamer who does ranked for your balance info- than your already balancing wrong as you are basing it off someone who doesn’t care about balance of the whole game. Advocating for mat balancing and balancing based off rank is almost equivalent to asking for ignorant devs and blind balance- the result so has been terrible balance and non functional skills

The word is legendary armor farming is very fast in pvp as compared to wvw etc. If you end up skill gated from it, then possibly not a good idea but playing pvp can improve your skill and mechanics greatly so I’d say give it a shot

I’m a fairly bad rev, though my mechanics, rotations , game knowledge etc are probably pretty high level, but I kindof agree- rev when it’s viable is usually loaded since it has 2 sets of heals + utilities which even if they cannot pick them are all very good and standard. Tone down the defense to compensate would be a good option imo and maybe it’ll force ppl to play fun builds like power shiro with sword/shield and staff even if renegade damage is still over the top

In all seriousness though they’d have to change the way it functions. Rn it does damage damage at the very start and this is the point where it is best to get a stun off- since if you stun it right away they don’t get the roll back, evade or the vigor/condi clear + fury if traited. Like wise the instant damage acts as it’s own trade off for being back loaded to the later part of the animation, that is to say that if you only get off the front animation- at least you did that damage + maybe even applied condis depending on the build. If you get rid of the damage make it an even level animation with dodge at the start and boons + condi clear instantly. This changed is necessary if you get rid of the damage to make it still functional, I predict either way ppl will complain about this skill, but also I think it would be against how ranger functions because all the skills are like this to were you need to completely finish the animation to get full benefits. Hence why things with cc are countering ranger builds in general- throughout most of ranger- possibly besides boon beast which had insane stability uptime

Perfect your mechanics then worry about rating. At first you may have to q selectively, Ie only prime time 120 games per season with a good duo, eventually you’ll be able to get a good rating playing relaxed and that’s where the real fun starts

Or just make it a daze and everyone will come here complaining how op ranger is.