memausz.7264

> @"JayAction.9056" said: > Recently there have been a few complaints on Rev specifically Rev damage. > > First, I would like to point out that rev still has the LOWEST power damage and LOWEST power burst of ALL classes in a PVE environment. Yet, with that being the case rev still has pvp specific damage and CD nerfs to even further lower this damage. > > Second, there are very few Revs that are playing consistently at high skill rating. If you are going to call something out for being OP pertaining to Rev you might as well from now on just say “XXX out skilled me and I want him nerfed.” > > As we all know rev has the MOST EXPLOITABLE weaknesses of all classes. It’s quite easy to win against rev just by playing a certain way or a certain spec. > > So for the sake of keeping things short; maybe from now on don’t call out rev. Call out the specific rev that farmed you, and state why this specific person is OP. No need to cry against Rev *insert laughing emoji*. I'm sure the MAT's Ventari Rev bunker sitting on a node for 1 min on such low HP is "outskilling" other top-tier DPS class players. Yep...

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > Honestly just fn balance the game and do actual passes on a reasonable time table. This whole stop support on the game balance wise cuz eod is being worked on is ridiculous. EoD = End of Development

They have Game Masters and the thing is, a Game Master needs to actively be present, spectating a match for their to be any cause of action for suspension/bans. Also, like Avatar said, this thread will likely be deleted because they would prefer to blame people who do not have 2 Factor Authentication (who are not hacking) rather than fix the problem and suspend and/or ban the hackers. That's the hard truth.

How does someone on your team disconnecting, thus, adding a loss to your record, but not hurting your rating - factor into this?

Well the problem is you have a bunch of top players doting on this meta which is much more similar to the bunker chrono meta of a few years back which made a lot of top players leave the game entirely. It's not fun to have so many bunkers and CC-spammers in the game.

Bad balance, overworked and understaffed Customer Support Team that apparently has not suspended a certain user for blatantly n-bombing and f-bombing (the slur) PvP map chats multiple times for weeks now, an inability to respond effectively to people using port hacks, people blatantly win-trading for meaningless titles, and general toxicity (where a player on your team AFKs the ENTIRE MATCH from the start, then when you call the player out, the player claims that YOU are toxic XD). There is no punishment for AFKers, slurrers, or hackers, and slow balance improvement, so yeah, people just move on to PvE or WvW or other games.

If you want to keep your Mac, learn how to dual boot Windows 10 on it. It's time to follow some consecutive steps, my friends. But if you have a weak Mac.... yeah, time to get a PC.

How bout... no? https://prnt.sc/wiofrs

Also, it's unconscionable for any player to Solo a lord in 10 seconds under any circumstances. And yet, burn guards can do *exactly* that.

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > > @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > > > I thought we were done with amulets that granted players more than 500+ toughness... seems not to be the case if Rabid amulet is still going to be around. It allows condi revenants and condi rangers to sit and bunk nodes even against two direct dmg dps players for extended periods of time with not much effort. > > > > > > > > It needs to go, in my opinion. > > > > > > You need to actually think about the amulets that have been removed if "it has more than 500 toughness!1!1!" is your reasoning > > > > Well that's literally the reasoning for deleting all the other amulets with lots of toughness or lots of toughness and vitality. Barbarian amulet - gone. Paladin amulet - nerfed. Cavalier's Amulet - deleted. Knight Amulet - deleted. YEah, there's precedent for it. Not this inconsistency of "Oh, let's nerf CC direct dmg to zero... except Lightning Rod, Fear, etc. This inconsistency screws with the balance if there is no consistent design philosophy. > > > > So yes, 100% justified in deleting an amulet based on precedent. If you don't like it, petition for knight's amulet to return. > > Still ignores the real reason; primary verses secondary stats, as well as the other stats that come with the amulet. i.e healing power with vitality is fine but healing power with toughness isnt. > > There's nothing inconsistent when you look at what had actually been removed. > > The three that got removed main stat defensive. Paladin got nerfed since it had both defensive stats and cele got removed since it had all 3. > > Removing rabid for its toughness means you would need to remove valk for its vit. > > Yeah and there's an argument to be had about Valkyrie, too.

> @"Shao.7236" said: > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > > @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > > > I thought we were done with amulets that granted players more than 500+ toughness... seems not to be the case if Rabid amulet is still going to be around. It allows condi revenants and condi rangers to sit and bunk nodes even against two direct dmg dps players for extended periods of time with not much effort. > > > > > > > > It needs to go, in my opinion. > > > > > > You need to actually think about the amulets that have been removed if "it has more than 500 toughness!1!1!" is your reasoning > > > > Well that's literally the reasoning for deleting all the other amulets with lots of toughness or lots of toughness and vitality. Barbarian amulet - gone. Paladin amulet - nerfed. Cavalier's Amulet - deleted. Knight Amulet - deleted. YEah, there's precedent for it. Not this inconsistency of "Oh, let's nerf CC direct dmg to zero... except Lightning Rod, Fear, etc. This inconsistency screws with the balance if there is no consistent design philosophy. > > > > So yes, 100% justified in deleting an amulet based on precedent. If you don't like it, petition for knight's amulet to return. > > Barbarian had only vitality, so the hypothesis doesn't hold much value. Besides we still have Valkyrie and Carrion. > > Look carefully, we have the option to delete traits and multipliers from a class or delete what causes any class to be OP with those traits. Let's keep damage in. They can just play Wizard's or Carrion. I shouldn't adjust because the game is rewarding such lazy builds. And yeah the theory holds up because that was still the reasoning behind it - super high sustain builds. With Barbarian, you could legit have a 35K base HP Necro. Think of shroud with that - that's an addition -50% incoming direct dmg and condi dmg - a permanent Spectrum Shield. Add to that all the sources of protection.... and for a little less HP, also having access to Eternal Life... and you've got yourself a trait tank that's unkillable.

> @"CutesySylveon.8290" said: > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > Ask yourselves this question - why is it that no other condis in the game and no other direct damage attacks in the game, even combined, match burn dmg? That's how I know all of you are wrong. > > Yikes, bad take. Burns are generally much lower duration and have limited access. Guardian compensate for having no cover condi by having the strongest damaging one. Bring cleanse and stop wasting it. Cleanse does not matter if you get spiked by condi - which, btw, has a +50% duration increase with Smoldering Sigil and Baelfire or Balthazaar Runes. You can't cleanse fast enough. And the chances of being tether pulled are quite high. It does so much damage that if you have two mediocre burn DHs in a game, one can sit at mid, one can sit at home and the rest of the team will just rotate between them and unless the enemy team has core necros, there's not much you can do. One counter build isn't very balanced at all. You have to look at damage output, mobility, time-to-kill, sustain, kiting potential, and so on when looking at this and when you do, you realize that asking players to switch their professions to such a limited set of builds to counter one stupid snapping turtle of a build that just sits on node all game is a terrible way of going about balance.

They are still going to be used in MATs, so... I don't know what to tell you, brother.

> @"Insomnus.9185" said: > https://imgur.com/ZHcPUGQ > > I've been experiencing problems with queues in recent weeks. > > Normally I would give up on waiting after 10-15 minutes. Some days I can't get any games. I've tried relogging, req-ing etc with no change. Today I decided to wait it out and got a game about 2 minutes after this screen was taken. Half an hour of queueing time for one match that lasts 10-12 minutes on average in a boring meta barely worth playing is intolerable even for casual play. I can't help but wonder what the kitten is going on. Again, it's because the balance is not fun and lazy condi builds get you much farther than they should in ranked and ATs. I don't want to fight that. People who are even moderately competitive DON'T want to fight that. So yeah, once this season is done, enjoy your condi + CC + bunker sandwiches. That's what you people wanted - no direct damage (but somehow you make an exception for renegade)... so there you go. Very little direct dmg in the game now. That's what you wanted, right? Don't come here complaining if you don't recognize the source of the problem.

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"memausz.7264" said: > > I thought we were done with amulets that granted players more than 500+ toughness... seems not to be the case if Rabid amulet is still going to be around. It allows condi revenants and condi rangers to sit and bunk nodes even against two direct dmg dps players for extended periods of time with not much effort. > > > > It needs to go, in my opinion. > > You need to actually think about the amulets that have been removed if "it has more than 500 toughness!1!1!" is your reasoning Well that's literally the reasoning for deleting all the other amulets with lots of toughness or lots of toughness and vitality. Barbarian amulet - gone. Paladin amulet - nerfed. Cavalier's Amulet - deleted. Knight Amulet - deleted. YEah, there's precedent for it. Not this inconsistency of "Oh, let's nerf CC direct dmg to zero... except Lightning Rod, Fear, etc. This inconsistency screws with the balance if there is no consistent design philosophy. So yes, 100% justified in deleting an amulet based on precedent. If you don't like it, petition for knight's amulet to return.