Sigmoid.7082

I think it's the difference between actual implementation and the suggestions for that your title doesn't elude to which is causing the reaction since, based on the content of the OP, it's a little misleading. Nothing new has been implemented yet. You are suggesting something for implementation. Very different.

> @"McPero.3287" said: > > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > Seeing a dev on a certain class. Reasoning that this might be the reason one specific build of that class overperforms (which it doesn't btw.). > > > > Oh dear... > > Yeah DH in ratings where majority of people play isn't overperforming at all, good one. DH is just stupid design and needs to be changed or if that is not possible currently, nerfed. It is very unfun to play against and bad for new/learning players. They never said it wasn't overperforming ?

> @"Quadox.7834" said: > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > are there even more then 4 actually good condi builds? whenever conditions are good its always " nerf all conditions ". Whenever power build is good its always " l2p " " just dodge" or " nerf this 1 specific thing leave the reast of the things alooone " > > Imagine if I made posts that Lich form is OP, therefore we need to nerf all power damage to the ground! > > And you know what? if you nef conditions what stops people from stacking the kitten out of toughness, protection, weakness and never dying ? > > then you will be making another posts " nerf the bunkers they OP OP " and remove toughness and remove protection and remove this and that and it will never end. > > did you notice that they blanket nerfed almost all power dmg in the game but did not nerf condi coefficients or base damage in february? Lots of durations were changed or stacks/duration adjusted. But you kind of ignore one of the biggest changes to condi which was the complete removal of expertise as a stat on amulets as well as the change from 50%/25% duration on runes to 20%/10%. In addition traits that granted expertise or free condi duration nerfed by as much as half, bunch of traits that granted condi also changed to be much less effective. Im sure people remember how strong things like [shaper imaged](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Sharper_Images) and [duellist's discipline ](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Duelist%27s_Discipline) were. Its disingenuous and false to say condi didn't receive a blanket nerf or any nerf in general like some like to suggest

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said: > Dev response: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/444283/#Comment_444283 > > > @Gaile Gray.6029 said: > _As I've said in the past -- in fact, I am quoted in this very thread -- we do not have plans to translate or localize Guild Wars 2 into any additional languages._ > > _More information above, as I went into greater detail in the past. But the core answer still pertains: We will not be localizing Guild Wars 2, nor accepting community localization, into any additional languages._ > I don't understand how the thread is still going after this. Already had the "it's not that hard" underestimate run around comments. As well as the huge confusion between need and want. Now just missing the snide "I want it. The game needs it. It's such a good idea ... But Anet never do anything good" kind of snide comments.

> @"Smoosh.2718" said: > You can run away from a power damage dealer with 10 health and live, but you cant vs a condi player. In actuality you would have died. I see this argument all the time. "Condi keeps hitting you when you have moved away" yet it always ignored the fact that you have already been hit and have already taken the damage, its just delayed. Its not the fault of the damage type that you fail to play defensively at the right time and have taken enough damage to kill you over the next few seconds. If it was power damage and you did the same you would have died long before. Yet the thought process would be more likely to be "I misplayed somewhere" / "I didn't defence" / "I engaged poorly" / "I was out of cd" than the common reaction to the same mistakes vs condi of "ITS OP" / "ABSOLUTE BS" >Can we seriously stop defending Condi damage like its the most fun balanced thing in the game? I don't think people are defending it like its "the most fun balanced thing in the game?" rather pointing out poor arguments, misinformation and bias. I could shorten your post to "I don't like it. Never will. Therefore it shouldn't be a thing and there is no way you can convince me otherwise" >Over this last year we have seen a lot of power damage nerfs yet next to no nerfs on the way condition damage should be over time than Burst over seconds. There have been nerfs to condi burst and the strongest condi builds usually get hit. Remember condi theif? Where are all the complaints about it now? Condi is damage over time...but if you consistently fail to avoid attacks or strong skills you will start taking more and more damage. Your bias has probably lead you to never learn why you are dying, just see the condi in the death log and call BS / OP .Your preference to power damage, specifically melee fights, means you have better learnt those matchups and the higher details for this in the death log top skills has made it easier for you to do so. Though I do like the complaint about "what if I have used my defences or get plussed? I just die then" like its something specific to condition damage... On the point of burn guard. Permeating Wrath and Spirit Armoury could use a nerf of some sort to burn duration but besides that I can't think of much else.

> @"anduriell.6280" said: > > @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > > @"anduriell.6280" said: > > > It would be better if the communication was constant. Communicating the changes once they are done is not good, If the devs reworked a traitline once it is done there is no point for the community to provide any feedback as no relevant changes can be done at that point. > > > > A lot of community feedback that you see isn't all that useful. It lacks objectivity and is brimming with bias. > Feedback does not mean the devs has to do what the community says. Could have fooled me with the posts I see on this forum. Never said there wasn't any merit to it, its just a large majority isn't that helpful due to aforementioned lack of objectivity and / or bias

> @"anduriell.6280" said: > It would be better if the communication was constant. Communicating the changes once they are done is not good, If the devs reworked a traitline once it is done there is no point for the community to provide any feedback as no relevant changes can be done at that point. A lot of community feedback that you see isn't all that useful. It lacks objectivity and is brimming with bias.

> @"Obtena.7952" said: > Personally, I'm crossing my fingers for a 2H main. This is something I would be surprised at.

Unless its changed they should stack multiplicatively: 1 * 0.5(shroud) * 0.8(Infusing Terror) * 0.67(Protection) . e.g Shroud and Infusing end up at 60% DR. All 3 end up at ~74% DR.

> @"sorudo.9054" said: > nothing here.... had to go buy it for 0 gems

> @"Sleepwalker.1398" said: > > @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > Deaths charge has a bunch of hits that are not listed in the skill fact that are part of the spinning animation. You get hit by them if you are close enough. The tooltip you see is the final hit and the final hit only. > > > > I can't remember how many but they haven't actually been updated in damage value since introduction, unlike the final hot, so they land for a damage coeff of 0.1. > > > > For some reason my memory wants to say 9 extra hits? > > > > It's one of the strongest skills in the kit..even if you only look at the final hit. only really held back by being a leap (not affected by quickness ), the landing lag on the final hit, and the weird targeting all leaps have. > > > > Though if you are getting hit for that much by that skill there are a lot of skills that would do FAR more damage to you. > > Thanks for this. I'm not a reaper so the hits on the skill's description did not make sense. > I was just testing and I think you are right in it being 9 hits. > The first 8 seem like normal and 9th is one that spikes. >  > You didn't count the first non-critial hit. Yeah it's 10 hits on total. 9 small and 1 big. Originally the last hit had a coeff of 1.0 and the small hits had a coeff of around 1. so over all it did 1.9. It's later been buffed by 30% and 25% placing it at 1.625 for the final hit unusure about the initial hits since they are unlisted. The Feb patch that reduced all damage even notes the initial strikes. Stating they have gone down from 0.125 to 0.06 and the final strike from 1.625 to 1.3. Overall if you land the whole thing in PvE it's 2.75 coeff. In PvP and WvW it's 1.84 coeffs. Like I said strong skill, especislly of you couldn't the extra 600 ferocity it can benefit from..it's just SUPER clunky.

Currently any ranked mode that isn't 5v5 is an off season "mini-season". It's meant to give people something to do while being something a little different. As much as people like to say "no I wouldn't" if there was nothing but season all the time they would burn out.

Which part of the trait? Because lesser enfeebling blood only procs on shroud entry.

> @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > @"Yasai.3549" said: > > 48k over 32 hits. > > Each tick was around 1.5k damage. > > > > So yu basically sat there and ate 1.5k damage per second instead of yu know, cleansing it and moving away. > > Aight, it's clear here that Guardians need to be nerfed guys. > > Man do so many people seriously not know how death recap works? Its not 1.5k damage per second, or per tick. Its 1.5k damage per *stack*. If he had 10 stacks, then 3 seconds would be 30 hits. Yeesh. How are we reaching 1.5k a stack? Only thing I can't figure out here.

Deaths charge has a bunch of hits that are not listed in the skill fact that are part of the spinning animation. You get hit by them if you are close enough. The tooltip you see is the final hit and the final hit only. I can't remember how many but they haven't actually been updated in damage value since introduction, unlike the final hot, so they land for a damage coeff of 0.1. For some reason my memory wants to say 9 extra hits? It's one of the strongest skills in the kit..even if you only look at the final hit. only really held back by being a leap (not affected by quickness ), the landing lag on the final hit, and the weird targeting all leaps have. Though if you are getting hit for that much by that skill there are a lot of skills that would do FAR more damage to you.

> @"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 and carrion for their vit.

> @"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

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > Honestly though, I think a good place for Deathly Chill would be to simply be to apply a Stack of Bleeding upon hitting a Chilled enemy, with 0.25 interval. I like this one. You can tweak the ICD, the stacks, and the stack duration for balance. Also solves the problem that people have of conditions applying conditions ending up in a condition cascade and incentivises you to continue to engage after you have chilled someone.

> @"Spook.5847" said: > it might be worth lobbying for some changes that actually help the game. Such as? And why would said change improve the game? >If you ever played a game that had real classes that were properly formed around a role, you'd know how extremely limited and weak the design of GW2 actually is (weapon swap mechanic being the lone exception) I have, many of them, and I don't agree. GW2 provides a level of freedom of choice and expression I have experience in very few other games. It doesn't feel limited or weak in any sense of the word to me.

> @"Pockethole.5031" said: >If open world mobs were to be made harder like many repliers seem to dream of I don't think people are as for making it harder as you think, rather more against making it easier since the bar is already pretty low. Made less annoying? Maybe. Made easier? I can't agree.

> @"Vancho.8750" said: > so if say someone is naughty in game and someone else makes even a vague comment about it, the naughty party can report it and it will get deleted. > I mean this specific example is against the forums code of conduct? Its not getting removed because there is some under qualified third party moderating, "hiding the truth", or whatever else people like to claim. It gets removed due to directly breaking the rules. Also to comment on criticism being removed. It isn't but in some particular cases the poster feels like it is, failing to realise its now what they said, but how they said it. They could have a post with the exact same meaning worded differently stand.

I would love for Anet to add land spears but in a way that nobody expects and then see how many of the "I want land spears" crowd goes on to complain that, even though they got what they wanted, it wasn't added or usable in a way they want and that Anet should have done something else instead with their time and resources...better yet a "why didn't you just add [insert existing weapon here] instead of doing this?!"

> @"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? Because other things are generally more effective at killing you. The higher that number the worse burn was at bringing you down. I can take 15~20k direct damage and die, I can take 30k+ burning and not die.

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"xEtherx.6127" said: > > Why is there so much hate for necro in the community for both pve and pvp and yet anet always hits us with the nerf bat. > > Why do people like to pretend *their class* is somehow especially targetted with the nerfs? People never want to acknowledge what their class does well compared to others. Just what it does worse.

> @"zealex.9410" said: > The increase of the population is on the hands of anet, with eod we will have a spike, if theres another expac planned after eod then we will have another. Its been 3+ years since the last expac so alot of ppl dropped pvp because of that. I know a lot of people left PvP back then because of how OP some specs were. Not just at numbers but mechanically. Even though I'm not one to ride him, CMC does seem to have a better understanding of the mode compared and , AFAIK is involved with the spec design this time so I hope they are more balanced this time around from the off.