Dadnir.5038

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"Axl.8924" said: > > Why not a single target range focused necro elite spec? The others aren't really ranged > > Because melee/melee ISH ( think else dagger ) makes the most sense I feel. Almost everything about necro bar reaper and a handful of other things are medium to long range already. > > Necro also has one core melee weapon and only has one true condi weapon in sceptre. > > Would be really surprised it it wasn't a sword or mace melee spec. > > I also expect it to be shroudless Well, we will know in a bit more than half a year. I think that the aggressive melee playstyle is solidly covered by reaper thought, I wouldn't bet against a ranged weapon. It will mostly depend on the thematic and the mechanism of the e-spec. For all we know, we could end up with: - A "bone trapper" thematic with bone traps, a longbow shooting bone arrows and a ghost hound as a main mechanism (just so that we can abuse _runes of trapper_ and get our load of hate about "unkillable invisible necro cancer that move like they got a speed hack"). - A "Spiteful shaman" thematic with focus on retaliation and/or confusion, wielding a hammer and summoning bone turrets/totems (trying to have our foes killing themself, the kind of gameplay that nobody want to encounter in game). - A "parasit host" thematic with focus on self inflicted conditions and an image close to that of an insect leading to axe Off-hand, venoms and some insect spawn. (Thiefs would probably kiss necromancer's feets if it lead to a runeset that give a bonus when using venoms) - A "dark mage" thematic with a focus on dark aura, using sword (because it feel like a good weapon to get a leap finisher) and some glyphs. - ... etc.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > I don't consider anything Anet has done last year to be Balance changes at all. > They are just playing whack-a-mole until no moles are left. > > Yu know what the dumbest thing is? > I've heard that the balance team can't make skill changes to address long lasting problems because apparently THEY AREN'T ALLOWED TO CHANGE THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE SKILLS. They've done quite a bit of that last year thought. Afterall, they reworked traits that allowed 5 target skills to reach 10 targets, they've removed some traits and introduced new one (Necromancer's _blood bank_, _dread_ are good example) and there was some skills fonctionnality work (for example, chronomancer's shatters getting back the self shatter). And it's far from being an exhaustive list. > Like so all they can do is nerf and buff numbers, and that doesn't change toxic things like Immob spam Druid, or Trapper Runes. > And as such they can't hammer a specific problem, and add more power back into the Profession by reworking underused or mechanically weak parts. What you say here doesn't make sense. If you ever looked at the patch notes, you'd know they can and do the changes you believe they can't. You're citing things here that fit the perceived OPness of sPvP/WvW but this perceived OPness is in constant motion. A few month ago everyone wanted engineer nerfed (and it got it's nerfs) and before that everyone wanted the necromancer to be burned at the stack. Today everyone want guardian being kicked in the balls and tomorow everyone will want [chose any profession] to be obliterated. > All we can hope for is when EoD is done, they can focus on reworking stuff that desperately needs reworking (Turrets, Minions, Underwater, problematic 300s traits etc.) Turret/minions always hoover at the edge of being OP, that's things ANet just can't make viable. Underwater is in an OK state based on the developpement priorities granted that there is not much underwater content in sPvP/WvW. 300s traits are what they are, in most case nobody is required to take them and there is 2 other option to chose from, which mean that it isn't really a priority for the dev team. > But I know this won't happen, because they would be TOO BUSY BALANCING 9 NEW ESPECS WHICH ARE NO DOUBT GOING TO BE OP AS HECK. > I doubt they will be "busy" but you're not wrong in saying that their focus will be mainly on those new e-specs. That said, these new e-specs will revive the game's player population and create an influx of cash so it wouldn't be surprising if they prioritize them. We objectively can't claim that ANet didn't make balance change after Feb 2020. There was plenty of number tweeks and even some skill/trait rework on a quaterly rythm (which mean pretty much the same rythm that the prior years). Yes they didn't increase the balance patch rate like they promised in Feb but at the same time 2020 wasn't a kind year for anybody (I believe what happened this year is enough to justify the fact that this promise was broken).

> @"jpsssss.7530" said: > I honestly hope it gets a condi focused spec with hammer The necromancer e-specs tend to have a focus on condi (Reaper: chill / Scourge: torment, cripple) and ANet like it's weapons "slow". So I guess it could very well get what you hope it get. Personally, I'd bet on a focus on a condition that's supposed to reduce incoming damage (probably _slow_ since the core necromancer feel already loaded enough on weakness). I can very well imagine a necromancer's hammer applying slow (There is a high probability that PvP players won't like facing this condition, like they do/did for chrono, but, let's face it, whatever the necromancer get, PvP players won't like to face it).

> @"Zee.1294" said: > ....... say what?...Can you say that again?..... Help yourself, just look at the patch notes. It's not because the balance patchs aren't especially gamechanging that they aren't balance patchs. - December 1st 2020 mainly focused on removing skills that affect more than 10 target for WvW's sake and came along some damage balance on things like guardian or Engineer. _You can't expect much more than that from a balance patch._ - October 13th addressed mainly the growing concerns about Engineer and it's grenade cheese in sPvP. _Yes, it was light for a balance patch, but still effective._ - July 7th was a pretty heavy patch. _Over a hundred point of balance targeted at either sPvP or WvW listed along some mechanical change._ So, Yes I say it again.

Can't we just have the stealth and superspeed replaced by something like 2 seconds of alacrity. I mean, for me, it make more sense if you are a trapper that you can make use of your trap more often than the stealth + superspeed does.

> @"otto.5684" said: > Well, pve did not have a balance patch since... July I think? July patch was like 80% PvP/WvW and 20% PvE, but, well yes, you could say that. Objectively, the last patch that wasn't directly claimed as PvP centric by ANet's devs was probably in december 2019.

I think it's a bit unfair for engineer and revenant... How about runes that give you stealth whenever you gain fury instead?

Well, there was a "balance" patch December 1st 2020. That's not so long ago and answer some sPvP/WvW concerns. October 13th 2020 can also be labeled as a "balance" patch. Answering PvP concerns. July 7th 2020 had a consequent "balance" patch. Answering both sPvP and WvW concerns. Prior to that we had covid-19 outbreak and the dev's team thined out. I'd say that we are on a 2-3 months balance patch release rate at the moment. We could expect one in February or March. I'll even go as far as expecting this patch to address some sPvP concerns.

> @"Cynz.9437" said: > PvE: so you agree that thief is not efficient in end game group content (basically a reason to play this game once you reached max level). That is also the point of OP. If thief is not allowed to do anything at least it should provide best damage in pve, by far and not in some unrealistic golem environment. > > WvW: no, anything thief does as "support" can be done by other classes and much better. Simple as it is. Thief is waste of spot in zergs. As you say, thief is not efficient. That is actually an additional problem if you consider their "viability" in pve. My stance is a bit more subtle than that. What I say is that thief is not _the most_ efficient choice in these gamemode but it doesn't mean that it can't be "efficient" at what he does, just that he isn't _the best_ choice (which in the end is also the case for a lot of professions due to the "meta" centric mindset of the playerbase). Ultimately you don't need to be the best to do the job, only players require the best (a mindset bound to exclude some professions which aren't necessarily bad in the end).

> @"Cynz.9437" said: > PVE: too bad BT is only usable on few bosses. Outside of damage thief brings nearly nothing to raids. It isn't a situation exclusive to thiefs, thought. PvE end game is ruled by efficiency, fortunately there is more than raid/strike in the game. Personally I enjoy playing thief in open world PvE (it's a perfect profession for moving unhindered through maps and puzzles) and it's tools still allow you to steamroll over quite a few dungeons paths (Thief is ideal to cheese caudecus manor paths for example). > > WvW: you get insta kicked from squads and flamed if you join one. So ofc all thives gonna do is roam - they are not allowed to do anything else. I do not think that roaming thieves are really that great. Successfully killing some upscaled undergeared enemies is hardly definition of strong. This is again an issue of players seeking the most efficient path. However, the thief's image (due to thief's players favored gameplay) also add to the fact that they are not welcome in zerg. It's scary but most player (thief players included) think that the thief can only play in a cheesy burst playstyle while in fact the thief have a lot of option to support it's team and take a beating. > > PvP: yeah, thief is so OP... oh, excuse me, "FINE" atm that i have been the ONLY thief in the 99% of the matches i have done this season. But every match i have multiple necros and guards - because thief is so OP, guize. Just git gut. Can't kill anyone with more than 2 brain cells but thief is fine, guize. Because i said so. Can't hold a point by design but thief is fine, guize. Mobility got nerfed so many times that your average guard/holo can keep up with you but thief is fine, guize. Also, get reported because you dare to play thief and not reroll. Yes, it happens. But thief is fine, guize. Dealing damage and running around isn't all that thief is able to do. Sure, It's what have defined him in sPvP for most of the game live but it's not all he can do. Over the years thief is the profession that changed it's gameplay the least in this gamemode, both because it's perceived as needed for his role and because thiefs players are drawn toward such gameplay. Thought, nothing really prevent players to try to get creative with what the thief can do. The issue is not whether thief is fine or not. The issue is thiefs are less effective at what they used to be the most effective, leading to an identity crisis.

My first memory... Being 1 shot by an elona thief between home and woodhaven as a mesmer (nov 2012)... Didn't really made me like the gamemode. (un)Fortunately, for me PvE lags were worse than WvW lags so I took a job as a scout.

Turrets were made and balanced for a game with limited way to apply boons and without ferocity/concentration/expertise. The more you level the more you'll feel limited by this outdated mechanism. Personally, when I take turrets it's mainly for their toolbelt skills (healing turret being the exception), their damage and hitrate is often to slow to make them valuable. Edit: In PvE, I think that: - _Rifle turret_ could/should have it's hitrate reduced to 1s from 2s. - _Rocket turret_ could/should have it's hitrate reduced to 2s from 4s. - _Flame turret_ could/should have it's hitrate reduced to 2s from 3s. - _Thumper turret_, _Net turret_ and _Healing turret_ are fine as they are. I mean, it's PvE, it's not like such hitrate would be OP considering how low their crit-rate/ferocity is.

> @"idontnoso.9850" said: > As for removing the ability to make gold while playing PvP. What's the point of playing PvP then? Just for fun wont cut it. There needs to be a reward. Thats' why I say that it would be the last nail in the sPvP coffin. If you want gold out of sPvP you have to live with the things (bots) or players that are here for this gold. The fact that you can make gold out of sPvP is why you have bots there, before ANet introduced the reward tracks in sPvP you seldom heard of bots in the gamemode.

You know sometime peoples claim that the otherside is a bot while it isn't. Some players are not willing to be bothered by the toxicity of the sPvP chat and simply disable the chat. Anyway, there is not much ANet can do, today you see scourges as bot, a while back it was mesmers, and some time later it might be another profession. Playing each and every profession isn't especially difficult, so, for someone that know what he does, it's probably not very difficult to program effective bots that take advantage of this point. The only possible way to thin out bots from sPvP is to remove the ability to make gold out of sPvP (And that would probably be the last nail on the coffin of this game mode).

I objectively wouldn't see myself playing a build like that in a PvP environment. In open PvE, I can see myself do it thought. The death magic traitline feeding on the vuln building of the axe/focus is a pretty creative developpement (It lead to an interesting synergy). Just one thing, wouldn't _herald of sorrow_ be a more interesting choice than _desert empowerment_? I mean 1k barrier every 10s on average don't feel expecially exciting while you could just time your _spectral grasp_ along _herald of sorrow_ burst.

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > Stealing mechanics from another profession seems more like a mesmer kind of thing than a thief, no? I'd say that mesmer is more about copying than stealing. Steal is supposed to imply a loss on the target that's been stolen from. It could be fun to have a thief removing their opponent current weapon skillset for a few seconds due to steal (renamed _disarm_), forcing them to use their weapon switch (for convenience, both elementalist and engineer would be allowed to switch to their secondary set if that happen). It could be an interesting mean of control (with 2 thiefs this could be very annoying unless you got kit/conjure weapon/transformation skill). The F2 skill would be bland thought, "_Throw weapon_". Would probably be totally useless in PvE, but it's not like introducing thing that are useless in PvE would be anything new.

> @"Axl.8924" said: > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > @"Axl.8924" said: > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > Lich autos need a 50% damage nerf, after that necros fine. > > > > > > Nerfing damage is problematic since it has such a high cd 150s s for damage that is bad is kinda gonna put lich in the unsueable stage. > > > > > > 50% is too huge. > > > > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Lich_Form says 150% here which is huge huge CD for such a big nerf which would cripple and hobble core. > > > > > > Like others have said prob an issue in 2v2. > > > > > > Also if it does need a nerf better to start small to see how much instead of huge 90% nerfs 200% nerfs. > > > > I'd say that it wouldn't be an issue if they nerf the AA thought. Technically, the feb patch made the sustain from _grim specter_ (lich#5) a lot more potent which can be seen as a balance point for a possible loss of damage on the AA. Now, sure, after close to one year, such a change would only feel like a nerf because everyone is used to the current potency of all the skills. > > I dunno 50% is such a huge number and what about the huge CD? usually huge nerfs like the way in wow when they did 50% nerf 60% nerf and gutting a class or some cases here too a skill makes it useless. Maybe but technically both the life leeching and vitality components of _grim reaper_ have seen a significant increase of efficiency with the patch. Is it right to accept this buff of "sustain efficiency" and fight against nerfs on the other side on the basis of "damage efficiency"? Should all healing and damage number values be decreased by 30% for the sake of "fairness" instead? Personally I'd rather have a 50% damage nerf on the AA than a global 30% nerf. Beside, if a 50% nerf on the AA of a transformation that have a 150s CD is enough to gut a profession, then the profession is already broken at it's core and need to be looked at seriously by the developpers. It's better to get rid of the bandaid that hide the festering wound and threat the wound than keep the bandaid.

> @"Axl.8924" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > Lich autos need a 50% damage nerf, after that necros fine. > > Nerfing damage is problematic since it has such a high cd 150s s for damage that is bad is kinda gonna put lich in the unsueable stage. > > 50% is too huge. > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Lich_Form says 150% here which is huge huge CD for such a big nerf which would cripple and hobble core. > > Like others have said prob an issue in 2v2. > > Also if it does need a nerf better to start small to see how much instead of huge 90% nerfs 200% nerfs. I'd say that it wouldn't be an issue if they nerf the AA thought. Technically, the feb patch made the sustain from _grim specter_ (lich#5) a lot more potent which can be seen as a balance point for a possible loss of damage on the AA. Now, sure, after close to one year, such a change would only feel like a nerf because everyone is used to the current potency of all the skills.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > And you don't understand that you pigeonhole things into 2 legends while I open up regen to all legends. (As for the FoN issue it's a reading comprehension issue on my part). Objectively you don't need FoN to do "more" on ventari and you certainly don't need/want (design wise) it to be a copy of FoL. > > Jalis' Focus is not Healing, does it need healing/Regen? > Shiro's Focus is not Healing, does it need healing/Regen? > Mallyx Focus is definitely not Healing, does it need healing/Regen? > > Why the heck do yu need to open up HEALING to all the other Legends which does NOT focus on healing? > In fact, Shiro already opens up sustain support with his FoN granting Siphon. > > If other Legends want Regen or need it so bad, take Elder's Respite. > > Ventari does need more, because it is a sorry excuse of a HEALING Legend once they swap out of it, so there needs to be more focus put into making healing stem from Ventari but still impactful after swapping out of Ventari. > > Easy fix would be to make Ventari just have a long unique HoT like Ele's Soothing Mist, but I don't like that design. > Slapping on Regen to Ventari FoN is more than sufficient, and provides synergy with my proposed EoE. > > Also, Ventari kit in general doesn't have Regen at all, which is extremely strange. > The popular healers in the game all have Regen : Mesmer builds, Guardian builds, Druid and Engineer build. > > Ventari is the only healer which has 0 Regen, the dedicated weapon Staff has no Regen. > What's wrong with putting Regen on Ventari? > > Also "pigeonholing" healing onto Legends that are mainly used for healing is a bad thing? > What's with people wanting more for things which don't need it? Well, you fail to consider that Jalis do provide boons (stability) and defensive mean to it's party and thus can benefit, in a support herald build, from having the ability to add regen to it's kit. The same goes for mallyx who could benefit to add regen to it's group resistance. Furthermore, it's not like ventari don't benefit from it either. Ventari also do have regen if you trait for it, thanks to _spirit boon_. And yes, the herald need to be able to justify a trait dedicated to regen by having access to regen whatever legend he use (not just the "healing" legend and the e-spec legend). > What's with people wanting more for things which don't need it? That's exactly what you do since ventari already have access to regen (do I stress this fact enough?) and EoE certainly don't need a buff you it's raw healing component.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > It's exactly what I understood. What I'm saying is that you make core stronger and by extension all other e-specs with your suggestion. The goal of the thread is to make herald support better, not core nor renegade or any other e-spec. The effect of your suggestion is that renegade (the most effective support at the moment) will be stronger as a support and thus still outclass Herald (even if it's buffed by your suggestion). > > > I don't think yu understand anything. > > EoE is on Shield. > Shield is a Herald only thing. > FoN Ventari is Herald F2. > FoN is a Herald only thing. > > **Once yu revert to core, or swap to Renegade, yu lose both of these things.** > > How can yu say I'm making Core stronger? > These are all Herald specific buffs which are taken away the moment yu aren't a Herald. > > Dude, do yu even play Rev? And you don't understand that you pigeonhole things into 2 legends while I open up regen to all legends. (As for the FoN issue it's a reading comprehension issue on my part). Objectively you don't need FoN to do "more" on ventari and you certainly don't need/want (design wise) it to be a copy of FoL.

Elementalist: Riffle (I want a magic riffle!) Engineer: Focus (I know some people think/want either a main hand or a 2H weapon but I think even an off hand will be manageable) Guardian: Warhorn (It should already have it as a core weapon) Mesmer: Pistol main hand (I want it since september 2012!) Necromancer: Axe off-hand (because nobody else want it ;) ) Ranger: scepter (I mean shepherd use something akin to a scepter to lead their sheeps... It feel like it would fit well in a ranger's hand) Revenant: Dagger Thief: Torch (It would be a nice weapon to fit it's smoke and shadows domain. It would also fit a graverobber theme) Warrior: Pistol (either MH, OH or both)

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > The issue of this suggestion is that you try to make core fit herald not the opposite. I won't claim that core wouldn't benefit from being able to apply regen but that also mean that you'd probably need nerfs to adjust core to this addition in order to avoid issue with core and the other e-specs. Taking care of herald's issue by tweeking herald and not core should be the priority when balancing herald. > > But EoE (Shield 4) and FoN (Herald F2) are all Herald centric skills? > Idea is that : > 1. Ventari FoN now has a way to pulse Regen when not in Glint Stance. > 2. EoE can be used as a burst healing tool, making Shield a good swap for a Support based weapon. > > So the entire fleshed out idea is this : > Herald, whether in Glint or in Ventari, can pulse Regen. > Herald, can now use EoE to burst heal > (I'm thinking of making this a charged based skill which AoEs up to 600 range centered on the Herald instead of the dumb projectile lob. Can also deal some damage) > > Constant Support presence would be Regen + Heal in Ventari, Regen + other Boons in Glint. > EoE used whenever needed to pop a heal off, and the magical thing about this is that it takes half the remaining duration of Regen, and applies it instantly. > > So if yu are keeping up with yur Regen pulsing, maybe yur Regen will be lasting a minute~ > So 60s of 130 HoT at base would be a total of 7800 HoT over 60s. > Using EoE here would burst heal for 3900 and the duration of the Regen would be halved to 30s. > > All this is to achieve : > - Better use for Shield > - Better Heals uptime for Herald. It's exactly what I understood. What I'm saying is that you make core stronger and by extension all other e-specs with your suggestion. The goal of the thread is to make herald support better, not core nor renegade or any other e-spec. The effect of your suggestion is that renegade (the most effective support at the moment) will be stronger as a support and thus still outclass Herald (even if it's buffed by your suggestion). Technically, there is no "need" of another source of regen on core because if you really need one for ventari, there is already _spirit boon_ for that. _Spirit boon_ give 5s of regen to 5 allies when you enter ventari which mean that with 100% boon duration you can keep it for the 10s of the legends CD. Giving 5s regen on EoE allow you to choose shiro, jalis or even mallyx and still have access to regen. Do you understand the difference? On one side you want to make change that confort the use of the 2 same legends and on another side I suggest a way to not necessarily be stuck to these 2 legends. On one side I make herald support more flexible and on the other side you effectively confort renegade support as the best option.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > How about reworking EoE to heal 50% of the total Regen duration per tick when applied. > > So reapplying Regen will give allies Regen for a lesser duration but also heals a good chunk per tick. > > This will also make Elevated Compassion stronger indirectly due to how Regen applied by Herald is also buffed. > > So, at base : > Regen heals 130 per tick. > Regen for 10s is 1300 total heal. > Regen with proposed EoE : > 650 Instant heal per reapplication > 650 remaining HoT for the remaining 5s > > Nerfed for competitive obviously. > > In addition to this, maybe Ventari FoN can now also apply Regen per tick, giving Heralds and Herald specifically, the ability to pulse Regen from Ventari as well. > Maybe base healing per tick for Ventari FoN should be lowered to compensate for this change. > > I am very much into the idea of Healing Revs being a Heal-HoT sort of healer, and not just a healer that vomits chunky heals. > The issue of this suggestion is that you try to make core fit herald not the opposite. I won't claim that core wouldn't benefit from being able to apply regen but that also mean that you'd probably need nerfs to adjust core to this addition in order to avoid issue with core and the other e-specs. Taking care of herald's issue by tweeking herald and not core should be the priority when balancing herald.

> @"Voltekka.2375" said: > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > @"Voltekka.2375" said: > > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > If you run the aforementioned traits, that reaper isnt really useful. Especially against a blob. Unless you play a condi reaper. Which is pretty bad. > > > > Condi reaper isn't much worse than condi core or condi scourge. It's just less popular than it's power variant. > > Mind sharing a build? Cause condireaper lacks the tankiness of core or the corrupts of scourge Reaper isn't less tanky than core, especially when playing condi since playing condi basically mean playing scepter (furthermore while slightly inferior in LF management, the reaper is superior to core in damage reduction and sustain). As for scourge having more boon corrupt, that's arguable, sure you can say that scourge is the only one with a heal and elite skill that corrupt but does it really make a significant difference? I don't think so. The only unknown is whether one is willing to drop power for condi as a reaper since power make better use of the shroud.

> @"anduriell.6280" said: > > @"Axl.8924" said: > > There is someone on nec forum asking for nerfs. > > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/117932/necro-deserves-a-solid-nerf-especially-reaper-in-pvp-and-especially-wvw#latest > > > > the person seems to be a noob ranger complaining about necromancer > > I wouldn't go that far, any ranger main knows they are a hard counter against necros. This seems more like a multiclass learning the ropes and learning ranger is not as easy as it seems in sPvP. To be fair the thread has been created by a ranger that insist to use the few ranger's tools that don't hard counter the necromancer. His build isn't bad per se, from what he say it work against most professions, but when facing a necromancer it fall short (and I even say that his build is hard countered). It's more an issue of someone lacking the ability to acknowledge that he don't use the proper tools than an issue of balance.