Aza.2105

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> You've never played thief have you

I pretty much play the game to test skills and changes in pvp. What about you?

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > @"Arcaedus.7290" said:

> > > > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > > > @"Arcaedus.7290" said:

> > > > > > Am I the only one that thinks that making both flanking and larcenous unblockable was a bad idea? Obviously I'm biased as a guardian player but a well-played s/d thief literally hardcounters the entire guardian class no matter how skilled the player.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Anyway, the combination of damage, unblockability, spammability, sustain and mobility of s/d thief leads me to think that something should be nerfed. Imo, since d/p has an established role as burst, I think s/d should be pushed more towards a dps/bruiser role rather than burst and that the damage of larcenous should be the focus of balancing rather than nerfing sustain of s/d thief.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Here are some suggestions and why:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > * Make Larcenous blockable: Would stop s/d thief from hardcountering the entire guardian class. A thief could still wait out a block, use basi, or auto attack (to remove aegis) to work around larcenous being blockable.

> > > > > > * Reduce the amount of time larcenous strike is available to be used after flanking strike: This could be done in tandem with another nerf or buff.

> > > > > > * Add a cd to larcenous: a short cd would stop the spammability and force a s/d thief to rely on auto attack a bit more.

> > > > > > * An alternative to the above - increase initiative cost of larcenous strike by 1 or 2: would stop spam a bit.

> > > > > > * Reduce the damage on larcenous, increase damage on flanking: This is a rather simple fix that would maintain some dps and decrease burst.

> > > > >

> > > > > Funny to hear a guardian lobby for thief changes because finally after 5 years of hard countering them you actually have to out play a thief now.

> > > > >

> > > > > I didn't see any "guardian mains" making posts to have themselves nerfed for thieves.

> > > > >

> > > > > Poetic justice is all this is

> > > >

> > >

> > > > Anyway, my point is that guard never hardcountered thief

> > >

> > > I can't take you seriously after this post after reading you down play the longest standing hard counter in the game.

> > >

> > > You are losing due to your own skill level not being better than the thief you are fighting. Not b/c you are being hard countered

> >

> > Actually he is correct.

>

> He's correct in what? That bunker guardian didn't hard counter thief....it just couldn't be killed by it?

>

> He killed any argument or point he could ever make on the subject with those statements

Bunker guard could never kill thief, but could just make them run away since they were wasting time. In terms of the current guardian vs thief, thief has every tool to simple dismantle guardian. Traditionally thief didn't have great access to condi removal but now that is not the case, so another one of their weaknesses was removed. With evade spam, mobility, stealth, access to condition removal and extremely high damage a thief should beat a guardian. And this is looking at it from a pure design stand point.

What exactly does guardian currently have to hard counter thief? It use to be block but larcenous strike alone hard counters guardian. Unblockable, high damage AND boon removal. From the current direction the game has headed, only a thief can counter a thief.

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Arcaedus.7290" said:

> > > @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > > > @"Arcaedus.7290" said:

> > > > Am I the only one that thinks that making both flanking and larcenous unblockable was a bad idea? Obviously I'm biased as a guardian player but a well-played s/d thief literally hardcounters the entire guardian class no matter how skilled the player.

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, the combination of damage, unblockability, spammability, sustain and mobility of s/d thief leads me to think that something should be nerfed. Imo, since d/p has an established role as burst, I think s/d should be pushed more towards a dps/bruiser role rather than burst and that the damage of larcenous should be the focus of balancing rather than nerfing sustain of s/d thief.

> > > >

> > > > Here are some suggestions and why:

> > > >

> > > > * Make Larcenous blockable: Would stop s/d thief from hardcountering the entire guardian class. A thief could still wait out a block, use basi, or auto attack (to remove aegis) to work around larcenous being blockable.

> > > > * Reduce the amount of time larcenous strike is available to be used after flanking strike: This could be done in tandem with another nerf or buff.

> > > > * Add a cd to larcenous: a short cd would stop the spammability and force a s/d thief to rely on auto attack a bit more.

> > > > * An alternative to the above - increase initiative cost of larcenous strike by 1 or 2: would stop spam a bit.

> > > > * Reduce the damage on larcenous, increase damage on flanking: This is a rather simple fix that would maintain some dps and decrease burst.

> > >

> > > Funny to hear a guardian lobby for thief changes because finally after 5 years of hard countering them you actually have to out play a thief now.

> > >

> > > I didn't see any "guardian mains" making posts to have themselves nerfed for thieves.

> > >

> > > Poetic justice is all this is

> >

>

> > Anyway, my point is that guard never hardcountered thief

>

> I can't take you seriously after this post after reading you down play the longest standing hard counter in the game.

>

> You are losing due to your own skill level not being better than the thief you are fighting. Not b/c you are being hard countered

Actually he is correct.

> @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said:

> > @Ubi.4136 said:

> > Please...please...do not suck.

>

> I think they look really awesome.

They remind me of something from alice in wonderland.

> @"Solori.6025" said:

> > @"Inoki.6048" said:

> > All these complaints about thieves, man... yet Shatter Mesmers are 100x more toxic.

>

> . . .S/D is the counter to shatter mes if played correctly.

>

> But I think thief is in a well balanced spot right now.

> Except HS, that needs to be buffed.

No profession is in a balanced spot at this time besides rev.

> @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > > @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > > > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > > > > @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > > > > If this split is limited to numbers, why not add toughness and vitality to every profession to tone down damage?

> > > >

> > > > Thats because toughness doesn't work. You won't notice any difference.

> > >

> > > Not even if every amulet added 500 toughness and 500 vitality? Maybe throw in some negative healing stat, too, as an experiment. Team fights can certainly be prolonged and professions leveled by global scaling of base stats.

> >

> > Nope it wouldn't change much. I'm a buildcrafter so I tend to test a lot of different possibilities that you normally wouldn't see in the meta. One thing I've specifically tested for quite awhile is if you could create a build that has high health and toughness and if they could survive all the extreme amounts of damage that is going around. The answer is no. I tested with rev, since theoretically they have high damage mitigation. With max toughness, scrapper rune, protection boon, minor gm trait from retribution line (with stability up and vengeful hammers up, you still will die in like 1-2 seconds.

> >

> > Revenant also has the most theoretical condi dmg reduction. With their gm trait from kalla -33% condi damage, vengeful hammers -20%, kalla heal -50% and Rite of the Great dwarf -50%. When the heal is up or rite of the great dwarf, you take less condi damage but its not enough to change the fight at all. Once those two buffs fade, even with the -33% passive and vengeful hammers buff you die in a few seconds to conditions.

> >

> > My conclusion is that damage is simply out of control. Its too high, too fast with little slow down between the damage being pumped out. The only way toughness or any form of mitigation would matter is if Anet scaled down damage significantly. Which would lead to another problem, there might not be enough damage to actually kill someone who is max mitigation. Ultimately the problem with gw2 pvp combat is the rate at which things are applied. That is damage and potentially mitigation. It just needs to be slowed down. There has to be a vulnerability time between each action you make, so enemies can punish you.

> >

> >

>

> So, if I understand you correctly, if given the choice, you might prefer something like -1000 power, -1000 condition damage, -50% boon duration, and -50% condition duration over some smaller buffs to vitality and toughness. Would that be acceptable?

Not sure if it would be that easy. I think a starting point would be to look at the damage, the rate of damage and mitigation, and health tiers. If you look at it from a design point of view. Players are dealing nearly the exact same damage as they do in raid situations. Except they can't one shot the raid boss because it has millions of health. And raid bosses can not one shot players with little to no indication. In pve big, strong attacks are highly telegraphed so you can dodge them. While in pvp its not uncommon for a player to get killed in a couple seconds from a opponent coming from stealth or after one knock down.

> @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > > @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > > If this split is limited to numbers, why not add toughness and vitality to every profession to tone down damage?

> >

> > Thats because toughness doesn't work. You won't notice any difference.

>

> Not even if every amulet added 500 toughness and 500 vitality? Maybe throw in some negative healing stat, too, as an experiment. Team fights can certainly be prolonged and professions leveled by global scaling of base stats.

Nope it wouldn't change much. I'm a buildcrafter so I tend to test a lot of different possibilities that you normally wouldn't see in the meta. One thing I've specifically tested for quite awhile is if you could create a build that has high health and toughness and if they could survive all the extreme amounts of damage that is going around. The answer is no. I tested with rev, since theoretically they have high damage mitigation. With max toughness, scrapper rune, protection boon, minor gm trait from retribution line (with stability up and vengeful hammers up, you still will die in like 1-2 seconds.

Revenant also has the most theoretical condi dmg reduction. With their gm trait from kalla -33% condi damage, vengeful hammers -20%, kalla heal -50% and Rite of the Great dwarf -50%. When the heal is up or rite of the great dwarf, you take less condi damage but its not enough to change the fight at all. Once those two buffs fade, even with the -33% passive and vengeful hammers buff you die in a few seconds to conditions.

My conclusion is that damage is simply out of control. Its too high, too fast with little slow down between the damage being pumped out. The only way toughness or any form of mitigation would matter is if Anet scaled down damage significantly. Which would lead to another problem, there might not be enough damage to actually kill someone who is max mitigation. Ultimately the problem with gw2 pvp combat is the rate at which things are applied. That is damage and potentially mitigation. It just needs to be slowed down. There has to be a vulnerability time between each action you make, so enemies can punish you.

> @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> If this split is limited to numbers, why not add toughness and vitality to every profession to tone down damage?

Thats because toughness doesn't work. You won't notice any difference.

Haha I love this.

I do not want to hear that you should of dodged, targeted or any of those garbage excuses that players here try to make. Lets look at it from a design stand point:

There are three base health tiers. 11k, 15k and 19k.

There is a skill that wipes two of those health tiers out in one hit. While leaving the highest health tier with only a fraction of health left. This is a problem and bad for the game. Yes there is some decision making like dodge. But it should not be dodge or die. Which is what the power creep has brought to the game. You dodge or die. Not you take a large chunk of unnecessary damage but you are still alive. No its dodge or die.

I think most players are so disillusioned on what is healthy for the game and what isn't that they believe this type of occurrence is ok. Look guys, damage is so out of control that even with max toughness, damage reduction modifiers from traits and protection, you still die in pretty much one hit. If that isn't a problem I don't know what is.

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> the +36% damage buff to shadow shot is ridiculous, maybe not for pvp, but definitely for wvw. this skill is already one of the strongest in the game, it does not need a buff of any sort.

Yeah I dunno. If that goes live then the devs are clueless.

> @"Wichidi.9281" said:

> With those changes you are kind of making spellbreaker awful to play and will most likely kick them out of the meta.

>

> You are literally nerfing every single spellbreaker skill there is. Every single skill.

>

> i mean you dont want spellbreaker to be relevant in pvp anymore, fair enough. Are you gonna make Berserker viable again then tho?

>

> Berserker is currently useless in pvp due to the Adrenal health gain, Headbutt etc.

>

> Could you maybe reverse the Adrenal health gain and make Berserker skill gain 3 stacks of adrenal health again? and Increase the casttime of headbutt again?

>

> those are 2 quick changes that would have a huge impact on war for pvp. It would simply make Berseker playable in PvP again which leads to a bigger build diversity in PvP which also is very healthy for the PvP enviroment. Pleas consider it.

>

> If you dont want Berserker to be viable in PvP again, would you consider maybe not Overnerfing spellbreaker? some nerfs are rly justified and needed but you are simply nerfing every single spellbreaker skill....

The meta will be totally different with these proposed list of changes.

> @"Cal Cohen.3527" said:

> The list in the main thread isn't final; one of the reasons we wanted to get it out way early is for you guys to give feedback. We agree that mirage could use more nerfs and it's something we will be looking at in the next few days. If you have any specific ideas (preferably splits) feel free to post them along with any reasoning and we'll take them into consideration.

>

> Thanks!

You guys created a monster with the Mesmer class. What ever happened to the roles with holes idea that Anet use to talk about during the games infancy? The class pretty much has access to everything. Condi removal, evades, blocks, invul, stealth, high damage, mobility and clones to confuse to opponent. Where on earth did the weaknesses go???

To quote from very old patch notes:

**Mesmer**

**Mesmers rely on illusions in order to accomplish their goals. They need illusions to accomplish some of their highest damage and control, and without the illusions, they become fairly fragile. They can deal with enemy boons better than most classes, but enemy conditions can often be a problem. They share some of the stealth and mobility that the Thief enjoys, but suffer from a low health pool if you get past all their tricks.**

No class has this type of power. Were if they move to a point all enemies evacuate the point because they don't want to die. The way scourge is designed is that they are bullies. They can decap because no one can contest them on the point, no matter how much condi removal or resistance they have. That is just ridiculous.

> @"Felipe.1807" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > Something is wrong when a skills radius is nearly the exact size as a capture point. That is NOT right. It removes the element of positioning. This is the greatest problem of scourge. They can either reduce the radius of the skill by half or make the points larger. Imagine if full counter was the size of the point, everyone would complain.

>

> They should give to Scourge the same treatment that they gave to Turret Engi and DH, just nerf to the ground...like you said, every single of the skill are Huge AoEs, it removes skillfull gameplay and is way to rewarding for a easy to play style...so they either nerf it to the point that is next to useless, or rework the profession so it fills the role of support and leave the damage for Reaper.

Yep one would think that scourge is support and reaper is suppose to be the bruiser. But nope, scourge is pretty much better in every way. The specialization is way too strong in a pvp setting, even with the recent nerfs. Its all because the amount of area coverage they have from their skills. And you know what is unbelievable? That its a problem with in wvw as well (I don't even play wvw). The difference is that wvw combat field dwarfs that of spvp and scourge's radius is still a problem there. That in itself is unbelievable.

> @"Flauvious.6195" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > Something is wrong when a skills radius is nearly the exact size as a capture point. That is NOT right. It removes the element of positioning. This is the greatest problem of scourge. They can either reduce the radius of the skill by half or make the points larger. Imagine if full counter was the size of the point, everyone would complain.

>

> Massive aoe skills are the death of skilled gameplay. They're nerfing passive invulns so they're making an effort to make gameplay more skill based,the next step is to massively scale back aoe's. Necro in general has to many place a circle on the ground abilities. Most of them should be reworked into different shapes, like lines or cones, and not be damage over time.

Oh yeah I agree for sure. Lines and cones would be WAY better. That would actually require some sort of targeting. Right now all necro does is just spam every thing that isn't on cooldown on the point. How is that skilled? But yea man, I'm feeling those ideas you through out there.

Something is wrong when a skills radius is nearly the exact size as a capture point. That is NOT right. It removes the element of positioning. This is the greatest problem of scourge. They can either reduce the radius of the skill by half or make the points larger. Imagine if full counter was the size of the point, everyone would complain.

Revenant:

Versed in Stone: Huge nerf. No one really uses the retribution line already. I'd rather just see the trait changed to something else. The 50% condition dmg portion is good though.

Eye for a eye: I don't think I ever see anyone use this trait in pvp. I already considered it a weak trait to begin with. 45 seconds taunt and now 90 second just isnt worth it compared to the other two major traits.

I think rite of the great dwarf energy cost should be changed, 40 is way too high in pvp. I think 30 might be a good balance.

What makes Mesmer too strong is: lots of dodge, stealth, block, clones, evade and invul. Its too much defense. All while doing massive damage. Its too much. You should not be able to have amazing sustaining power while having high damage and the ability to escape at will to reset fights.

> @"Cal Cohen.3527" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Cal Cohen.3527" said:

> > > The list in the main thread isn't final; one of the reasons we wanted to get it out way early is for you guys to give feedback. We agree that mirage could use more nerfs and it's something we will be looking at in the next few days. If you have any specific ideas (preferably splits) feel free to post them along with any reasoning and we'll take them into consideration.

> > >

> > > Thanks!

> >

> > Hey Cmc, I'm kinda confused what you guys mean by splits? Meaning any suggestions we make need to be split between PvP and WvW?

>

> When splitting a skill we're looking at changing numbers on skills rather than functionality.

> * Damage/healing numbers

> * Cooldowns

> * Durations of boons/conditions/effects

>

> Essentially the skill should behave the same in every game mode, but can be more or less effective at what it does on a per-gamemode basis.

I read through the list, its pretty amazing man. Looking forward to this patch.

I have no problems with weakness ever since they change the conversation table. I'd say its fair.

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > > @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> >

> > > **PvP Armor set 2.5**

> > > We are working on an enhanced version of the Glorious armor. No dates on this yet, as it’s still a ways out. We’re aiming for 2 tiers. Tier 1 for Leagues and tier 2 for Tournament prizes.

> >

> > What happens to those who have legendary armors already? They don't get the new skin?

>

> The set isn't going to be legendary, though we may make it upgradable to legendary. Current plan is to have tier 1 be on the league armor vendor and tier 2 be rewards for monthly tournaments.

Ok cool. Quesiton, are you guys planning on giving legendary pvp armor a better skin? Not to sounds ungrateful but with the amount of money it costs to make it, I'd expect it to look different. It doesn't have to be fancy like the pve variant. Just something cool for us pvpers.

> @"Mthe mystery.4615" said:

> > @"Razor.6392" said:

> > Warrior and ranger have always been the inclusive classes. Can't help it.

>

>

> Umm What? I think you forget when Berserker Warrior was useless in the beginning months of HoT and end months of HoT. I also think you're forgetting about mesmeric and guardians lol. Funny post though

Zerker warrior wasn't useless, the bandwagon followers just didn't know how to play it.

> @"Gandrogh.1530" said:

> Try poison+damage

Doesn't matter, they usually have perma resistance.

Conquest was designed for esports, but gw2 esports died. Time to move on. Shit they don't even have to be original. Just take game play modes from guild wars 1 and adapt them to gw2.