Ghos.1326

> @"c u again.3267" said:

> absolutely nothing will change, good job not touching decap scrapper/core guardian lol. another patch that makes the game more braindead

decap scrapper was touched. throw mines now on 30s cd, bulwark gyro 30s cd, system shocker halved in effectiveness per cc.

> @"bethekey.8314" said:

> > @"CutesySylveon.8290" said:

> > Obviously dodge. You were hit with a CC skill used to setup big burst hits. You died not because you didn't dodge but because you didn't have a stun break. If you had Elixir S, probably the best stun break in the game, you wouldn't even have to dodge since the entire burst rotation would just be negated. Your build was bad, nothing about the zerks build is a problem.

>

> Glad we worked through that problem together :) Engineer only having 1 "viable" stunbreak sounds pretty bad to me. We should buff engineer!

>

> Also, please define viable for me still.

>

> > Lol you're claiming to do fine with nonviable builds but complain that you got dumpstered by one of the most obvious and easily negated burst combos in the game? You're really discrediting yourself.

>

> Everyone dies sometimes. No need to be mean about it! I don't quite understand how my individual skill plays into this, but I have other videos on my channel if you're interested and regularly sit in the top 1-25 (mmr wise) when I do play ranked.

They can't and won't define viable to you because they don't know what that is themselves. They'll only point out how "bad" you were in the fight, or "are" in general. It's like arguing with kids.

No logic, only feelings. As for me, I understand your point entirely, and I agree with you. Both should be nerfed accordingly.

> @"Broady.2358" said:

> Imagine thinking that this video which is full of memes should be taken seriously or is a true reflection of how to play Thief...

> Seems I should have included a disclaimer saying this a is parody of the attitude of players who think Thief is bad. If you think Thief needs higher damage in order to succeed, you're playing it wrong.

> Those judging my knowledge of the game and PMing me in game asking my rank in order to inflate your ego on the forums just shows your maturity levels.

>

> For those enjoyed the video and understood the irony, I'm happy and intend to do some more overly edited shenanigans covering "broken builds"... *Looks at Grenade Holosmith"

Us intellectuals appreciate your humor, keep up the good work brother.

> @"Clyan.1593" said:

> This class in PvP is absurd. Can't fathom how broken it is compared to other builds. And it's been like this for a very long time.

> Just spams so much buffs on itself, has unbelievable dmg output, even gets shields and blocks and everything. Sustain equals out dmg with no efford. The range on holo sword is beyond reasonable too. And nades, what even are these dmg numbers.

> It's so obviously broken, tanky and strong at the same time, why is this not fixed since yesterday?

> Some people don't even bother with playing something diverse, just spam flamethrower 1 and running around. Then go into tiny form and troll on point.

> Seriously what is this rubbish balance?

No effort? This is a lie.

When you play FT, you need to sacrifice a lot of sustain options in order to gain the damage. LIke Inventions + Alchemy combo (good defensive traitline combo), Bulwark for Elix U (quickness makes the damage more frightening, autos themselves are slow), and condition clear options from other traits because you want HGH in Alch. In Scrapper, you don't run any of the sustain traits like system shocker, adaptive armor, kinetic stabilizers, damage dampener and exper exam. You run all offensive traits (firearms literally has no defense oriented traits, juggernaut's stab doesn't do anything to mitigate damage dealt). It's one of the very few examples of healthy give vs take. you give up defense to gain offense. that is fine.

For core engi, you don't have access to bulwark gyro or anything that grants barrier outside of emergency elixir in alchemy. and that untraited is a 100s cd. it's 80s if you trait it with HGH. but with core, you can run with alchemy + inventions for a great defensive set up and run firearms or explosives to gain a little bit of damage to go with alch + invent combo. If you want a lot of damage, you gotta sacrifice either alch or inventions and defensive traits to gain it. This is healthy give vs take. this is fine.

Holo is another beast entirely, and it is mainly due to ECSU giving 2 might per second and laser's edge which, when coupled with ECSU, grants 22.5% more damage while in forge under high heat circumstances. tone down both of those and it'll be in a good spot. and maybe grenade autos as well.

> @"Broady.2358" said:

> Thief is trash, please buff.... ;)

>

>

I approve of this message.

> @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > Balance - To be in a state of healthy give vs take, where the rewards are properly granted for the amount of risk presented for any specific thing or task, of course per the task and its difficulty as well as other factors that take a part in determining this data.

> > tldr: a healthy give and a healthy take.

>

> Define healthy...

>

> If a rabbit and a wolf coexist, the wolf has to kill and eat the rabbit. Not so "healthy" for the rabbit huh?

>

> I'm telling you that people have no idea what balance is in any meaningful sense. "Healthy" is a subjective and arbitrary descriptor that lacks any sort of real world application.

>

> Me eating "Healthy" in a first world country means some poor kid somewhere in a 3rd world country is working 22 hours for 5 cents a day to make the product that i consume so i can be "healthy."

>

> So i'll ask you again...what is true balance huh? Cause it's certainly not about healthiness.

Actually it is about health (not literal HP). You bring up the wolf and the rabbit but fail to mention that the rabbit eats plants to survive. And when both die, the plants will consume the dead bodies, starting the cycle all over again. Give vs take. Healthy.

> @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:

> > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > Buffing only is what trashy mobile F2P game do because they are scared of losing their players and is a HORRIBLE way of balancing a game. You end up in a power crept game(you know, the thing we just escaped) due to constant buffs.

>

> Here's the thing that most people need to understand.

>

> Both Buffs and Nerfs are equally horrible ways of achieving balance.

>

> Almost nobody here can even tell me what balance actually means or how it is actually achieved in any fundamental or meaningful sense. Nobody is asking bigger questions...everything is "nerf this buff that, it will fix everything..."

>

> and yet every time buffs or nerfs happen problems crop up and balance gets worse...The reason this happens is because there is a fundamental problem here, and nobody is asking the bigger questions, or doing proper analysis on the subject area. and it indeed is a subject area...not some simple change a few numbers here and there...it is a highly complex and completely nuanced thing that nobody is even talking about in the correct perspective.

>

> @"Kuma.1503" and i'm sure a few others now are asking the right questions and looking at the problem through a more sophisticated lens.

Balance - To be in a state of healthy give vs take, where the rewards are properly granted for the amount of risk presented for any specific thing or task, of course per the task and its difficulty as well as other factors that take a part in determining this data.

tldr: a healthy give and a healthy take.

That's what true balance is. <3

There I answered it.

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said:

> @"Shiyo.3578" add in stupid number of CC to it too.

> 2 chills on staff

> 1 chill on focus.

> 2 chills on shroud

> 1 chill on lich

> 6 sources off chill, some of them last 5s some of them are pulsing.

> Add in stun and 3 fears and you have CC machine.

> BTW spinal shivers should not get chill applied on target before dmg, that way its dmg would be slightly lower.

> If you wanna get chill damage bonus then first apply chill, its stupid that this skill applies chill before the damage -.-

I didn't know spinal shivers applied the chill before the damage. I agree, that's kinda stupid.

> @"Supreme.3164" said:

> > @"Brimstone Jack.3462" said:

> > > @"KrHome.1920" said:

> > > There are tons of builds with defense mechanics that reduce the reaper shroud auto attacks (where most of the damage comes from) to pathetic triple-digit numbers. You need 3 or 4 whole auto attack rotations to kill them, if (!) they don't dodge, evade, block, disengage...

> > >

> > > How long do you think facetanking reaper shroud should not be punished until you consider the spec balanced?

> >

> > Nailed it. 99% of complaints about Necros in general boil down to "I can't facetank this DUELING CLASS and refuse to change my playstyle to deal with it, despite them having garbage mobility and almost no stunbreaks on many builds" or "condi classes are too stronk." Then they get livid when the actual answer to their problem is to get better at the game.

>

> And yet I seen necro players complaining about other professions/specs....why is this community all about :"my class is balanced yours is OP"?

Because most of the community is simply biased in favor of their own profession, and/or they hear top players giving their opinion and take it as absolute law.

tldr it's full of sheeple.

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said:

> Nerfs can be beneficial when done in creative ways that simultaneously buff and nerf specs.

>

> They're called Tradeoffs, and it's an idea that Arenanet played around with for a while and then just stopped which lead to some elite specs having drawbacks that others just don't.

> And that's sad because Tradeoffs are **the** solution to power creep because they target the main problem: Elite Specs, and without just nerfing or removing them and calling it a day.

> Think Berserker getting increased damage at the expense of sustain, or Mirage getting 1 dodge but having that 1 dodge be a mirage dodge.

>

> Nearly the entirety of the Feb 25th patch and this 'balance' agenda to remove or nerf literally everything and anything has; for the most part, been kinda pointless.

> The changes do not make the game more exciting to play or watch, and the ability for players to express themselves uniquely through their class and its gameplay has gone down because build diversity has drastically shrunken.

> Also, the people who pretend like the patch just magically solved power creep don't understand what power creep even is.

>

> The patch also created a unique form of patch-culture where people feel like they can ask for something to be nerfed or removed, and it probably will be. When it isn't, they throw a tantrum. "X is too strong! You nerfed everything else, now nerf X!"

> They aren't going to stop, but you're just feeding them by giving individual people what they want.

>

> Anyway, great post. I've posted this video before, but this is a really good short analysis that covers the topic much more intelligently than I ever could:

>

While it's true that tradeoffs are very integral in balance, it's also untrue that only nerfing something is pointless. The one time it would be pointless is if it truly did not need to be nerfed. Otherwise, a nerf without a buff is perfectly feasible.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > While there is some truth to what the OP says, the funny thing about it is that applying a nerf to something overperforming can balance it out. So in a way yes, calling for nerfs constantly, if that's what it takes to achieve balance, can result in balance.

>

> Yeah maybe lmao in a world where players dont just constantly call for nerfs on classes they just dislike fighting or classes that they have trouble fighting, unfortunately this is the case the majority of the time.

This is also true. The anet employees gotta watch carefully on what's good, constructive feedback vs clear bias, which sometimes can be hard to spot out. It's unfortunate too that it's actually quite common here. FeelsBadMan.

While there is some truth to what the OP says, the funny thing about it is that applying a nerf to something overperforming can balance it out. So in a way yes, calling for nerfs constantly, if that's what it takes to achieve balance, can result in balance.

> @"UNOwen.7132" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > @"UNOwen.7132" said:

> Theyre not, nor are they even close. Take D/P thief for example. Top tier class, you need one in every team. Its *so* much worse than pre-HoT D/P thief. The backstab does at best half the damage, your autos do probably less than half, and your pressure is just unfathomably worse. Nothing is on the level of Cele Ele or Cele Engineer right now. Even Grenade Holo is a mere shoddy fascimile of cele engineer, featuring less damage, far less survivability, less utility and only mobility as an actual advantage.

No profession should be able to pump out the kind of damage that most builds could pump out pre-feb patch. It was unhealthy and unintuitive.

> No I dont notice it because its not true.

It is true, some defenses on some things were untouched, and were only recently nerfed (example rev)

> Not really. Hell, most "bunker" builds arent bunkering up. Theyre glass cannon builds. Turns out even glass cannons can survive endlessly against how low damage is now.

This is because they've removed the amulets for bunker builds to happen. The issue with bunkers before, and in general, is when that bunker also has high damage and high mobility. No bunker should have both of those on top of their crazy high sustain.

Also, this is false. The only things that can survive using zerk-like stats are those with many blocks/evades/invulns/high defensive boon uptime/cleanses/etc. Even then, when they pop all of that, they still die really quick.

> > That shouldn't happen. For PvP to be healthy, the opponents needs to have a chance to properly fight back.

Agreed 100%, when things die in literally 2 attacks, it's just boring. There is no skill in that, it's basically "did you dodge, and if you didn't, did you dodge all of the other possible attacks that can burst you down really quickly, only to save for that other thing that bursts you down quickly". What kind of skill is that?

> And they had that chance pre-patch. However for PvP to be healthy, you also need to be able to kill opponents *without* outnumbering them. That is no longer the case. Damage is too low. We need to increase it.

They didn't have that chance pre-feb patch. The only thing that actually did was warrior, and that was mainly because of signet heal being 300+ hp healing passively per second, which is stupid, might makes right giving you 100+ healing per might stack, while being able to easily stack might with all of the traits it ran on a mostly offensive trait line, which is also stupid. If you want that kind of defense, you should run a defensive trait line. Literally before the patch, a Warrior didn't need a defensive trait line to be just as defensive as they were if they ran the Defense trait line, the line that actually focuses on defense. So what you had was Warriors being able to run full offense, while also gaining defensive properties from 2 sources, one being a passive heal slot and the other being an offense focused trait line, which resulted in them being able to hit 5k bull's charge, 10k+ arcing slice, 7k+ whirlwinds (while also having evade frames) etc etc.

Even support focused firebrands could pump out major direct and burning damage with little to no cost in sustain, they could run jack of all trades build and do better than builds that chose to focus on one kind of role.

I agree with one thing you say here. People should be able to kill opponents without outnumbering them. But raising damage doesn't help that. It only brings back powercreep. There are still a few things that actually need their damage lowered, as they were missed with the nerf of the feb 2020 patch. Once that happens, many things will inadvertently be buffed without actually bumping up numbers or reworking things on their skills, so you'll start to see things come back as the overperforming things currently are brought down to acceptable levels. This doesn't apply to just damage too: defensive things can still be looked at for a few things as well, so that they don't overperform after damage on the other things is brought down.

All in all, damage is not too low. thieves still being able to hit 5k+ on a single stealth attack with no real drawback is still pretty hard hitting, especially to those with lower health pools. I think the issue is you may be used to everything hitting way too hard (example my hammer 2 on scrapper hit someone for 10k, 10k!! 6s cd pre-patch btw). The reality is it wasn't healthy and it needed to go.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > @"Lucentfir.7430" said:

> > > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > > This is where the second part of what I said comes into play. The failure to do what they promised, which was smaller frequent balance passes, is why the game doesn't feel like it's moved forward since February. Unfortunately, that has a bigger impact than what people may have expected.

> > >

> > > Mirage getting some endurance taken away is fine, honestly. What was the mistake, however, is that they got nothing in return: no return of vigor to offset the fact they only have one dodge, no mobility adjustments, etc.

> >

> > Why is that a surprise to you? Anyone who's been here for a decent length knew that was going to be the case, the suggestion for faster balancing has been requested for years, even before HoT. They can't do it, and if you thought 1 dev heading the project would be enough, unfortunately that's naive thinking.

> >

> > You say that like they've ever given any sort of compensation after nerfing something. Removing a dodge from mirage was lazy balancing. All they needed to do was make it so if they get stunned or hard CC'd they can't evade. Believe it or not despite having the modes split, the balance for PvP is still very much dictated by PVE. It's a reason why you won't get class reworks, and very rarely weapon reworks.

>

> I get a laugh at the devs excuses, "ah we can only change numbers as any mechanical changes or reworks have to be done by the skill design team" WELL THEN GET THE DESIGN TEAM TO DO THE NEEDED CHANGES, not that hard of a problem to solve. The design team is like some magic group within anet that can not be bothered with such trivial things as fixing broken,op or underpowered traits,skills or weapon kits as they have to focus on lw stories etc lmao, get more design devs on the team or make they ones u have set time aside to do the changes needed(looking at u team managers)

While I agree that the devs aren't too savvy on what goes on with their game in general, some changes don't need to be full on reworks. In my opinion, not every change needs a rework. Some changes that will work are simply numbers changes, whether that pertains to coefficients, raw damage numbers, conditions output/cleared, boons output/corrupted, etc etc.

> @"Lucentfir.7430" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > This is where the second part of what I said comes into play. The failure to do what they promised, which was smaller frequent balance passes, is why the game doesn't feel like it's moved forward since February. Unfortunately, that has a bigger impact than what people may have expected.

> >

> > Mirage getting some endurance taken away is fine, honestly. What was the mistake, however, is that they got nothing in return: no return of vigor to offset the fact they only have one dodge, no mobility adjustments, etc.

>

> Why is that a surprise to you? Anyone who's been here for a decent length knew that was going to be the case, the suggestion for faster balancing has been requested for years, even before HoT. They can't do it, and if you thought 1 dev heading the project would be enough, unfortunately that's naive thinking.

>

> You say that like they've ever given any sort of compensation after nerfing something. Removing a dodge from mirage was lazy balancing. All they needed to do was make it so if they get stunned or hard CC'd they can't evade. Believe it or not despite having the modes split, the balance for PvP is still very much dictated by PVE. It's a reason why you won't get class reworks, and very rarely weapon reworks.

It's not really a surprise to me. Just a statement.

In terms of compensation for nerfing something, that's not always needed. That's on a case by case position. Something does not always need to be given when something is nerfed. In this particular case, the Mesmer losing a dodge does deserve more uptime for vigor to offset only having one dodge. Removing endurance is not necessarily lazy balancing, it goes on the "give and take" model. You gain X, but sacrifice Y. Which is a healthy way to balance. They just didn't think too far ahead, is all, and this saying could go with the other things that were missed when balance was passed as well.

> @"Raiden The Beast.3016" said:

> Stealth is fine as it is ...I even think all these anti stealth thief mechs. r just laughable on top of noodle dmg. If u disagree show me ur stealth high lvl op gameplay video proof ... NO? Ok than kitten...

Noodle damage?

-thief farts out 5-6k damage using backstab, sometimes higher, then proceeds to fart out 3-4k heartseekers because lower health-

yep, noodle damage.

Oh, not to mention that if you miss your stealth attack, just try again 4Head because no pentalty for missing your burst.

Oh, not to mention thieves have multiple sources of stealth TO try again from if you ever miss your bursts.

Oh, not to mention that thieves have means to gap close if you disengage but want to re-engage because your enemy let an opening show.

Oh, not to mention that thieves are singlehandedly THE most desired assassin in the game, even currently beating power rev, whom btw still has pretty high damage, most notably on sword 3 and 5.

Last I checked, 5k wasn't noodle damage, it's actually pretty heavy of a hit in one go.

> @"Kachros.4751" said:

>

> >

> > Nooo, the meta before February was literally a one shot "who can hit who first" meta. that was not fun at all.

> > Defense didn't matter during that meta (and the only one who had any kind of defense was warrior). It was a disaster.

> > I think a very small amount of CC should return to the CC skills, but nothing major. At most, most CC skills should only do around 800 damage crit. Some more, and some less, depending on cooldown, cast time, extra effects, etc.

>

> Honestly that was highly dependent on your comp and your support but at higher levels it was rarely a matter of who hits first, but meta had around 6 classes that were viable and could switch them around. Depending on your support the fights could last a few minutes and it involved actual skill, timing and coordination. Right now its jus holo coming in, doing 10k burst then nade spam and people die. The only sidenoders capable right now are guardian, scrapper and to some extent ranger. Damage on CC was only good for warrior at the time and they nerfed the regeneration of it which was enough to make it balanced with other sidenoders but anet took it too far. Same with mirage too instead of nerfing THEIR OWN implemented traits they removed a core mechanic of pvp from it (dodge). The choices of anet and the balance has yet to be "good" for years and its horrible to know that theres only 1 class that stands a chance vs holo rn, scrapper is a separate issue. But knowing that the only way to beat decap scrapper or other classes like it is to avoid it. So avoiding pvp IN pvp. the idea of that is absurd. Anet doesnt understand their own gamemode and listen to the same people who also have no clue and "try" to improve based off their bias halfbaked knowledge.

No matter the comp, before February everything had absurd amounts of damage. Even Firebrands that focused mostly on support could still fight solo and teamfight.

This recent February patch opened up new possibilities for players to explore new builds. It involved the tweaking of 800+ skills in a single patch. It was a very large patch, with a limited time frame. Things were bound to be missed.

This is where the second part of what I said comes into play. The failure to do what they promised, which was smaller frequent balance passes, is why the game doesn't feel like it's moved forward since February. Unfortunately, that has a bigger impact than what people may have expected.

While I agree that things like holo, thief, and ranger are pretty strong right now (holo and thief being pretty broken), Warrior is still in a strong spot. Once the overperforming things in the game are nerfed properly, I think those things like Warrior will be inadvertently buffed. I think Scrapper can also see a small adjustment in System Shocker and the amount of barrier it gets per CC.

Mirage getting some endurance taken away is fine, honestly. What was the mistake, however, is that they got nothing in return: no return of vigor to offset the fact they only have one dodge, no mobility adjustments, etc.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> The meta was 100% better pre feb patch, only players who's mains came out of it broken think otherwise. Same few specs spammed every match, u get 2 same players 3 matches in a row who arnt even duo qing cuz since the feb patch pvp population has plummeted worse and faster then it ever has. Games a mess right now, cant believe anyone woulda thought a no thought blanket damage nerf across all classes would work lol it was big patch only cuz how many skills and classes it touched not because it required a lot of work lol, other than the fact it was a zero thought patch that required little considerations. Given anets frequency of updates players warned it would tank pvp and it did.

The bit about "only players who's mains came out of it broken think otherwise" is a highly ignorant statement, and quite frankly, it invalidates the rest of the post.

Either way, the rest of the post is actually pretty false as well.

> @"Kachros.4751" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > > @"Kachros.4751" said:

> > > Jus a quick PSA, pvp is an absolute kitten rn and somehow has yet to be fixed for years whether its matchmaking or class viability, pvp has been even more of a disaster after the absolute fiesta update of February which in all honesty was not needed or wanted by most players. I already know this wont amount to anything but its rather a rant if anything. Fix the kitten gamemode :)

> >

> > The February patch was one of the best patches in a long time, but there are a lot of things that were left untouched (which is understandable, can't get everything in one go with little time frame). However, what I'm most concerned about, is they've gone back to less frequent balance passes (even small ones) and little to no communication. So broken things are being left broken for extended periods of time.

>

> They changed most of the meta by removing damage from CCs, killing a few classes in terms of viability almost completely and they made almost all of these changes with the casual part of pvp community which is 90% of the community already which has not helped pvp in the slightest. Its been 7 months since then and they have yet to make any decent changes, the meta before Feb was 100 times better than what it has been lately.

Nooo, the meta before February was literally a one shot "who can hit who first" meta. that was not fun at all.

Defense didn't matter during that meta (and the only one who had any kind of defense was warrior). It was a disaster.

I think a very small amount of CC should return to the CC skills, but nothing major. At most, most CC skills should only do around 800 damage crit. Some more, and some less, depending on cooldown, cast time, extra effects, etc.

> @"Kachros.4751" said:

> Jus a quick PSA, pvp is an absolute kitten rn and somehow has yet to be fixed for years whether its matchmaking or class viability, pvp has been even more of a disaster after the absolute fiesta update of February which in all honesty was not needed or wanted by most players. I already know this wont amount to anything but its rather a rant if anything. Fix the kitten gamemode :)

The February patch was one of the best patches in a long time, but there are a lot of things that were left untouched (which is understandable, can't get everything in one go with little time frame). However, what I'm most concerned about, is they've gone back to less frequent balance passes (even small ones) and little to no communication. So broken things are being left broken for extended periods of time.

> @"Shao.7236" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > @"Leonidrex.5649" I agree with the bug fixes and QoL updates. Those are always good, in my book.

> > I still don't agree with warrior needing buffs. Once we nerf the 3-4 main things overperforming, warrior will be in a good spot. It's getting shoved out currently because of those things, though.

>

> Most warriors are used to the fact CC damage did about half the damage then they could use GS to rip through anything with the 50% damage bonus, doesn't work like that anymore.

>

> There's also other ways to deal great amount of damage, but those options are often overlooked/disregarded because if you have no GS or shield, its not viable according to whatever the reason its always used.

>

> People are really attached to the old cheesy Tetherbreaker with lots of evades to spare, in turn you had also Might from it which ridiculously buffed damage.

To add on to that, pre-feb patch might makes right also healed for stupid amounts of health per might gained, basically being a defense line Adrenal health. Paired with all the crazy might gain and damage they did as well.

@"Leonidrex.5649" I agree with the bug fixes and QoL updates. Those are always good, in my book.

I still don't agree with warrior needing buffs. Once we nerf the 3-4 main things overperforming, warrior will be in a good spot. It's getting shoved out currently because of those things, though.

> @"uberkingkong.8041" said:

> > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > > @"uberkingkong.8041" said:

> > > > > @"bringlotsofweed.2086" said:

> > > > > I think the warrior is in a decent spot. I just think there is WAY to much aoe going on for them to be effective.

> > > >

> > > > Do you play Warrior?

> > > > Can't say they in decent spot if all you do is play other professions and KNOW for a fact you going to rekt any Warrior that gets in your way.

> > >

> > > Just because the other professions are way too over-tuned, doesn't make Warrior any less decent.

> > > Warrior doesn't need buffs, the others need to get shaved.

> >

> > No sense talking to someone like him. Either he's hard trolling or he's that delirious.

>

> Yeah, he says others. Which he could have said everyone but warrior.

> What makes you think everyone but warrior is overtuned?

>

> Look at it glass half full or nearly full instead of glass half empty or nearly empty.

> All you do is BUFF warriors and NOW BALANCED.

> SIMPLE

> Why adjust 90% when all that is needed is 10% to be adjusted???

>

> "yeah the other classes (AKA ALL BUT WARRIOR) not balanced, warrior tho, its decent"

> yeah ok.

> Warrior doesn't FIT ALL the others, it aint balance.

> It doesnt fit them because the others are overtuned you say?

> BUFF THE WARRIOR THEN.

> "nah we want to nerf all the other professions" "we like negative thinking"

> Why nerf EVERY SINGLE ONE BUT WARRIOR, so much work, so much to change for balance. When all you had to do was....

> Make WARRIOR GREAT AGAIN by buffing the heck outta them.

>

> This is what Warrior should be like

>

> You want to fight on node with Warrior? You want to fight warrior head on? Ok your death.

> You want to shoot warrior and kill him from range? Oh wow, warrior death. Thats balance.

> You fight from distance YOU BEAT warrior. You fight from melee YOU LOSE to warrior. THATS BALANCE.

> ANY Version of Necro today I'd own ANY VERSION warrior regardless if he wants to fight from distance or in my face. THIS IS NOT BALANCE.

> Make WARRIORS GREAT AGAIN

>

> Yall so negative, NERF NERF NERF.

> No bro.

> BUFF

>

> Negative negative negative. Think positive. Quit complaining about negatives, so many negatives. **Just buff one and all complaining goes away.**

> NERF aint always the answer.

> Sometimes...

> BUFF

>

> ..

> ..

> Meanwhile in PvE, Dev "hey we made fractals a bit tougher since everyone does more dps"

> NERFS incoming to all but warrior because people think NERFS will bring balance.

> "fractals so hard now, please tune down"

> "say what? people said all but warrior was overtuned, hrmmmmm.... now I must do even more work, tuning 90% for balance took a lot outta me, now I gotta tune all these fractals too"

> "I should have listened to the dude saying BUFF not NERF"

>

> In PvP

> "wow now I see why that guy asked if Mist Champs are too tanky, didn't realize warriors don't do squat to them, and now the ALL BUT WARRIORS are on par with warrior, now we all see why these mist champs are too tanky"

> "should have just BUFFED the warrior, now you gotta make MIST CHAMPS LESS TANKY because you listened to NERFS not BUFF"

>

> You have 90% and you want to say its overtuned?

> No bro,

> 10% is UNDERTUNED.

>

> The secret to balance is listening to the right people. Go ahead and nerf 'others' like the wrong people suggest.

> **_Game is already built around 'others' "overtuned"_**

> You want to NERF 'others' because they "overtuned"? What about the game "overtuned", oooh now you gotta nerf all that as well.

> **_You want to balance by fixing 90% rather than fixing 10%. Ohhhhh ok I see how you balance things._**

> Oh wow now the PvE things are overtuned you nerfed 'overtuned'

> All you had to BUFF warrior to bring balance into the 'others' "overtuned 'PvE aspect overtuned'

>

> Look at Fractals, they the same as when they was when it was just core? Nope, its 'overtuned' now.

> Just buff the warrior, make the correct decision.

>

> Good greif these 'others' are so "overtuned"

> NERF em, it will look good in patch notes.

>

> Patch notes makes games #esports, the longer they are, the more #esports they become.

> It has nothing to do with... game just being good and no patch notes even needed.

>

> "gotta show the boss I'm working hard, I'm going to nerf because I get more patch notes outta nerfing than just buffing the warrior and putting an END to balance"

> "I gotta make anet feel like they will always need me, I can't be like Diablo2, they dont even do balance patches anymore, 3 years into the game they didnt do a single balance patch"

> "I gotta feel always needed, make sure game is never balance, can't listen to this smart guy saying buff warrior, he's just too true"

> "these necros going around like gods, all because the class thats suppose to keep em in check *warriors* are decent"

> "I hate people showing that 5 warriors ownage video because it just goes to SHOW a BALANCED WARRIOR TO NECRO. WARRIOR IS SUPPOSE TO TURN THAT NECRO INTO SARDINES.

>

> ...

> ..

> Oh you arent suppose to stand in front of a necro, they eat you alive.

> Well if Warriors were BUFFED, OTHER WAY AROUND, that necro knows better than to go face to face with a WARRIOR.

> THATS THE PROFESSION THAT OWNS THEM. AND THEY ARE BALANCED NOW.

>

> Shroud is very juicy and full of health, aint nobody good at cleaving melee.

> Oh here we go warrior is balanced, they DESIGNED to cleave in peoples face.

>

> That juicy shroud, gone in seconds, because warrior ate it all. You still want to stand in front of him like you do to everyone else?

Because, as explained earlier, if you buff that 10% (warrior, as you claim it to be) then it now puts it in the category of overperforming, because currently, it still hits hard and can survive well. The issue is that the top performing builds right now (holo, thief, reaper) need to be toned down because they do extreme amounts of damage, and quite consistently. Not sure where you missed that, or if you just ignored it.

While it may be easier to just buff X, the outcome could be fatal and could put the game in a more horrible position. Just because something is underperforming doesn't mean it needs a buff. Think outside the box.

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"uberkingkong.8041" said:

> > > @"bringlotsofweed.2086" said:

> > > I think the warrior is in a decent spot. I just think there is WAY to much aoe going on for them to be effective.

> >

> > Do you play Warrior?

> > Can't say they in decent spot if all you do is play other professions and KNOW for a fact you going to rekt any Warrior that gets in your way.

>

> Just because the other professions are way too over-tuned, doesn't make Warrior any less decent.

> Warrior doesn't need buffs, the others need to get shaved.

No sense talking to someone like him. Either he's hard trolling or he's that delirious.

> @"uberkingkong.8041" said:

> > @"TeqkOneStylez.8047" said:

> > > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > > > @"uberkingkong.8041" said:

> > > > > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > > > > @"crepuscular.9047" said:

> > > > > > > @"Ghos.1326" said:

> > > > > > > Warrior doesn't need a buff. Other things just still need nerfs.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > yeap, otherwise we get into the cycle of endless power creep again

> > > > >

> > > > > Well its either buff one class or nerf everyone else. I think the former is easier to accomplish. Berserk wise,power is just Burst and Die. You have zero sustain and less armor as a zerk thief,which is absolutely laughable. I do think the damage is fine as it is. Condi tank is "Okish" in teamfights,solo not so much because you cant rlly cover those burns up with much else condi's so they can be easily cleansed by about anyone. Ive also ran into some core necs on my condi tank that can just life force forever and your burns wont do kitten but give them more life force,so all you do is try to burn through that life force bar over and over and over and over ( I think theres something off with the life force gain on core nec,its Too much ). I still need to run Sb again and see but tbh i played sb for too long and it started to bore the absolute kitten out of me. Berserk is warris most fun spec,if only it had some more "Oomph".

> > > >

> > > > You'll know they found the right balance when every profession is on Metabattle as a Meta build.

> > > > Right now, no version of Warrior is Meta.

> > > > Right now, no version of Warrior is Great.

> > >

> > > Meta battle isn't this games bible for PvP.

> >

> > You would be surprised how many think it is.

>

> What is then?

> Where is information showing Warriors are doing great?

>

> All I see is information Warriors not Great

> All I see is information Warriors not Meta

>

> Prove me wrong.

Ok I'll prove you wrong.

Warrior can still hit 8k bursts in one go. That's on a 5-6 second cooldown. They don't need to literally one shot people to be good.

Warriors are still defensively good, if you take the trait line that is focused around defense: Defense. They just can't be good at sustaining damage anymore without needing to sacrifice offense like it was pre-patch.

Currently, warriors lose matchups against things that are pretty overpowered right now. Tone them down and warrior gets inadvertantly buffed, because now those overpowered things can't obliterate the warrior in small amounts of time anymore due to insane damages, boon uptimes, stack ouputs, etc.

While warriors may not be on the metabattle site, don't count them out. If I'm not mistaken, they're still listed in the great tier. Again, nerf the overperforming things and they will rise back up.

Warrior traits are still some of the most impactful per trait choice in the game. Choosing one trait over another gives great benefits and losses depending on trait choice. Which is a balanced system. Any trait that gives way too much in every direction is bad trait design and should see a nerf.

Warriors are balanced, just so many things are not balanced right now due to it being completely missed or wrongfully buffed recently. Although I think anet is slipping back into their old ways of not pushing out enough balance passes (even smaller ones that only impact a couple professions per pass would be helpful, smaller ones that address the right things), I'd still say give it some time before we need nerfs to those overperforming things. You'll see, warrior will come back.