Israel.7056

Kaineng double link seems a bit insane they were already pretty fat

> @"Usagi.4835" said:

> Thought of another idea. Get rid of Iron Hide and Dragon Banner. Neither of those should be in WvW.

Agreed. And invuln walls.

> @"Last Crysis.1934" said:

> No thank you!!! If I have to spend my time doing WvW (which I hate) to get a GoB. The WvWers can spend their time in my beloved fractals for there leggy equipment.

>

Pretty bitter. Personally I think you should be able to get your gob outside of wvw.

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> it is a large scale combat mode which does at times involve large groups of people smashing into each other to get an advantage.

Yeah and that's all the fight oriented rvr type of players want. That's all they've ever had to focus on to keep that demographic.

I consider myself to be among that crowd and I don't care about rewards all that much. I was playing this game for 10 hrs a day back when there were no reward tracks no skirmish chests no money in it at all because the fights were fun and I enjoyed the experience.

But now pretty much all the fight guilds are gone and it's because over the years they ignored how popular GvG was and instead they leaned more and more into making this game mode this slow paced siege warfare focused thing that very few people actually want to spend time on. And now we have to talk about getting PvErs into the game mode to fill that gap left by fight guilds.

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> It is a sandbox mode for large scale warfare of course it leans heavily on siege and not player killing. To take a keep or capture anything you literally just kill an NPC. It is turning into an easy reward, we won't do anything unless there is a commander or a mode for people who just want to grief players for fun. There are also the people that log in off hours for easy caps so their servers can advance next week. When played as intended it is a pretty fun mode, you should try it.

Well thats the problem. It's not focused enough on fighting and so it loses everyone who actually plays rvr for fights to other games that are designed to be focused on fighting.

People who want to fire trebs at walls all day are in the vast minority of people who play these sorts of rvr type game modes.

The focus should not be on adding more silly fluff to entice pve rabbits it should be on attracting the sort of players who like fighting other players.

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> The problem is people come to WvW to fight other players instead of going to PvP. WvW is siege combat and attacking/defending keeps. It is supposed to be long term strategy and planning for points, not blobbing in open fields to get bags of useless loot. The rewards if anything, encourage people to idle in the maps and do bare minimal for participation when they don't even like the mode.

The problem with wvw is that it leans way too heavily on the siege and keep aspect which is only fun for a small number of people who don't know how to fight other players while the majority of people who seek out rvr game modes just want to fight other players. So unsurprisingly wvw has kept a large number of the siege enthusiasts and lost most of the fighting enthusiasts to other games which just focus on fighting.

> @"SkyshaAdbinderMoonshard.7026" said:

> I don't think retal really benefits glassy or tanky builds more in a zerg context, overall I think it just benefits zerging, or rather punishes players for doing a very non-optional part of killing other players, attacking them. Would removing retal solve all problems no, would doing so be good for the game, ye.

That's a more logical position to take.

> @"Usagi.4835" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > People are going to bring minstrel chronos and firebrands even if retal is entirely removed from the game.

> I didn't say they wouldn't but it'd be a start by tuning down retaliation damage; it's one thing to have a tanky comp, it's quite another to be passively punishing glass players who, as it stands, take more damage through retaliation than they themselves put out, and for such little effort. So I have to wonder what it is you're exactly disagreeing with besides a point I didn't make?

I'm disagreeing with the idea that retal disproportionately rewards people running tanky builds or that toning down retal would somehow discourage the use of Minstrel Chronos and Firebrands. It's my understanding that retal damage has a base damage amount and a multiplier that actually scales off power. So he could've dropped that into 40 people running full glass power builds and the only difference would have been that he would have died to retal even faster.

> @"Usagi.4835" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Usagi.4835" said:

> > > Re: zergs/blobs, nerf retaliation damage to discourage rewarding blobs/zergs who stack Minstrel bunker builds like Chrono and Firebrand.

> >

> > Lol as if people run minstrel chrono and fb just for retal

>

> Israel, don't play dumb. It's not a good look. I'm sure you know precisely what people mean when they bring up retal without it needing to be spelt out for you :)

People are going to bring minstrel chronos and firebrands even if retal is entirely removed from the game.

> @"Usagi.4835" said:

> Re: zergs/blobs, nerf retaliation damage to discourage rewarding blobs/zergs who stack Minstrel bunker builds like Chrono and Firebrand.

Lol as if people run minstrel chrono and fb just for retal

> @"SkyshaAdbinderMoonshard.7026" said:

> Stuff lacking proper counterplay is the entire point of the thread. You say ultra aggressive gameplay, I say faceroll keyboard and hope for the best.

Eh I dunno I think it's more about being the first to completely commit and being quick enough to completely overwhelm the opponent's reaction time. No hesitation no fear.

> Attrition and ultra aggressive gameplay are on 2 opposite sides of a spectrum. Ultra Aggressive means blowing all CDs all at once usually at the start of the fight, attrition means spacing them out, trying to "trade up" so to speak in every situation.

If we're going to speak in terms of spectrums I'd say ultra defensive is on the opposite side of ultra aggressive. Never push, never fully commit always try to have an escape plan, build defensive siege that sort of thing. The attrition I'm talking about is the defensive cds being outpaced by offensive cds. There's play/counterplay but it generally favors offense which is good I think. So I guess another way to say it is that the game leans more toward being proactive rather than reactive play if that makes sense. Again I think this is good.

> Well that's hardly a reason for why it isn't a problem. If anything that'd be an argument for why stunlocking is bad. If it warps a game to such a degree, then the mechanic must be inherently broken. Meaning to balance they'd either need to more equally distribute stunbreaks/stab across the board (or increase the amount overall), which would homogenize the classes, or they could fix the mechanic that causes the problem.

Warp has a sort of negative connotation. But yes the lack of stab and available stun breaks for most classes combined with the fairly ubiquitous amount of cc in the game has made guard the obvious choice for medium to large scale combat since launch. But this is how it is in every MMO I've ever played. The heavies are always designed to push in and tank damage and ccs better than any of the other classes because that's supposed to be their role. In a roleplaying game not everything is going to be equally good at everything, different classes occupy different roles. So if you want to be able to handle CC pretty well play a heavy. If you want to do an amazing amount of damage play necro but understand that CC is going to be a bigger threat to you. To me this makes perfect sense.

> Stunlocking from getting hit by "random CC" spam

> Supposed to work like that =/= Good

> Stunlocking rarely comes down to trying to more efficiently use your CC compared to your opponent's counters to it. It comes down using CC faster than you can stack stab. Granting enough stacks of stability is something a very select subset of classes can do, especially in an AoE (ie support by stab). These classes quickly become the only realistic option. This is meta warping and could either be solved by spreading out even more stab out across the classes (ie the stab vs cc proliferation I talked about), which would mean the only way to actually CC someone is to spam, which means we come full circle.

It depends on what you consider to be efficient within the context of a GW2 fight. What I'm talking about when I say efficient could perhaps better be called "more succinctly coordinated." It is an efficient and highly effective strategy to simply try to get everything in the same place at the same time and completely overwhelm the enemy before they even have a chance to react. I personally like this style of play but some people prefer something slower more methodical.

Ultimately it comes down to personal taste and I don't think you and I are likely to see eye to eye on this particular issue but in general I think you made some good critiques in your OP.

> @"SkyshaAdbinderMoonshard.7026" said:

> Can you always counter it?

No but nothing can be countered 100 percent of the time. At some point you're supposed to either kill them or run out of buttons. This is good imo. It promotes ultra aggressive gameplay which I'm a fan of but I suppose that's just a matter of personal taste.

> Most of the time, but not always (I am under no illusion that I counter it perfectly every time, but I'd conservatively say 8-9/10 times I actually die to stunlocking it's due to there simply not being enough breaks/sources of stability to deal with the sheer numbers of "random" CC skills), most of the time but not always (simply due to the sheer number of CC effects that there are).

Well yeah but I think that's how it's supposed to work. There's play/counterplay but if you can't kill them before they overwhelm your defenses you're probably dead. So it's like you can't go too far into playing defensively or else you lose to attrition. Again it's a matter of personal taste but I like it.

> One could ofc proliferate the amount of stunbreaks and stability in the game, but that would lead to strategically CC-ing your opponent being harder while "spamming" CC being the only way to get any amount of "stunnage" on your enemy. This seems less preferable than a situation where CC can be landed realtively reliable, but not in the sheer amounts that constitutes chain-CC.

I dunno there's already a ton of stunbreaks and stab they're just not evenly spread out among all the classes. Guard has always dominated the stab scene with everything else trailing behind which is why guards have always been the main staple of WvW.

> What happens when you can't?

> You are stuck in the position of waiting for it to end (either after they somehow run out of CC (unlikely) or you die).

Right but again I think it's supposed to work like that. Everyone has a certain amount of finite play/counterplay options so the outcome of a fight usually comes down to who uses their respective tools more efficiently and effectively before they gas out so to speak.

> @"SkyshaAdbinderMoonshard.7026" said:

> CC-ing someone to land key skills isn't a problem, getting hit by repeated "random" cc effects repeatedly (often thro 1 or 2 stacks of stabs) is a problem. On my condi rev (which is as close to a main as I have right now) for example, I do have access to stab, I do not get CC-locked more frequently than can reasonably be expected with the tools given (ie every now and then but not very often), whether I get CC-locked or not doesn't change how good/bad design it is. Nor does really what class has the biggest issues with it, the game mechanic is bad, even if it wasn't a strong strategy (and no class struggled against it) I'd say it was poor design, as how good/bad design something is, is not necessarily related to it's power level.

Ok why is getting hit by repeated "random" cc effects a problem if you can counter it?

To me the question here is: is there counterplay? It seems that there is counterplay. So what is the issue?

> @"SkyshaAdbinderMoonshard.7026" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > If you're getting hard ccd often that's a comp issue imo. Need more revs and guards. Now if you get ccd out in a bubble that's totally understandable and it happens to us all but that's also the point of spellbreakers.

>

> Already responded this

Alright well I think that's kinda the end of that aspect of the discussion tbh.

Now the question of whether or not it should be possible to cc someone to death I say yes as long as there's some sort of potential counterplay in the game like stun breaks and stab. But if you're maining necro you're resigning yourself to being stunned to death a lot because that's one of the main weaknesses of necros. It doesn't happen often on rev because rev has so many stun breaks but rev is also in a lot of trouble if it gets condi bombed because it doesn't have many personal cleanses.

This is what happens when you main something: all your opinions of the gameplay are tinted with the trials and tribulations of whatever class you happen to be maining. So for me as a Rev I hate mesmers and thieves and soulbeasts with a passion because they're super obnoxious to fight on rev.

I'm with you on the idea that everything does too much thing but this cc lock thing reads like your necro main bias to me.

If you're getting hard ccd often that's a comp issue imo. Need more revs and guards. Now if you get ccd out in a bubble that's totally understandable and it happens to us all but that's also the point of spellbreakers.

> @"BlueMelody.6398" said:

> > @"steki.1478" said:

> > I'd just disagree on stun locking. If you have more than 1 stack of stability you literally cant be stun locked at all. Considering that you don't have stability or that stability got stripped down, it can only mean one thing : you're not positioned properly, and that's not something that game needs to fix, it's on your (group's) end. If you get pulled out of zerg, you deserve to die if you dont react fast. If you get caught in winds of disenchantment, you deserve to get bombed/boon stripped/stun locked if you/your firebrand/chrono don't react fast. No amount of CC can lock you down if you're staying near commander on top of other 30+ people, stacked with 10+ FB's/chronos for boons and stab.

> >

> > It's basic combat knowledge, you kill before you get killed and you use everything you can to get advantage. If you get caught, you blame your reflexes or your supports, not the game.

>

> I'll disagree with this. I get stunlocked and killed plenty, though I only run with about 20 at most generally, and the stabs are not that available. You get yanked out from the group and cc-bombed, there is literally nothing you can do to save yourself. Hit all the stunbreaks you want, there's lots of cc waiting to hit you instantly.

So I'm guessing necro or guard.

> @"steki.1478" said:

> Even in small scale, there's not many classes that could stun lock or they have quite telegraphed animations. Most stun breaks also provide either stability, evade or stealth, which can prevent stun locking and there's even passive procs for those on every class.

>

> When fighting outnumbered you either win with skills or lose to numbers, there's not much philosophy. Playing builds with no stun breaks or not having a designated support in that situation doesnt make CC skills any stronger, it just means that your composition/build lacks basic pvp tools, which are mobility, damage mitigation, stun breaks and cleanses.

I agree I think it's pretty easy to build a comp that's tough to completely grey bar without a lot of spellbreakers.

The cc thing is also less of an issue on rev because it has a lot of stun breaks. I can see why it would be more of an issue for other classes.

> @"coro.3176" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > I don't think the game is really in that bad of a place balance wise I just think it's gotten boring because nothing much has changed in six years and there's not really much to work towards in game for anyone who has been playing a long time.

> >

> > I do agree that generally speaking there aren't enough tradeoffs built into class design and I agree that downed state is a problem. I don't have any issue with resistance and I play condi exclusively but I can see why you might have more of an issue with it on scourge than i do on rev. I don't have any issue with the amount of condi cleanses or with the amount of cc in the game currently.

>

> .. Try playing condi engi, condi revenant, condi ranger, or hell, condi anything that isn't scourge in any medium-large fight. You can't make any damage stick because the second you land your skills, it's instantly gone thanks to a single support player in the other blob. At least when you're playing power, you can throw those 10k ranged bombs into the blob and expect them to hit. On top of that, you generally have to get closer to land condi damage than power. More risk, less reward. The only exception here is scourge because they throw huge aoes at range and they stick around to pulse.

I do play condi rev.

I don't think the game is really in that bad of a place balance wise I just think it's gotten boring because nothing much has changed in six years and there's not really much to work towards in game for anyone who has been playing a long time.

I do agree that generally speaking there aren't enough tradeoffs built into class design and I agree that downed state is a problem. I don't have any issue with resistance and I play condi exclusively but I can see why you might have more of an issue with it on scourge than i do on rev. I don't have any issue with the amount of condi cleanses or with the amount of cc in the game currently.

Completely gutted the build I was running. Pretty disappointed altogether.

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. Any tool that's available in the game can be used by any sized group in the game.

>

> Yes and no, if people know what was possible interms of sustain against ac's, they would not be QQ about 1k-2kl damage form superior ac's, Ac's are mostly useless against groups with sustain and that do the correct teamwork and calls (not much work is actually needed ).

>

> Wich means its a tool that its useless against a large sized group.

>

> And due the current updates im seeing ._. GAWD sooo much sustain addded to the game(didnt read all the updates)

> Maybe this skills update can make players start to work more in group even w/o them noticing...

>

> A deadeye is far far more deadly than 5 superior ac's ahhahahaha.

Yeah it sounds like you're doing it wrong.

What you do is you build a bunch of ACs (anything more than 4 is completely unsurvivable but even 2 or 3 can get the job done easily once you get overlapping fire going) and then you push the enemy group while they're in AC fire. You don't just sit there and fire ACs at them, you push them while they're being hit with ACs. So not only are they getting hit with your group's bomb they're getting hit with AC damage. I don't care how many guardians they have, how many of them are in minstrel whatever. They're dead. Probably instantly dead. No matter who they are. Fight is over. Anyone can do this.

ACs don't just favor smaller groups against bigger groups they favor any sized group against any sized group. They are universally available and they work against everyone.

I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. Any tool that's available in the game can be used by any sized group in the game.

> @"Clownmug.8357" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Clownmug.8357" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said:

> > > > > > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> > > > > > > After running with it for a while, really think the AC changes should be rolled back personally. I feel the swing in AC damage favors the attackers too much.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Or you are just too accustomed to defenders having more of an advantage. The change so far IMHO has been great. Seems like there has been more activity. Objectives SHOULD be flipping in active matches. When objectives don't flip as much, that's a stagnant match.

> > > > >

> > > > > I am seeing less defense and more back to Ktrain days. K-Train means zerg win and we lose peeps to other games, that's a bad business investment as we see pop declining quickly already. We need to find a balance between how many defending should hold off how many attacking. Bali's have no angels and don't fit the same role.

> > > >

> > > > Well as I said too many bad players were too used to the ac crutch. Not surprising that they might leave if they actually have to learn to fight people instead of just turtle objectives with siege. Good riddance to bad rubbish as they say.

> > >

> > > Bad players are better than no players. I hope you enjoy your new PvE game mode.

> >

> > Absurd hyperbole. There are still plenty of people to fight turns out not everyone is a terrible siege turtle after all. Hope all the raging siege turtles have fun farming istan it's where they belong.

>

> In my experience the people remaining are just attacking empty buildings and map hopping when they face equal or greater opposition.

Indeed but this has always been a problem regardless of the strength of arrow carts. Those sorts of groups map hop around and try to take undefended or lightly defended objectives and then siege turtle whenever someone attacks their stuff. But things have supposedly changed. Attack their t3s, bring them to you. If they can't siege turtle as effectively they will have to actually fight to defend things now and you will either get a fight or they will lose everything. Either way you win.

> @"Sovereign.1093" said:

> i have come to accept siegers. mag has probably one of the best. as long as they allert we could not open sm wall.

>

> so fighting to open is really grade a. and they fight 2.

>

> respect

>

I will never accept them. Unfortunately you are right though current Mag has WAY too many people who use siege WAY too often but I cannot control that. All I can do is make fun of them when I see it and hope they change. Spoilers: they never change.