ZDragon.3046
-
Posts
2,351 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by ZDragon.3046
-
-
> @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > @"SeikeNz.3526" said:
> > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > > > > > > You can kite pets. Rock Gazelle hurts but I don't think ranger is as egregious as you're claiming now, especially with the unblockable synergy soulbeast had being trimmed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have to say i dont agree with you here which is strange.
> > > > > > Pets can be kited only if the ranger does not run beast mastery which most do run.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Otherwise the pet has far-greater mobility passively than you do as a player in combat let alone ones that have dashes, leaps, blinks, etc There is no realistic kiting them at general in combat speeds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The only way you avoid pets generally is if you have constant access to superspeed or stealth which breaks their targeting causing them to run back to the pet owner or to another target till you re appear this might be enough of a gap to make pets seem avoidable. But generally on most professions that cannot stealth often there is no kiting the pet. The pet is going to get you how much it gets you depends on the situation.
> > > > >
> > > > > The pets are viable mostly at point blank range even with beastmastery traited because 80% of pet attacks are 1s+ cast time and with stop animation , the more skilled the opponents the harder to land any pet attack as you need to find gaps in the enemy defensive rotations and even if manage that..the rock gazelle is the only one that can deal huge power burst due to a bug when it happens...other pets can deal as much dmg as an AA from a warrior or thief..which is still good in my opinion.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main reason why rangers are forced to get beastmastery is because Anet (apologetically) said that increasing attck/speed of core pets would cause problems with the same models used in the core game hence why HoT/PoF pets are better overall.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pets are the ranger mechanic and they're part of the dmg not a separate entity like people want to believe, without the pets the overall dmg of rangers drop by a lot...almost by 70% , outside couple heavy hitting skills ( maul and rapid fire ) the DPS of ranger is rather lacklustre ; considering the fact that PvP offers a more controlled DPS environment, a PvE benchmark can be used more effectively to demonstrate what I am saying.
> > > > >
> > > > My only gripe about ranger pets is that attempting to kill the pet is not a viable strategy to reduce the rangers effectiveness (currently). The pets that are not the birds are generally as tanky as another player and can be swapped too easily on demand or revived via soul beast fusion with no punishment. In pvp or wvw if you are under attack by a ranger killing the pet should be a viable option to reducing the rangers effectiveness. But you dont really have that choice so you have to ignore the pet and just avoid its key skills for the most part.
> > > >
> > > > > P.S I don't justify bugged attacks like rock gazelle and with that said I believe that tanky pets should offer support option for the player and only rock gazelle remains outside the spectrum and possibly bristleback, but I do expect squishy pets, that die in a couple aoe , to deal as much dmg as other profession auto-attacks in the 1-2k range ..anything less would be completely unreasonable
> > > >
> > > > Any pet that can perform a Disabling attack even more so attacks that are not commanded by the ranger do need to be made more visible imo. Some pets have these kind of things others dont.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd love to see more DPS oriented pets like bird/felines where they're squishy but do hit hard or utility pets like bears/moa and some canine that do far less dmg but arguably ( need some buffs here ) offer more support utility . As I have explained pets are the ranger mechanic and asking to disable another profession mechanic for a limited amount of time it's not really an option..unless you allow ranger to effectively stop mesmers from casting clones for 60s or prevent a thief from restealthing or stopping a warrior from gaining adrenaline.
> > >
> > > I can understand people asking to remove tanky pets with DPS as that should not be allowed but asking to easily kill pets and leave rangers helpless for 20s+ it's not really an argument, it sounds more like a bad joke than a good idea
> > >
> > >
> >
> > well people kill mesmer clones in one hit and they can't shatter, mesmer can only resummon it easy if they trait for it, why rangers should be different and pets can't die having 40k hp? rangers have a backup pet already and they should put a cd of 60s after the pet dies to ress.
> >
> > today i was playing pvp and i killed the ranger and he left me with 20% of my life, i was trying to finish him and the pet was stunning me while the ranger was downed, the pet killed me then the pet ressed him because my class don't have a stun while downed, but he could only do that because in the middle of the fight i was not able to kill the pet because he would ress just be changing it, tell me how is that fair?
>
> 1) no pet has 40k HP
This is true but they have enough where in most cases the ranger can swap it out the moment they see someone attempting to kill it or fuse with it which completely invalidates the idea of even attempting to do so.
> 2) there is already a 60s CD for dead pets
Not when used with soul beast which is an odd ball factor
> 3) comparing pets to clones is absurd...maybe they should add a 60s CD for each clone destroyed also
I do agree with this though pets should not be compared to clones. Cones have a wider number of effects they can be used for on command of the caster where as pets are pretty standard from the moment you see it you know mostly what it can potentially do even if you cant always read when it will do it. That said pets are in my personal opinion too tanky in general.
The birds are fine as far as damage goes and they are super squish
The felines some of which are ok i think they are just under used in general though
Bears are not tanky enough to draw peoples attention out side of soulbeast for damage immunities
Smokescale despite it supposedly being equivalent to a bear in terms of stats has far more damage due to its skill kit and offers much more utility if not too much utility to rangers in general with they damage they have. Its why the pet is so over used almost every ranger build uses it.
Wolves/canines are a nice mix but need more tells on their non command cc attacks
Pigs are good idea of a utility type pet that come with big risk for the reward. (as anyone can pick up your plasma if you are careless)
The deer is a bullet bil that needs to be removed from the game. LOL
-
> @"bravan.3876" said:
> > @"viquing.8254" said:
> > > @"bravan.3876" said:
> > > > @"viquing.8254" said:
> > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said :
> > > Actually axe is rly not as bad as most ppl think. I think the weapons is in a good spot. Played around with it lately in case staff will be trash after nerfs.
> >
> > When is the last time an axe mirage kill you ?
> > What can you say about my why is axe bad ?
> >
>
> I don't know what to say about your axe opinion. I thought it is bad too until i tried it and it worked well. When you care for your axe 2 use you don't rly get interrupted during that. Axe 3 is still an insane skill. Don't use Sage amulet with axe and the dmg is good. That was my experience at least. It was already a decent use, when now everyhting else will get nerfed axe will be even better most likely.
^ this
-
> @"viquing.8254" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said :
> > I think this is a bit off putting for one i dont think staff damage output should be what it is period no matter how you shift it. Axe should be the go to tool for hard condi dps from mirage but very few mirages use this because of the ease of staff.
> Mirage don't use axe **not because staff is better** but because axe get overnerfed and bad designed :
> The 3rd skill have plenty of ground bugs and half time positionnate you too far of your target to hit them while doing average direct damage and lol condi damage.
Every class in the game has bugged skills you are not alone here get in line lol.
> The 2nd skill don't do much damage/soft cc, need to be in melee and you are a free target when you use it.
Thats the high risk part and its a condition weapon you should not expect it to do high damage immediately thats how condition weapons are suppose to work.
> The first skill has average cast to little damage, is melee.
Once again you are not the only one here either get in line thats kind of a general thing for good number of classes. See necro scepter for example, slow damage not soo good and ramps slow. Warrior sword also melee pretty slow in cast speed and condi ramp.
> The ambush can be reflected and was nerfed hard.
But this is also a a fact of the staff ambush but its not a problem there? Projectile reflection is counterplay for any projectile it would be odd if it couldnt be reflected
> >Axe mirage actually applies the things you just listed. Its more active with good damage output and has higher risk and requires the mesmer to play offensively
> Who play a high risk, no reward tools ?
That should be how most people play if a build has very low risk and very high reward then expect people to complain about it. I personally like the axe on mirage the 3 skills is pretty solid gap close / evade the 2 skill while its not an evade is not the the worst thing ever but i mean you do have the option to dodge while performing the 2 skill to avoid taking damage which makes it completely safe on use.
>
> >Also the conditions are pretty limited 2 main damaging conditions which is good because its easier to know what you should avoid and what you dont need to avoid vs staff autos which are slightly rng.
> Staff clone auto has a 1.75 sec delai + slow projectile moving animation for approximatively 1000 condi damage (counting the bounce). On every PvP map, it's more than easy to bait them considering the setup before they start doing some pressure.
> >Getting hit by a few staff autos might not do much damage
> It's the case. Who consider 1700 dps ((3*1000) / 1.75.) as a high pressure (less in practise because I didn't count it as condi duration.).
> >while in other moments a few hits from staff autos might cause tons of damage.
> Tons of damage = how much ?
> Give me details please as you are a pro mesmer with data behind.
The reason i point out how staff autos can do rng sytle dps is because the staff auto inflicts one of 3 condition all of which do varying ranges of damage as each of the conditions is scaled quite differently. Lets say you take 10 hits of winds of chaos
Of those 10 hits you could get 7 bleeds 2 torments and 1 burn which is moderate possibly even pretty low damage over time
OR
Of those 10 hits you could get 2 bleeds 2 torment and 6 burn which is pretty heavy damage over time
Burn deals considerably more damage than bleed will and considerably more damage than torment even if you dont proc any burn but proc a ton more torment than bleed thats still pretty heavy damage over time for just passive auto attacks.
Ideally just eating autos from staff can be nothing bad or can be devastating depending on RNG.
>
> >All of this while boasting a passive defensive play style with hard defensive tools on top of it that you need to force out.
> We haven't choice than to play passive as they over-nerfed the active (aka condi application with shatter.).
I dont feel like thats true shatters are the same as core mesmer shatters its just fact that its greater passive dps to not shatter than it is to shatter them Axe mirages actually need to shatter or are encouraged to do so with their playstyle which leads to much higher burst potential than staff can perform its also more risky to play however.
>
> >There is also the matter of the fact that staff attack bounce around meaning there is potentially no end to the condition application so long as you are trying to engage the mirage it just is constant application.
> I counted the bounce in my calculations.
>
> > Ideally swapping to staff should lead to a dps drop for the utility and defensive play style it provides.
> Thanks for proving again you have no clue about this class.
> What will left if you drop the utility and defensive play ?
> You hope to kill someone with 3 confusion stacks during 4.5 sec on a 25 sec CD or with only an obvious animation from pistol fantasm ?
>
> It's good to everyone, please don't make suggestion for thing you don't know anything apart from the fact that they kill you someday.
I dont have anything else to add ?
-
> @"bravan.3876" said:
> > @"viquing.8254" said:
> > > @"ZDragon.3046" said :
> Actually axe is rly not as bad as most ppl think. I think the weapons is in a good spot. Played around with it lately in case staff will be trash after nerfs.
Exactly axe puts out good dps and a player who knows what they are doing can kill you with it much faster than they can with a staff.
It also still encourages the user to actually actively use their shatters instead of actively not using them. People just dont do it because there is no reason to so long as staff provides great dps while boosting a defensive plays tyle.
IT works against most situations so why use anything else.
The damage is good enough and its safer so why use anything else.
Staff also provides utility along side the great damage while axe is more just geared to damage so why use anything else.
Fighting an Axe mirage does not bother me. Fighting a passive staff mirage pains me greatly.
-
@"Cal Cohen.3527"
I certainly think you and the team should consider addressing some boon application at the same time as reducing the corruptions otherwise you will see a drastic shift from scourge is the problem to firebrand/holo/scrapper is the problem.
One thing I personally think should not be done in any competitive modes is hitting 1 area and not the other at least to some extent at the same time.
The last thing we need to see is scourge getting toned down even more and then just being left like that "its fine" because the complaints stopped even more so if thats because people just stop playing scourge because its not longer effective enough.
Im not saying scourge shouldn't be reduced im simply saying that the choice to reduce it without also addressing boon splatter which has yet to receive a single culling since ever that i can recall could lead to an even bigger issue. Scourge takes a massive nose dive in the process for several months or people stop playing it all together because it feels too ineffective.
All teams should possibly consider a scourge rework in all game modes pve included if its going to keep getting these kind of pass overs on a mechanic thats proving to be too difficult to balance in terms of effectiveness.
Scourge is indeed a problem in big numbered fights or in the instances of multiple scourges. But i think this only pushes people to drop scourge entirely or simply bring even more scourges than before. Both of which are not good imo.
As i said in a previous statement i hated the idea of necromancer's main unique mechanic feature being used as what almost feels like a pure balance tool for 8 other professions. Boon converts went from being a unique mechanic and strategy defensive combat tool of the necromancer to being a almost a pure boon balance tool for every other profession.
The reduction of that tool without the reduction of the thing its meant to combat at the same time or before hand seems backwards to me. This is going to up effectiveness and dps for a lot of builds passively even more which is the opposite of what i thought was suppose to be happening in the future for both wvw and pvp.
-
> @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > > You can kite pets. Rock Gazelle hurts but I don't think ranger is as egregious as you're claiming now, especially with the unblockable synergy soulbeast had being trimmed.
> >
> > I have to say i dont agree with you here which is strange.
> > Pets can be kited only if the ranger does not run beast mastery which most do run.
> >
> > Otherwise the pet has far-greater mobility passively than you do as a player in combat let alone ones that have dashes, leaps, blinks, etc There is no realistic kiting them at general in combat speeds.
> >
> > The only way you avoid pets generally is if you have constant access to superspeed or stealth which breaks their targeting causing them to run back to the pet owner or to another target till you re appear this might be enough of a gap to make pets seem avoidable. But generally on most professions that cannot stealth often there is no kiting the pet. The pet is going to get you how much it gets you depends on the situation.
>
> The pets are viable mostly at point blank range even with beastmastery traited because 80% of pet attacks are 1s+ cast time and with stop animation , the more skilled the opponents the harder to land any pet attack as you need to find gaps in the enemy defensive rotations and even if manage that..the rock gazelle is the only one that can deal huge power burst due to a bug when it happens...other pets can deal as much dmg as an AA from a warrior or thief..which is still good in my opinion.
>
> The main reason why rangers are forced to get beastmastery is because Anet (apologetically) said that increasing attck/speed of core pets would cause problems with the same models used in the core game hence why HoT/PoF pets are better overall.
>
> Pets are the ranger mechanic and they're part of the dmg not a separate entity like people want to believe, without the pets the overall dmg of rangers drop by a lot...almost by 70% , outside couple heavy hitting skills ( maul and rapid fire ) the DPS of ranger is rather lacklustre ; considering the fact that PvP offers a more controlled DPS environment, a PvE benchmark can be used more effectively to demonstrate what I am saying.
>
My only gripe about ranger pets is that attempting to kill the pet is not a viable strategy to reduce the rangers effectiveness (currently). The pets that are not the birds are generally as tanky as another player and can be swapped too easily on demand or revived via soul beast fusion with no punishment. In pvp or wvw if you are under attack by a ranger killing the pet should be a viable option to reducing the rangers effectiveness. But you dont really have that choice so you have to ignore the pet and just avoid its key skills for the most part.
> P.S I don't justify bugged attacks like rock gazelle and with that said I believe that tanky pets should offer support option for the player and only rock gazelle remains outside the spectrum and possibly bristleback, but I do expect squishy pets, that die in a couple aoe , to deal as much dmg as other profession auto-attacks in the 1-2k range ..anything less would be completely unreasonable
Any pet that can perform a Disabling attack even more so attacks that are not commanded by the ranger do need to be made more visible imo. Some pets have these kind of things others dont.
-
> @"NorthernRedStar.3054" said:
> What is this 'burst' that Anet thinks condi thief has?
Its a wide spread condi burst and its effective against a good number of professions that dont have great optional burst condi clear. The poison gets covered by several other condis which are not heavily damaging but most people cant slow clear enough to not get rapidly melted to death before hand. I dont think its more so the condis that are applied its more so how they are applied. Super safely with minimal risk while playing keep away.
>
> Going full-on ape _Panic Strike_ - dodge - _Steal_ will just get your condis cleased by _Shake it Off!_ or _water attunement_ or _Consume Conditions_ in the matter of seconds. The build is already grind 'em out -style as it stands. Unless, of course, you're +1'ing someone who's already blown their cooldowns - but in that case, Fresh Air Ele, DE, Revenant; all these builds kill people faster.
I think shake it off with 2 charges is a bit much but at the same time you have things like staff mirage so.... till that gets fixed i cant see the reason to change shake it off.
Water attune clear is kind of fine imo because it requires investment its not exactly free.
Consume conditions is the necromancers only burst clear with a modest cd. I mean for a class thats suppose to be the master of conditions it would be silly not to have at least one dependent self burst clear thats not an xfer that has the potential to miss or be blinded, needs a target, etc.
Fresh air ele just has slightly too much instant damage reduce it a bit and its fine.
DE mostly the same problem but perhaps some stealth also needs to be looked into or stealth as a whole game wide tool needs to be reworked for competitive play. Maybe add more reveals to skills throughout the game.
Rev just has too much instant damage and the this mostly only applies to herald which leaves me believe the boons are the problems here more than anything.
-
> @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> You can kite pets. Rock Gazelle hurts but I don't think ranger is as egregious as you're claiming now, especially with the unblockable synergy soulbeast had being trimmed.
I have to say i dont agree with you here which is strange.
Pets can be kited only if the ranger does not run beast mastery which most do run.
Otherwise the pet has far-greater mobility passively than you do as a player in combat let alone ones that have dashes, leaps, blinks, etc There is no realistic kiting them at general in combat speeds.
The only way you avoid pets generally is if you have constant access to superspeed or stealth which breaks their targeting causing them to run back to the pet owner or to another target till you re appear this might be enough of a gap to make pets seem avoidable. But generally on most professions that cannot stealth often there is no kiting the pet. The pet is going to get you how much it gets you depends on the situation.
-
> @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > @"bravan.3876" said:
> > > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > > > > @"bravan.3876" said:
> > > > > the passive effects mostly lie in the design of the condi ambushes.
> > > >
> > > > I'm fine with the condi ambushes getting redone instead, as long as the end result is a non braindead playstyle, but is that actually doable without upsetting pve?
> > >
> > > It should be, because in theory Condimirages dmg output should be nearly the same only the application should be more active and for that with higher risk for the Mesmer and less abilities to play defensive all the time. But even if it would lead to underperfroming PvE builds, Cal mentioned that they can compensate in PvE for dmg loses through mechanic changes by adjusting numbers.
> >
> > I think this is a bit off putting for one i dont think staff damage output should be what it is period no matter how you shift it. Axe should be the go to tool for hard condi dps from mirage but very few mirages use this because of the ease of staff.
> >
> > Axe mirage actually applies the things you just listed. Its more active with good damage output and has higher risk and requires the mesmer to play offensively. Also the conditions are pretty limited 2 main damaging conditions which is good because its easier to know what you should avoid and what you dont need to avoid vs staff autos which are slightly rng. With the ambush attacks just being boosted af. Getting hit by a few staff autos might not do much damage while in other moments a few hits from staff autos might cause tons of damage. All of this while boasting a passive defensive play style with hard defensive tools on top of it that you need to force out. There is also the matter of the fact that staff attack bounce around meaning there is potentially no end to the condition application so long as you are trying to engage the mirage it just is constant application.
> >
> > Ideally swapping to staff should lead to a dps drop for the utility and defensive play style it provides.
> >
> > As far as ambushes anet should really consider removing the ties that IH gives as far as caster to clone ambush attacks even more so while the caster is disabled. Clones should only cast ambush attacks when the caster actually uses an ambush attack. if the caster is cc'ed and dodges even with IH clones should not perform ambush attacks ideally. One is already being allowed to potentially evade some if not all of potential follow up damage while disabled which is something no other class can do while its disabled without first breaking the effect causing the disable.
> > Shatters should be changed to be unique to mirage too.
> >
>
> That's why people complain about condi mirages ...people have been complaing about **Infinite Horizon** even before they'd nerf Elusive Mind...it's same thing with druid, instead than nerfing **Celestial shadow and Ancient seed** as I suggested in a thread long time ago...they nerfed everything around it ...they seem to always do that but I have hope for the new team with Cal and Ben because they seem to go directly for the throat
More proof of the fact that anet does not simply listen to every thing we say they should nerf so i dont get the idea of people coming here who say anet nerf things because players say they should be nerfed. When in most cases its things that people never suggest that are the things that get nerfed. With very few exceptional cases and in those cases there is usually something very busted realistically.
I cant stand how people should say that anet will never do a good job if they only listen to players when most of the time they dont listen to players in the first place ?
-
> @"bravan.3876" said:
> > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > > @"bravan.3876" said:
> > > the passive effects mostly lie in the design of the condi ambushes.
> >
> > I'm fine with the condi ambushes getting redone instead, as long as the end result is a non braindead playstyle, but is that actually doable without upsetting pve?
>
> It should be, because in theory Condimirages dmg output should be nearly the same only the application should be more active and for that with higher risk for the Mesmer and less abilities to play defensive all the time. But even if it would lead to underperfroming PvE builds, Cal mentioned that they can compensate in PvE for dmg loses through mechanic changes by adjusting numbers.
I think this is a bit off putting for one i dont think staff damage output should be what it is period no matter how you shift it. Axe should be the go to tool for hard condi dps from mirage but very few mirages use this because of the ease of staff.
Axe mirage actually applies the things you just listed. Its more active with good damage output and has higher risk and requires the mesmer to play offensively. Also the conditions are pretty limited 2 main damaging conditions which is good because its easier to know what you should avoid and what you dont need to avoid vs staff autos which are slightly rng. With the ambush attacks just being boosted af. Getting hit by a few staff autos might not do much damage while in other moments a few hits from staff autos might cause tons of damage. All of this while boasting a passive defensive play style with hard defensive tools on top of it that you need to force out. There is also the matter of the fact that staff attack bounce around meaning there is potentially no end to the condition application so long as you are trying to engage the mirage it just is constant application.
Ideally swapping to staff should lead to a dps drop for the utility and defensive play style it provides.
As far as ambushes anet should really consider removing the ties that IH gives as far as caster to clone ambush attacks even more so while the caster is disabled. Clones should only cast ambush attacks when the caster actually uses an ambush attack. if the caster is cc'ed and dodges even with IH clones should not perform ambush attacks ideally. One is already being allowed to potentially evade some if not all of potential follow up damage while disabled which is something no other class can do while its disabled without first breaking the effect causing the disable.
Shatters should be changed to be unique to mirage too.
-
> @"foste.3098" said:
> > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > Condi thief is strong because of this synergy. Consider making a change to sword 2. @"ZDragon.3046" made a suggestion that, if you use sword 2 to port and it misses or gets blocked/interrupted, you shouldn't get the flipover skill to return to where you were for a cooldown.
>
> This sounds fine on paper until you realize it would give sword/x thieves infinite teleports as long as you can target something that is far away and proceed to spam infiltrators strike until you get to it; or run out of initiative. Giving a thief weapon skill a cooldown would go against the class design so that is probably a no.
Well then the answer would be just not getting the return skill at all if you dont hit anything. Which means if you go in and miss you are just in.
This same concept applies to the sword 3 skill with offhand dagger if you miss the evade stab you dont get the flip over skill at all.
> The counter argument would be to make sword 2 only usable if you are in range of your target, how steal/swipe works, but that would restrict gap closing combos using sword.
This is kind of fine to be honest i dont see issues with this as you still hold major advantage with this kind of mobility to go in and possibly go back out at any time you want. There should be a bit more risk to it. Even more so with the condi setups people are running now where most of the damage can be applied through i frame evades that also deal strikes.
-
> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:
> > @"Jojo.6590" said:
> > > @"Hoodie.1045" said:
> >
> > > # Mesmer
> > >
> > > Nerf the number of clones mesmer can have active. Ever since mirage was released, clones have made fights such a visual mess.
> >
> >
> > As the saying goes be careful of what you wish for.
>
> Yeah, I was thinking about that myself yesterday.
>
> In particular, I was considering this universal idea we all have that "power creep is too high, tone everything down." Well... the truth is that if things went back to a bunkery meta or even a "slow" meta where it took considerably longer to finish fights, people are going to get bored. Aside from popular complaint, the high DPS values keeps players more mentally stimulated as every moment is dangerous and needs to be paid attention to. If we go back to Scrappers vs. Druids on nodes, people are going to get bored really fast.
>
> It's very true in life that you don't know what you've got until it's gone. And sometimes people wish for things that sound good, but they don't really understand the full realities of what they are wishing for. Regardless, if the Arenanet team is aiming at reversing power creep, it needs to be done not only to DPS, but also defensive skills. I agree that DPS values and Defensive spam are both out of control, but it needs to be dealt with carefully.
>
> Someone in this thread I believe it was, had mentioned something like: "If you go back and watch old ESL games from Core or HoT, it's actually boring compared to what the game plays like now." I went back and watched a few old videos and you know what? He was right. The game is actually just a lot more interesting now,
>
> Something to consider @"Cal Cohen.2358"
>
You bring up some good points.
I dont want things to go back to the HoT meta but i also dont like this meta which almost invalidates conditional defense options or stats like toughness and vitality etc because the damage is that high.
For example if i take tons of toughness i dont expect anyone to pretty much 100-0 me in 1.5 seconds. that simply should not be a thing in the game if they knocked me down to a modest 30% of my hp ok thats fine im low but i have a chance to do something but getting 1 shot when you invest in toughness is not healthy for the game. Right now as of the current time if you dont have tons of evades, blocks, or invuln you can spam your best defense is being offensive which makes no sense.
Damage needs to be lowered so that properly invested defensive stats can be relevant. Things like invulns/blocks, possibly some evades in some cases need to be reduced so that people simply dont stack defensive which still leaves us in the same situation more or less stats ontop of them.
You are right its going to be a tricky balance.
-
> @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Solori.6025" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"Solori.6025" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > @"Exedore.6320" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Solori.6025" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > It's why a wonder, why would a dev ask for subjective feedback instead of forming more non biased opinions through metrics,statistics, and knowledge of how the classes work.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Because metrics can't tell you whether it's fun to play.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Players are very good at identifying what frustrates them. They're not as good at identifying why and even less so at fixing it. But the devs first need to know what isn't fun so they can figure out where to start looking for changes.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > ........" Metrics, statistics, and **knowledge of how the classes work.**"
> > > > > > > > > > > Fun is subjective, and by asking players to identify what they like and dont you are creating an outlook that is mostly biased.
> > > > > > > > > > This is only true until a certain majority of people say that something is or is not fun at which point it starts to become less subjective and more factual. Fun is a part of the game. Some people play for fun for some people fun is winning or having a well fought match win or lose. Fun is indeed subjective and it can be a driving force of what keeps people playing the game.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I stand by what I said then. Since you also acknowledge "fun" being subjective. That you can't use that feedback then as a starting point in balancing talks .
> > > > > > > > > > > That's not how you achieve balance, and I covered most of that in the first post I made in this thread.
> > > > > > > > > > Its not always how you achieve balance but some times its a good place to start. If some one says something is not fun and some one say something is super fun which do you believe? If a majority of people who main many different professions also start to say similar things do you think all of them are just subjective or does it mean that something is clearly an issue. Do you think that a large number of people would make false accusations on the subject of how fun something is? I would say its its very unlikely.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Simply saying its subjective so your statement does not apply to the input of something is not a good way of really looking at it.
> > > > > > > > > > What happens if someone says you telling someone something is subjective is also subjective should we just void out your statement too?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As i told some one else its half and half
> > > > > > > > > > When possible metrics and statistics should be part of it but the other half should consist of client feedback data. Thats why businesses and companies often ask you how a service was to you.
> > > > > > > > > > Say you order a package.
> > > > > > > > > > Looking at metrics data tells the sender that the box got from point A to B.
> > > > > > > > > > It might say how fast it got there and which route it took.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > But it does not tell them in the condition of how the box was when it got there or how pleased you were with how fast it got there. Maybe it got there at a bad time leaving your product to sit out all day exposed or maybe it got there quick but not quick enough to your liking.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Subjective feedback is rather important one cannot simply dismiss it as it is a part of balance.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And once again, I covered this in my first post, people seem to gloss over the bolded part of "Knowledge of how the game works"....Or from my first post in this thread
> > > > > > > > > "Devs should have an intimate understanding of what EVERY class is capable of.
> > > > > > > > > When I say intimate, I mean like this class shows up in your dreams intimate.
> > > > > > > > > Too often we have seen knee jerk fixes or changes to a class that don't make sense to the people playing, and sometimes these changes are contradictory to the way the class functions or even what the balancing "idea" for that patch tried to achieve.
> > > > > > > > > The Devs first and foremost need to play this game, and understand it to the level that people who have been playing since launch do."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you are relying on players to identify, **WITHOUT BIAS** the things that make a class over-perform you have set the ground for failure. Plain and simple. Even in this thread, you have evidence of that. No one want's to be nerfed further and everyone is pointing fingers at everything BUT what they have.
> > > > > > > > > This is why I said those 3 things are needed.
> > > > > > > > > Too many times player X throws out hyperbole to get player Y's class nerfed.
> > > > > > > > > It always goes like this " Bob plays a class (We'll call it class X) and wants to feel powerful, and be powerful, but bob gets killed by Tim on class Y. Bob could either, go into the game and make class Y and figure out what the strengths and weaknesses are, OR, he could complain about the class. Clearly Bob is a pro and class Y is just broken. So he makes a thread ( OR post in a thread with a dev asking what's fun or not) and decides to complain about everything he doesn't like. Citing that other people don't like it either. For added effect, Bob wiki's every skill and throws them all in, complaining about every effect Class Y has , then going through all the traits and doing the same. Bob creates a franken build that realistically CAN NOT EXIST. Then to put the final touches he creates scenarios in which no class could actually perform. Bob writes this as fact, and everyone that plays class X like bob agree's. This franken build to them exist in reality, and it does exactly what bob says.
> > > > > > > > > Tim and the other people playing class Y try and tell bob what actually happened but then it devolves into a shouting match where insults like " you main the class so you don't get a say" come in.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This entire scenario, if we just stuck with player feedback. Would end up ( and has ended up) with a class being stripped of multiple tools it needs to function at a competitive level across multiple builds. It generates dead builds because they have been cried about repeatedly.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This can not continue, and is unhealthy.
> > > > > > > > > The Devs MUST know how to pull apart fiction from fact.
> > > > > > > > > The devs need to play this game first, **The devs must understand this system and game first**, the devs need have to have every statistic, and metric first, before gathering feedback where players can't even be bothered to complain about specific aspects of a class and create these out of reality things and then complain about it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Edit: ALSO if they devs understood how this game worked, how classes worked, and how they fit in the grand picture of this game. We wouldn't have things like Launch day scourge, deadeye, mirage, spellbreaker, holosmith, weaver, renegade, etc. This is more than a numbers game, I acknowledge that. But changes like these tell me that in a grand picture for balance their was little or no vision. That needs to change like yesteryear.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It goes without saying this is true but devs cant perdict what players will do once they get their hands on the content or how they will adapt to playin it after the fact. It is impossible for them to know every possible result because they are a group of a few hundred and we players are up in the thousands if not hundred thousands. We will try combos and playstyles that they would have never considered which may lead to unexpected or abusive mechanical tactics that will not be healthy for the game.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To say tha the devs must understand the system without fail is simply not plausible as new content is added.
> > > > > > > > The devs should not be doing balance on what they think is fun they how ever should mind how other players feel about that same content even more so in compeitive modes.
> > > > > > > > Im sorry but if something causes major frustration because its not balanced then its not ok i dont really care how subjective you think it is. Fact is a game should not cause frustration to a person or a majority of people and once that starts to happen it means there is a problem that needs to be addressed.
> > > > > > > > To ignore feedback and subjective feeling from the clients you provide a service too is very ignorant and what leads to the game gettin to the state its in right now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Players time and time again have told anet things they liked and did not like only to have the opposite happen in terms of balance in one mode or another. Players often came up with very creative and possibly balanced solutions to frustrating issues only to have anet ignore them and the problems remain problems for 6 months at a time.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Its not so much pulling apart from the fun factor. When i say the devs must consider feed back data from people because its important it means just that. I dont mean the devs should be biased and design or blanace things based on how the feel when they play the game themselves. IF you dont agree the devs should listen to the people who play the game at all then you cant expect the game to ever be balanced.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Im sorry i just wont agree with you no matter how you put it because when you say data is the only thing that should be looked at wont solve the problem. 1 patch you are on top because data said you were doing bad next patch you are trash because data said you were doing good. Data will be smothered by people who flock to what wins and works in the same way it is now by your above example of player x says player y's main class should be nerfed while player x's main class is still obviously broken but they defend it anyways.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regardless of how you "subjectively" think it should be done i don't agree. ITs a half and half situation for the best results. Devs are human beings and know how to read quality statement when they see it. Simply saying "nerf x class because y reason while im playing broken z profession" is not something they probably pay attention too.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You said it yourself : "nerf x class because y reason while I am playing broken z profession" is not something the devs listen to. Players here tend to forget how frustrating it is to be at the receiving end of their own class ...while they complain about the frustration of being themselves at the receiving end of some other matchup...like "it's fun to hardcounter others...but I don't want to be hardcountered and what hardcounter me is clearly OP"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I stand with what @"Solori.6025" said : " you cannot balance an effective balance process on player's feedback" , a feedback based on emotions and self-preservation is not something to be ever taken seriously.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Left out the part where i said devs should be able to filter through that and find the constructive feedback which tends to be a bit more well written from an un biased standpoint.
> > > > > > Sorry to say i dont agree metrics an data only get you so far and dont create a perfect balance you may stand where you like but ive played enough games to know how balance can fail based on only data and metrics alone which leads to periods of "balance and imbalance" if something is balanced for someone its likely not balanced for someone else and thats always going to be a thing. IF something becomes too imbalanced for a majority despite the data saying its doing fine and players decide to strike against it then it means something was over looked that the data alone could not reveal. Its happened in the past it will happen in the future.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I dont discredit the use of metrics and data for balance i welcome its use. I just dont think it should be the main and only source for balance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As far as him referecing that the devs need to understand flawlessly the potential of what the professions can and cannot do ill go into detail why thats not possible in most cases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even if the devs do play competitive when exploring design and balance work they can't expect how thousands of players will take that content and explore it and build onto it. The minds of a few dozen or hundred cant simulate the results of how thousands will explore it.
> > > > > > That's how obnoxious builds and skill abuse/tactics even pop up to start with it's because players come up with ideas that the devs never considered during balance and design.
> > > > > > When you design something it's very easy to get tunnel vision on finite limits that only you see through your eyes but when you give it to hundreds if not thousands of other people they may not see anything of what you see and take it in a completely different direction. In some cases the direction ends up being very unbalanced.
> > > > > > That's why I said it's impossible for devs who design and balance the game to fully understand the game it happens in every single game I've ever played. The only way you could make this happen is to cut a massive amount of content out of the game and make almost everything play the same way with the same rules and finite limits where it cant be changed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Guild wars 2's profession system is far too vast for that despite how much of a down scale is from the original guild wars. There are too many build options too many build stat factors and too many different mechanics for anyone to expect the devs to be able to predict every single possible build outcome, play style, and expect broken things not to pop out of the woodworks with each balance pass or new content addition.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All of this also adds whole new level to metrics and data that would need to be analyzed when trying to balance the game off that alone that would possibly work against itself in some cases. For example some tools/traits/skills are not or rarely used right now but might not be used till something new is added in the future. But because the data in the past implies it either wont be used or wont make a factor how could you balance for it off that alone? Your data shows that its not a problem now but it becomes one when you add new content or change existing content in some way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Trust me going off data alone is simply not always the best way. Data is and can be a good source of information but so can the people who respectively play the content.
> > > > >
> > > > > After 6 years it doesn't seem to me they did a good job in filtering constructive feedback, they still tend to overnerf things because of uproar on the forum. The last example of what I am saying is **whey they disabled Chaotic Interruption** , they did not solve the problem with mirage **(mirage cloack applied to clones)**, they simply reduced the build options for mesmer mains.
> > > >
> > > > I would argue to say not all of it was constructive feedback so im not sure thats a fair assumption to make.
> > > > A large portion of poor balance choices were made because of all game modes being tied to one another or design changes being made blindly with what seems like no input at all or opposite imput from what people suggested.
> > > >
> > > > This is what ive mostly seen over the past 6 years. Not them following the general "nerf x thing cause its op"
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -They go and nerf the most used pets on rangers...**but they do nothing to solve the problem with the other pets non hitting any moving target or having stupid CD and cast times**
> > > >
> > > > Maybe they thought the most used pets were too strong and wanted them to be leveled with the other pets. Not ever balance direction has to be up in some cases its down. Every profession catches this karma from time to time and we never understand why it happens. If only 2 pets out of the several dozen are the only ones being used what would the data then suggest? That those 2 pets are too strong or that all the others are just too weak? Which side to you pick now? If feed back was ignored from players how do you know the result would not have been the same based on the data alone?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -They nerf sustain of eles using healing amulet...but do nothing to solve the dependency of ele on healing power..and so on for every other profession.
> > > >
> > > > Most other professions dont play the same way that ele does. Ele has always been a bit of a different beast in itself. Once again some times the direction is down and not up. Do you nerf how healing stats work with ele or do you just buff how healing power works on everyone else and ignore the ele. Based on the data alone which direction do you take. Without player imput how do you know the result would have not been the same?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Up to this very moment, the devs have proved to be unable to discern constructive feedback from simple blubbering , they still nerf things for the sake of nerfing in order to please the angry mob on the forum, they never think why something is never used..they only care to "fix" what get overused for lack of other options and that tend to leave things in the gutter after they're done...only to come back later and overbuff something and bring the class back to relevance .
> > > >
> > > > I point to my first statement again. I highly doubt its been specifically 6 years of only following constructive feedback anything i would say its been more so 6 years of not following feedback with a few niche case exceptions from time to time. We wouldnt be in this problem now if devs had listened to players years ago who wanted balance, numbers, and mechanics to be split between game modes years ago. They chose not to follow that advice that landed us in the mess we are in now.
> > > >
> > > > > In an ideal world you'd be 100% correct but in this world maybe it's better for the devs to stick to metrics because it seems to land better balance decisions
> > > > There is no proof of this. But we can wait and see i guess. The fact that they are finally splitting pve from pvp and wvw means they are fianlly taking players advice now that they realize how much balancing 1 or 2 professions in 1 or 2 game modes can ruin it in some form or another in the other game modes. This is likely not a metrics decision alone.
> > > >
> > > > Like ive said ive seen games where devs have streams with the players and share the data that they look at when balancing something and have watched them creat imbalance based on those numbers with changes they think will help even the numbers for all players involved a good many times.
> > > >
> > > > In an ideal world the devs would allow players to beta test upcoming balance patches before they go live for a weekend or a week (they did this before HoT released twice and once or twice before PoF released)
> > > > Doing this would let them get both data and feedback that could help everyone in the long run but of course this is not something they do.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok so if I understand what you're saying : balance decisions based on metrics alone tend to get rid of outliers but not explain why the outliers exist in the first place and here is when the player's feedback is required. Fair enough but again that feedback has been given in the past and openly ignored or partly acknowledged by the devs who simply got rid of the outliers as per request of the forum.
> >
> > Some times yes in some cases balance choices made on metrics alone can get rid of some outliers but like a coin every tool has two sides. IF metrics show that something is not being used and a totally new mechanic or change enters the game that when combined with that skill/trait/perk which data says "is weak or underused" makes that same skill/trait/perk very over powered how could the data alone have prevented it from becoming such an outlier.
> >
> > Outliers will always pop up over time because its not possible for devs to find them all during internal design and testing. There is no such thing as outliers not existing they will always exist and via popping up and vanishing as changes come in the future. I have yet to play a game where something if not multiple things were not inherently broken at any given time.
> >
> > In some cases Outliers are so extreme that short term action is required to remove them or fix them. These would be the "niche" cases i spoke of. Now one thing i will say is that i dont always agree with anets methods of fixing a solution for the short term and then leaving it that way for a long period of time after which its seen as "fine or ok" be it something thats heavily used or not.
> > >
> > > In the end decisions based on metrics would fail eitherway , I stand corrected but my points mostly remain , the devs do tend to nerf things for the sake of nerfing while not fixing any problem, taking the ranger as an example here : they keep nerfing the most used pets but **the other pets simply can't reach the target because of bad coded AI and pathing issues on top of lack of raw stats**
> >
> > Nerfs happen. To everyone i don't think they nerf something just for the sake of nerfing it i would like to think in most cases there is always a reason for it even if they don't communicate or properly communicate that reason. I agree with you that some ranger pets are bad but most pets with beast mastery will reach their targets just fine. Even if we go on on your idea thta the pets cant reach their targets would the data suggest that the pets or bad or that player mobility is just too good? Do you make the pets even faster to compensate this or do you just cut everyones mobility by perhaps increasing how conditions like cripple and chill work against mobility?
> >
> > >
> > > In this instance the devs have listened only to the feedback on the forum asking for nerfs apparently confirmed by metrics...which funny enough on the other of the coin tell us what is not being used and the devs should ask themselves...why
> >
> > In some case exceptions changes need to be made more harshly. Depending on the topic and whats involved yes nerfs are handed out after complaints are issued. In alot of these cases though there is something wrong that should be changed. How quick or how much that thing changed depended upon what game mode it was breaking and then there is the limitation of how much you can change it with all game modes being tied together. Which as i said landed us in this whole mess. Even if they had split pve completely from pvp and wvw years ago people would still complain about major issues that became imbalanced. The biggest difference would be the wider range of options anet would have had to tackle the issues which could have saved some professions from becoming dead in some game modes to this very day.
> >
> > This is the first time im mostly looking forward to nerfs in pvp and wvw because as he said the general direction is down. IT was a nice refreshing reminder that not always is the case that the weak stuff needs to be moved up some times the top end things can be moved down to make the unused tools usable again. Everyone talks about power creep in this game and its nice to see that they might be trying to for once de-power creep the game for a change.
> >
> > There will likely be more even more imbalance for some professions before reaching better balanced state for everyone unfortunately as only so much every goes into any balance patch.
>
> People don't really get super pissed at nerfs, most know that buff/nerfs are a cycle in every game instead people get pissed when **the profession playstyle** get removed enitrely, because they remove the very reason they picked that class. For example if you nerf warrior ability to stick to melee fight better than any other classes..you'll will anger many players who picked warrior for that reason alone abd **they're right to be angry**, players tend to spend money and time on a character, a dev cannot just drop a balance bomb and delete all of that like it never existed.
This is a double edged sword thought. What about someone who plays the profession who needs to keep away and over time warrior gets several buffs which allows them to stick and disregard the avoidance tools. Then couldnt you say people have a right to be angry in that case as well. Its not always the side that gets nerfed some times its the side that gets buffed that counters the opposite play style which could also involve players who have spent money and time on a character. As you said a balance bomb. goes both ways. Some times its not just the class getting nerf its other classes getting buffed while some classes dont change at all.
>
> Another example that hit closer to home for me is **ranger longbow** recent nerfs, by all means I advocate for dmg nerfs for the sake of balance but....the devs cannot go and follow the outcry on forum asking for the "complete" removal of dmg from longbow because the class is supposed to be a ranged DPS whether people like it or not, as I expect people on a thief to backstab me for god knows how much or get cleaved to death by a warrior who I have left too close...people should expect to be sniped to oblivion by a ranger or get chewed on by a pet.
I mean this is a ok example but i dont think anyone argued that the complete removal of damage from longbow should be a thing. Maybe it would be more appropriate to ask that the damage be shifted off the autos to the skills which are key things you generally want to avoid more than auto attacks. Of course the removal its damage should not be a thing thats just understandable anyone who says that is just not someone that should be taken with even a grain of salt.
>
> Apply balance nerfs where necessary..but don't destroy entire class concepts for the sake of pleasing the angy mob and that's what I call "nerf for the sake of nerfing"
^ as i said i think this rarely happens im not sure ive ever seen it happen. Not every change anet has made that ruined a class was because someone said "nerf something" in most cases if someone is saying something should really be nerfed within good reason it means something about that is over-performing in some cases it is damage.
This is why they seem to want to tone everything down overall which is good. Most professions and specs have way too much of alot of things right now. This applies to everyone in some form or fashion some more than others. Alot of this imbalance comes from ties to pve where things could not be nerfed down or buffed in one mode or another. I think people thinking their professions getting nerfed for the sake of nerfing is silly. No it happens for a reason in most cases and the player of that profession should know exactly what it is assuming they play more than one profession in pvp or wvw.
-
Just more elite skills in general that instantly finish downed foes.
A skill that can res a fully defeated player, Maybe even as a ghost/spirit for a short time
Kit transforms similar to Holo across a few different professions which for short times give them access to totally new weapons on land spears, hand to hand, etc.
-
> @"Dadnir.5038" said:
> I'd rather see _dhuumfire_ removed and replaced by a trait that add 3-4 second bleed on hit on weapons and shroud skills that naturally grant life force (without the help of a trait). Thus, affecting _Necrotic stab, necrotic bite, feast of corruption, ghastly claw, necrotic grasp, locust swarm, soul grasp, life transfer, all 3 GS auto attacks, death spiral, grasping darkness, Life reap and harroing wave._
>
> After all, packing burn on shroud#1 use already proved to be a bad idea.
Nah no more bleeds bleed is boring its already the main condition focus of necormancer and its so slow ramping compared other conditions.
Necro actually needs more conditions than just bleed that can help them ramp faster which is what the burning is suppose to do in short burst. Lets not ruin another thematic trait by just making it bleed like they did with deathly chill (which in pvp and wvw should return to its former mechanic now that the modes are being split)
I also dont think its a good idea to have multiple on hit/crit bleed traits stacking with one another in 2 different trait-lines.
The issue with the trait overall is that
With core the stack application for a grandmaster is too low or the base duration is too short either make it 2 stacks pre shot or up the base duration to double what it is now.
With condi reaper its base attacking speed is too slow and the base kit speed needs to be updated slightly in general leave the trait as it is now on reaper with no cd.
With socurge leave the trait as it is now with the icd.
With core its too weak in general
With reaper, reapers autos are too weak in terms of base attack speed.
With scourge well you know how scourge is
-
> @"killfil.3472" said:
> My idea ; make dhuumfire's effect unique depending on your specialization.
> Core ; applies 2 stacks per hit, 4 seconds.
> Reaper ; 1 stack per hit, 3 seconds.
> Scourge ; 1 stack per hit, 4 seconds.
^ this is really what should be done to it and it would be perfectly fine across the board
-
> @"Anchoku.8142" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > With splits from pve and pvp/wvw
> > Scourge barrier traits should be improved in pve only heck barrier in itself in pve only should be improved.
> > Make barrier last considerably longer or until damage removes it while in combat in pve only. That alone would make support scourge very very VERY strong in terms of support. Support does not always have to be boons and raw healing. I think the current constraints on barrier only exists from the fact that all modes were tied together. Now is the change to make Scourge barrier application in pve only very viable in terms of supportive strength.
> >
>
> The dev's said they would roll barrier out to more professions but we both know applying barriers from multiple sources makes content face-rollingly easy. For that reason, I think Scourge barriers may actually be nerfed harder in the future as more professions are allowed to bring it.
Thats all well in fine but still there should be a class thats better at supplying barrier to groups of people just because others get barrier does not mean they will get barrier share.
Scourge is a hot mess and the mess could be some what fixed making it into a real support imo.
>
> Consider the (de)-evolution of Druid healing and boon generation over time. Scourge is, and will be, the main barrier-slave but Arenanet will probably make it so that if a group needs barrier because of excessive kitten, a group or squad can reconfigure other professions to get it without requiring a Scourge.
Even so i still think now is a good time to make scourge a real support spec instead of this damage spec with minor support that bandaids in a weird way over blood magic.
I would say if not fore firebrands druids would probably be fine with a few QoL buffs. Tempest support is nice but it too only does so much. Firebrand over performs in pve though.
-
> @"Koen.1327" said:
> Did you guys even watch the monthly vids?
> You have to put the amount of evades in the right context, no class can put enough pressure for the thief to run out of evade frames so it is indeed the whole game long.
>
>
There is really only one class in general that shuts that play style down and its not commonly used.
Tempest or base ele with auras can shutdown evade dd staff thief quite easily using tools like shocking aura even more so with air magic using traits like bolt to the heart etc.
That said thats only 1 class and elite that has a higher chance to counter-play it and its still on the thief to choose if they want to slap the aura covered ele. Not on the ele landing a precise stun.
-
> @"Jekkt.6045" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > No one cares if you get the power to 1v1 people care if they don't ever have a proper turn to fight you back though.
>
> That's exactly what the bug fix will achieve tho. both staff 5 and 3 have an aftercast that can be punished (without the jump bug). Yet, anet is willing to overnerf a build just to "make sure it doesn't get played in the next mAT" with plans to nerf the traits even more in a later patch, and maybe revert the ini change on staff 3.
Yes i dont agree with the point cost increase there was no reason for that. I think bug fixing it would have done enough and adjustment can be made after the fact if its still too much down the line.
I think most people dont agree that the cost of the skill should have increased
-
With splits from pve and pvp/wvw
Scourge barrier traits should be improved in pve only heck barrier in itself in pve only should be improved.
Make barrier last considerably longer or until damage removes it while in combat in pve only. That alone would make support scourge very very VERY strong in terms of support. Support does not always have to be boons and raw healing. I think the current constraints on barrier only exists from the fact that all modes were tied together. Now is the change to make Scourge barrier application in pve only very viable in terms of supportive strength.
-
I think first of all
Well of power should not have a cast time period that often leads you using it as a break stun but should you need to dodge immediately the skill gets interrupted after breaking the stun while not dropping the well. This is just QoL polish.
As for the stab on every pulse i cant say im a fan of the idea.
Can we just get a reduced cd on well of darkness and have the blinds pulse faster like with thief's new smoke ring?
Can we have a well that we can stand in that lets us breath properly that can actually be a legit annoyance to stand in should some one choose to ignorantly do so.
Would also be good for safe stomping players
I personally would never use well of power to safe stomp someone even if it had that effect of pulsing stab. Thats much better used in my opinion so that you wouldnt be stunned and killed yourself or chain stunned to death not something i would save just to safe stomp
-
I think shroud was only meant to be a partial defense not the whole thing which is fine. buuuttttt
The bigger problem comes with the choices anet made pre HoT and going forward after the fact. Before HoT necromancer excelled at keep away if you played it right and hindering its foes down with conditions as its main line of defense. To go into a bit more detail see the below.
**Fear** The main "get off me / you are exposed" tool in necromancers kit it shuts down defense and offense at the same time and similarly replaces the necromancers need for things like Daze's and hard Stuns. The only real issue with this condition is that most applications are base line very short and have extremely high cooldowns. The tipping point was over time anet added additional mechanics to the game like the resistance boon which gives the Fear condition as a cc the most counters in the game as far as a cc goes.
**Weakness** to reduce enemy damage and limit their evades, This condition to this day is still kind of ok but overall its control to negate critical hit damage is still based on RNG in other words it works great some times and other times it does not work at all. I would like to see this updated to be less rng reliant.
**Blind** This is necromancers best and pretty much only true damage avoidance tool. Sadly necromancer lacks great access to this. Both core skills from off hand dagger and well of darkness are outdated. While you do get a bit more of it if you take reaper Ideally blind is only as powerful as the number of fury to blind converts you can make in a given combat situation. In other words most people get themselves blinded by necromancers not the necromancers raw skills applying the blind in most builds.
**Cripple** to slow foes down its ok but not great by any means.
**Chill** to slow foes down and limit how often they can use their skills allowing the necromancer more time to take action against them. This condition already struggles to stick to a target unless you really really hard core invest into it making it roughly low impact in todays standards unless you happen to be a necromancer or an ele.
The two above conditions were down graded considerably which tanked necromancers sustain with them. That said the long term of how this would lay out could not have been seen back then as everyone did way less damage overall.
Back before HoT there was a patch that changed these two conditions which prevented them from effecting movement based skills that were often use to close the gap between you and your target that many classes now have access too.
Chill and Cripple use to be viable keep away tools in pvp before this and once this was changed they became considerably less effective as people under the effects of these conditions can simply continue to chase you down through the use of weapon skills practically ignoring them.
Moving on overall between the addition of bonus clears, mobility skills, resistance, and other various things necromancers main defenses which are these conditions have become less effective over time as the game as evolved.
Conditions like slow would have done wonders for the necromancer with the idea in mind that it wont ever get more evades, mobility, or blocks in the future. Sadly its not something we get much access too and the conversion of quickness into slow is not all that punishing and not really something thats 100% applicable to apply.
Basically conditional defense has become a bit of an unstable defensive too for the necormancer. In some patches its decent in other patches its not very good at all depending on how much condition pressure is in the game overall. When you have classes like mirage and condi thief, support firebrand running around your conditional defense is considerably less effective to the point that most people just look at shroud as the main form of defense.
But hey in the 2019 meta being more offensive is the best defensive measure..... (i still hate that about this meta)
-
> @"rowdy.5107" said:
> > @"Koen.1327" said:
> > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:
> > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:
> > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:
> > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Jekkt.6045" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"foste.3098" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"Killthehealersffs.8940" @"Psycoprophet.8107"
> > > > > > > > > > > staff/staff daredevil is op in the sense that it warps the game around it since only particular builds can deal with it.
> > > > > > > > > > > But i am 100% against nerfing staff to the point of un-play ability, which seams like it will be the case, just because 1 degenerate build poped up and is abusing the on swap trait and sigils to bunker points. Daredevil was never meant to be a bunker but a bruiser, there is a big difference there.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > i don't see the problem with a build being extremely defensive to keep a node. this is what conquest is about. as for thief, evades is just the only way you can do it, but people seem to hate everything they can't hit.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > as for the on swap stuff, you're wrong. caed (i think) once polarized a double s/d build back in the times of dhumfire necro and spirit ranger with the same ini on weapon swap trait. as usual, it got nerfed because people in the history of gw2 have always complained about evades.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > if thief evades and stealth keep getting nerfed, how about giving thief an actual build that doesn't rely on them?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This^ its halarious to me that the community spouts op on any thief build that has a chance at 1v1'ing than turns around and complains about thieves always disengaging during fights and how it's unfair. So according to the community thief shouldn't be able to hold its ground because of the mobility it has but at the same time shouldn't be able to have the mobility to constantly disengage due to not being able to hold it's ground lol its beyond funny. The staff/staff build dps isnt near what most dps builds do like if DA or CS was opted for instead of acro. Most other high deeps builds on other classes do more to. So staff/staff is basically a stall build that uses timed evades to sustain due to EVADES being it's way of sustain and its OP? So a warrior or any classes using their multiple passive and active sustain options while having high bursts is ok but a thief that spams evades cuz it's how it lives is OP? Why is any thief build that can somewhat stand its ground op? And why is it OP if thief has mobility if it doesn't have the ability to hold its ground ie disengage? So is thief supposed to be weak 1v1 and have low sustain/hp with just ok disengage potential? Sounds like a viable class to me lol. I hope I'm wrong but I can see the thief class as a whole being basically erased by these new devs with the help of the vocal gw2 community that has little care to the long term health of the game and only want their preferred classes to be in great spots while being barely contested by others, been this way for a long time now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So you want to be necormancer with high mobility in a nutshell?
> > > > > > > > The issue is not that it can 1v1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The issue is that while its 1v1'ing its not very subjective to any kind of retaliation other than on hit procs such as retaliation and auras both of which are extremely rare among the professions. Retaliations being limited to mostly guardian and auras like shocking aura being limited to only tempest and base ele for the most part.
> > > > > > > > People dont mind you having lots of evades or a modest amount of stealth what people do mind is not having enough common tools spread throughout the game to combat it. Literally nothing except shocking aura stops that style of play for any decent amount of time and only should the thief choose to strike the aura buffed target.
> > > > > > > > If a build does not allow for others to retaliate reasonably during a moment of down time then that build needs to be adjusted its simple.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No one cares if you get the power to 1v1 people care if they don't ever have a proper turn to fight you back though.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My issue is that when a thief build is buffed into a spot where its somewhat a viable 1v1 build without relying on one shot cheap mechanics its deemed OP because it constantly evades. How else would it sustain long enough in the fight if evades are its main defensive mechanic, of course it would have to evade enough to sustain itself in a fight to win it.
> > > > > > I wouldnt really say staff was buffed though that staff bug has been there for a long time and people just didnt abuse it very bluntly. Its not until it was heavily abused to chain evades for long periods did it become a problem.
> > > > > > I cant recall any buffs to staff or daredevil that made a super significant change to make it 1v1 viable. As far as i know its just as viable as its always been. Lastly its we have to remember the game is not only balanced around 1v1. I even forget this from time to time myself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Daredevil will still have plenty of evades to sustain itself for an extended period of time. Will you be able to do it for extremely long periods of time without the staff 3 jump fix? No. Will you have bigger gaps between your evades? Yes. Overall not that much is changing staff dodge will still be a viable build but it wont be as 1 sided as it is now.
> > > > > > Like i said if there were more tools that could counter such an evasive style of play across the game in general no one would likely minded it. But evasive play styles are a big topic right now considering
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > So if a thieves evades are to op because they can allow the thief to stay in the fight long enough(doesn't have passive sustain/hp or invulnerability) than how will a thief sustain itself in the fight long enough to win? They can't have a burst buff to shorten ttk so they wouldnt need sustain cuz the community will cry, they already cry about them disengaging all the time due to low sustain so.... and now being g able to evade long enough to sustain the fight is OP lmao it's seriously halarious. Like I said can't wait to see where thief's at in a yr. Not being g able to combat it is BS as I'm not a amazing player myself yet I've had zero issues taking down staff thieves in every rank game I've played. There was a few that took a while to down so I left them but they weren't a big threat to me yet I can face half the other classes that take a while to down as well but can burst u in secs with far more deeps like warrior,holo,slb etc and on top the DD has one burst rotation so it's easy to know what its gonna do,other classes have many but because it's a thief build when community gets all in arms.
> > > > > > > Good stuff!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why do you assume the evades should last you until **"you win"** that in itself is not a healthy way of thinking how the evades should be balanced.
> > > > > > The evades should last you long enough to give you a chance to win with the tools you have at hand (your weapon skills combined with your utilities and mind tactics). The evades should not last you in-defiantly until you do win just because if i fight you long enough i should win.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ranger gs auto had an evade tied to its final strike and people would intentionally try to strike nothing with it so to proc the evade multiple times (2-3 times in a row) which was surely not the intentional use of the skill originally, it was fixed to not reward abusive un intentional behavior. I dont see why fixing the jump +3 on dd staff should not get the same treatment obviously the skill was never intended to be used like that. and using it in such away makes it far more powerful of a tool than what it really was designed to be.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree some of these other classes have too much damage and or too much defense to go along with that damage and hopefully they will be getting the shorter end of the stick than thief when the nerfs start hitting.
> > > > >
> > > > > But they don't. Pls don't come to me with the infinite dodge hyperbole. Might as well say thief has infinite ini and endurance which it most defenitly doesn't. They cannot evade for ever for one and second of all if evading is their only real sustain method why shouldn't they be able to long enough to have a chance at winning a fight?
> > > >
> > > > You know what i mean. ITs not literally infinite but its enough to be considered such if you last for 2-3 minutes on dodges then no that should not be a thing lastly.
> > > > This should mostly be a bug fix if your build hinges on a bug or unintentional use of a skill then thats not a good thing for your class or for anyone else.
> > > > I wont go back and forth with you over and over again.
> > > > If you think the amount of evade access is across the dodges, endurance restoration traits and skills, and weapon skills then i dont know what to tell you. ive seen thieves and 1v1 people and win with far less than what the staff / dodge build offers so lets not even go there.
> > > >
> > > > Once again its also about the fact that that build with that bug has very limited counter-play. To counter something you need to be able to combat it. You cant effectively combat someone who is just dodging for the majority of a fight. Similarly You cannot combat someone who is invisible for the majority of a fight. When i say majority of a fight i 0mean 75% or more of the fights total time. With evades (which also do damage) specifically, because there are no un-dodgeable damage mechanics in pvp expect people to call out something should it get out of hand.
> > >
> > > U do realize with full ini supplemented with prepardness u can use st3 like 3 times than swap to get another 3 ini and by than u wait a sec to have enough for a fourth. That's all ur global resource gone for all skills. So a thief monkey bouncing using ini on vault is gonna be able to consistantly use the st3 jump bug only so often . It's not like u cam just sit and spam vault and st3 continually with some bounds in between for infinite evade. I'm gonna low ball peeps claims here and challenge anyone to post a vid of a staff/staff DD evading for 1 minute real time continually. I'd be interested in seeing it.
> >
> > Just watch monthly vids and you see staff thieves evading the entire game long not just 1 minute
>
> Every staff video ive seen, Staff thief gets squished after he uses up all his Ini and he fails to escape. Just like literally every other thief... Nothing different there.
Well thats what happens when you use up all your defense being offensive. Same thing happens with condi thief should you happen to catch them after they spam evade around you should the conditions not kill you.
But it really depends on the build and knowing how to balance endurance restoration with dodges and ini.
That said there is no excuse for skill abuse to this level. The skill abuse was fine when it was rare to see it used but once it gets public and everyone under the sun starts using it abuse will not be tolerated. Thief is not the first class to fall victim to this.
-
Loaded question makes this whole thread kind of invalid. It feels more like a statement rather than asking a realistic question.
Then again like some other people said
I also dont play wow (not that i ever liked it much to start with) i surely dont now lol.
I also dont play eso very much these days either
Overall anet should include a way to mark a preferred traits/ utilities tabs for pvp and wvw that auto swaps when you enter those modes. A short term fix is using account storage to remember you main pvp and wvw setups but then again being limited to 6 free slots might be ok if you are someone who only plays 1 or 2 classes in all 3 game modes but you still need to remember to swap each time.
Overall thought from my experience the system is technically an improvement i cant say it made the overall quality worse for me. ITs just change... most people myself included dont like change and it takes us time to get use to it.
Potential Future Balance Changes - PvP
in Player vs. Player
Posted
> @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > @"SeikeNz.3526" said:
> > > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:
> > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:
> > > > > > > > > You can kite pets. Rock Gazelle hurts but I don't think ranger is as egregious as you're claiming now, especially with the unblockable synergy soulbeast had being trimmed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have to say i dont agree with you here which is strange.
> > > > > > > > Pets can be kited only if the ranger does not run beast mastery which most do run.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Otherwise the pet has far-greater mobility passively than you do as a player in combat let alone ones that have dashes, leaps, blinks, etc There is no realistic kiting them at general in combat speeds.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The only way you avoid pets generally is if you have constant access to superspeed or stealth which breaks their targeting causing them to run back to the pet owner or to another target till you re appear this might be enough of a gap to make pets seem avoidable. But generally on most professions that cannot stealth often there is no kiting the pet. The pet is going to get you how much it gets you depends on the situation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The pets are viable mostly at point blank range even with beastmastery traited because 80% of pet attacks are 1s+ cast time and with stop animation , the more skilled the opponents the harder to land any pet attack as you need to find gaps in the enemy defensive rotations and even if manage that..the rock gazelle is the only one that can deal huge power burst due to a bug when it happens...other pets can deal as much dmg as an AA from a warrior or thief..which is still good in my opinion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The main reason why rangers are forced to get beastmastery is because Anet (apologetically) said that increasing attck/speed of core pets would cause problems with the same models used in the core game hence why HoT/PoF pets are better overall.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Pets are the ranger mechanic and they're part of the dmg not a separate entity like people want to believe, without the pets the overall dmg of rangers drop by a lot...almost by 70% , outside couple heavy hitting skills ( maul and rapid fire ) the DPS of ranger is rather lacklustre ; considering the fact that PvP offers a more controlled DPS environment, a PvE benchmark can be used more effectively to demonstrate what I am saying.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > My only gripe about ranger pets is that attempting to kill the pet is not a viable strategy to reduce the rangers effectiveness (currently). The pets that are not the birds are generally as tanky as another player and can be swapped too easily on demand or revived via soul beast fusion with no punishment. In pvp or wvw if you are under attack by a ranger killing the pet should be a viable option to reducing the rangers effectiveness. But you dont really have that choice so you have to ignore the pet and just avoid its key skills for the most part.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > P.S I don't justify bugged attacks like rock gazelle and with that said I believe that tanky pets should offer support option for the player and only rock gazelle remains outside the spectrum and possibly bristleback, but I do expect squishy pets, that die in a couple aoe , to deal as much dmg as other profession auto-attacks in the 1-2k range ..anything less would be completely unreasonable
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any pet that can perform a Disabling attack even more so attacks that are not commanded by the ranger do need to be made more visible imo. Some pets have these kind of things others dont.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd love to see more DPS oriented pets like bird/felines where they're squishy but do hit hard or utility pets like bears/moa and some canine that do far less dmg but arguably ( need some buffs here ) offer more support utility . As I have explained pets are the ranger mechanic and asking to disable another profession mechanic for a limited amount of time it's not really an option..unless you allow ranger to effectively stop mesmers from casting clones for 60s or prevent a thief from restealthing or stopping a warrior from gaining adrenaline.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can understand people asking to remove tanky pets with DPS as that should not be allowed but asking to easily kill pets and leave rangers helpless for 20s+ it's not really an argument, it sounds more like a bad joke than a good idea
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > well people kill mesmer clones in one hit and they can't shatter, mesmer can only resummon it easy if they trait for it, why rangers should be different and pets can't die having 40k hp? rangers have a backup pet already and they should put a cd of 60s after the pet dies to ress.
> > > >
> > > > today i was playing pvp and i killed the ranger and he left me with 20% of my life, i was trying to finish him and the pet was stunning me while the ranger was downed, the pet killed me then the pet ressed him because my class don't have a stun while downed, but he could only do that because in the middle of the fight i was not able to kill the pet because he would ress just be changing it, tell me how is that fair?
> > >
> > > 1) no pet has 40k HP
> > This is true but they have enough where in most cases the ranger can swap it out the moment they see someone attempting to kill it or fuse with it which completely invalidates the idea of even attempting to do so.
> > > 2) there is already a 60s CD for dead pets
> > Not when used with soul beast which is an odd ball factor
> > > 3) comparing pets to clones is absurd...maybe they should add a 60s CD for each clone destroyed also
> > I do agree with this though pets should not be compared to clones. Cones have a wider number of effects they can be used for on command of the caster where as pets are pretty standard from the moment you see it you know mostly what it can potentially do even if you cant always read when it will do it. That said pets are in my personal opinion too tanky in general.
> > The birds are fine as far as damage goes and they are super squish
> > The felines some of which are ok i think they are just under used in general though
> > Bears are not tanky enough to draw peoples attention out side of soulbeast for damage immunities
> > Smokescale despite it supposedly being equivalent to a bear in terms of stats has far more damage due to its skill kit and offers much more utility if not too much utility to rangers in general with they damage they have. Its why the pet is so over used almost every ranger build uses it.
> > Wolves/canines are a nice mix but need more tells on their non command cc attacks
> > Pigs are good idea of a utility type pet that come with big risk for the reward. (as anyone can pick up your plasma if you are careless)
> > The deer is a bullet bil that needs to be removed from the game. LOL
> >
> >
>
> It's very easy for thieves/mesmer/revs and generally any class with high evasion to completely kite the pet in the vast majority of cases, you keep forgetting what I have stated before about buffing pet movement speed, the **devs cannot do it because it would affect the core game and reason why HoT pets are more resilient**....there was an old thread in the ranger forum where the devs acknowledge the fact that path issue is a critical issue , rangers have been waiting for fix on pets since launch..if anything you should expect buffs to core pets as they're in shamble
But beast mastery does exactly this through a trait. The beast mastery line improves all ranger pets base movement speed (unless you mean attacking speed) which swiftness can be stacked ontop of. Ive watched pets move around with basically perma super speed the only thing that kites them is something that teleports a ton or has stealth which all the things you listed have plentiful access too.
>
> Smokescale has seen its damage nerfed by well over 70% already...really the thing does a total of 2k dmg when you count all the hits on a medium armor target
Its damage is still pretty solid considering it has a shdowstepping attack and the smoke aoe which is massive utility to the ranger overall smoke scale is technically meta or too good it has been for a long while now. Im not saying it should be nerfed im just saying it does ALOT more than most pets even most of the new PoF pets are not equal in terms to it. I suppose if you count the buggy deer.
>
> They should just move the dmg from pets to ranger and change pets into utility skills...something the rangers have been requesting for years
With the way the game is right now i dont agree. Ranger dps is already quite high even with just base core ranger as its probably the 3rd best core profession in the game behind guardian and warrior.