Tails.9372

And there are only two changes I wanna see (which don't require a bigger overhaul):

- make Signets of Power the pistol / harpoon gun trait instead of Deadly Aim

- change the activation condition for Signets of Powers bonus effects to "on crit"

But that's not going to happen, not because the proposed changes wouldn't have the desired effect and not because it would be too much work to implement but because A-Net doesn't seem to understand the issues this class is facing and makes changes seemingly only based on usage data which are not reflective of the whole picture (not even close).

The main reason I bother with legendary weapons is the simple fact that they're pretty much one of the only ways to change up projectile and sound animations on my guns. For rifles and pistols especially these animations are more noticeable than the weapons skins themselves and both regular ingame weapon sets and even the gemstore weapons constantly fail to deliver in this regard so legendary it is.

What's with the confusion here? Since when does A-Net balance around how people want to play?

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> I can't find anything in my wardrobe that doesn't have a long coat, glowy bits or shiny metal stuck all over it.

Try the Executioner's Outfit, it doesn't have "glowy bits" or "shiny metal stuck all over it" and it at least doesn't look like as if you're "wearing a dress".

Also, you can reduce "shininess" by wearing a Polysaturating Reverberating Infusion (Gray).

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> Lorewise, it makes no sense for;

> ...

> - Races other than asura to have access to personal golems

Actually according to ingame dialogue the colleges do sell their golems to outside groups.

Also, contrary to what you would expect almost all asuran golems seem to be rather standardized (and the ones the PC can summon fall into that category) with the exception of those which belong to key characters like Schraddel.

It's a balance patch so there is really only one thing to hope for: for your favorite build to not become collateral damage to whatever random thing they're trying to address this time.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> Deadeye is pretty trash open world **unless you're p/p**

Even that has severe issues in multiple situations while only doing ok-ish vs. the things its supposed to excel.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> P/P does ok open world **but is very subpar group dps as you always have 25 might so the self might from unload isn't useful.**

Pretty much this, a way to address this would be to buff the damage of pistol skills by ~30% (that's roughly what you get from 25 might) and remove the might gain from Unload.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> Why are so few weapons useful?

I partly blame the "dual wielding" system for this as it was used in an oversimplified way to create new weapon sets which lead to some severe synergy issues. Core weapons also never really got a "update" to keep them "properly viable" in the face of several waves of power creep.

Another issue is that they don't really seem to collect feedback from the player base on how these issues should be addressed.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> Please consider adjusting some of thiefs weapons in PvE with simple flat % buffs

In some instances that alone would be insufficient, for pistol they would also need to do something like reworking some traits e.g. make Signets of Power the weapon trait of this spec (instead of Deadly Aim) and change the activation condition from "on kill" to "on crit". This would solve some issues which can't be addressed by simply applying some "flat % buffs".

> @"Taril.8619 " said:

> PvE Thief also suffers from incredibly boring rotations

That's highly subjective, I've seen many people say they enjoy the rather simple rotations of P/P and that they find the overall gameplay of this weapons set fun. This seems to be more of an "issue" of personal preference then an actual problem that needs addressing.

That being said some of them could use more utility options.

> @"Nightcore.5621" said:

> Help me understant this

Ok, you see if content has some mechanics that turn it into a drag if other people don't do whatever the content wants them to do properly then players tend to want to avoid getting into these kinds of situations so they put up some requirements to make sure to not get into a situation where it turns into a drag. LIs are just the thing that came to mind for most people so they go with it.

Endless combat tonics and gizmos like the [Prototype Position Rewinder](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Prototype_Position_Rewinder).

I don't have any problems with the story but that's because I'm not really overly demanding in that regard. However the maps just bore me to death, not just since season 5 but pretty much since Thunderhead Peaks. I already had enough of the desert theme after PoF but at least Istan had a decent meta with GH. But everything after Jahai Bluffs just makes me want to play something else with Dragonfall being the worst offender here.

> @"otto.5684" said:

> Not much to be said about strikes. **If you have established systems, do not create a new ones.**

I have to disagree here, there is nothing wrong with creating new systems in order to reach parts of the playerbase the already existing content failed to reach. Issue here is that strikes didn't really do that (nor was that ever their intention).

> @"Goettel.4389" said:

> > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > I can't say anything about SW but the HoT ones are still populated.

> Thanks, are any of the current PoF/LW metas fun (as opposed to just profitable)?

Well that's highly subjective but I do like the GH meta in Istan, to bad this one is pretty much "dead" ever since A-Net decided to nerf the rewards on top of making them daily instead of once per event. I also like the Specimen Chamber in Sandswept Isles, also not that rewarding but you can do it for the map currency and you can usually get it done (issue here is that Sandswept Isles tends to suffer from lag spikes).

But beside that I don't think that any of the other metas are particularly "fun", some of them (like e.g. the one in Dragonfall) are rewarding tho but then again like I said it's subjective.

I can't say anything about SW but the HoT ones are still populated.

> @"babazhook.6805" said:

> > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > @"Hannelore.8153" said:

> > > Add 1sec of Quickness per target hit to the trait, then P/P will maybe be viable again.

> > Issue here is that P/P can already get quickness from other players in group content meaning it wouldn't do anything for you except if you're playing OW but there you already have BQoBK which is usually enough to burst down the average trash mob.

> >

> >

> > > @"Hannelore.8153" said:

> > > Rifle and P/P Deadeyes are a beautiful aesthetic but it just doesn't work under real-world conditions because the damage isn't worth the Initiative.

> > That's why I suggested to make the changes above. It wouldn't really do much for PvE (except for a huge QoL boost) but it should make P/P a decent option for sPvP / WvW. I think the change that would help P/P for PvE the most would be to remove the might gain from unload and to buff the damage of all weapon skills by ~30%.

>

> When they started raising Initiative costs across the board as part of the balancing I suggested it a VERY bad idea. It is not akin to increased cooldowns as those increased cooldowns do not affect all other skills. Thus when INI goes up the given skill either becomes unusable because it just not worth using that INI if all other skills no longer usable , or that one skill becomes the only one used while others shut down.

Yes which is why Signets of Powers effect being crit based would help here as it would change Infiltrator's Signets additional passive effect from "Restore initiative when you kill a foe" to "Restore initiative upon landing a critical hit". This would alleviate the burden Unload puts on other skills while also making Vital Shot regenerating ini faster so that P/P isn't just "screwed" if your opponent manages to avoid your initial assault. This is also the only change they can make which actually addresses one of biggest underlying problems with P/P without having to A: redesign the whole weapon set (which I still think would be the most ideal solution) and B: having to resort to "excessive fine-tuning" which is pretty much safe to assume they're not going to bother with. It also has relatively little impact on other weapon sets and gives value to otherwise unused things so that would be another upside.

> @"babazhook.6805" said:

> If anything if they were worried about the damage out and wanted to cut it back they should have just lowered damage factors and LOWERED Ini costs.

I doubt they are worried about damage, at least I hope that this isn't the case as it would just poorly reflect on them. P/P was never known for having "high damage" within the context of any relevant situation, quite the opposite.

> @"Hannelore.8153" said:

> Add 1sec of Quickness per target hit to the trait, then P/P will maybe be viable again.

Issue here is that P/P can already get quickness from other players in group content meaning it wouldn't do anything for you except if you're playing OW but there you already have BQoBK which is usually enough to burst down the average trash mob.

> @"Hannelore.8153" said:

> Rifle and P/P Deadeyes are a beautiful aesthetic but it just doesn't work under real-world conditions because the damage isn't worth the Initiative.

That's why I suggested to make the changes above. It wouldn't really do much for PvE (except for a huge QoL boost) but it should make P/P a decent option for sPvP / WvW. I think the change that would help P/P for PvE the most would be to remove the might gain from unload and to buff the damage of all weapon skills by ~30%.

TBH at this point I don't even care that much about getting ricochet back anymore. But I don't think that piercing (especially given the fact that it comes with a build in damage nerf) is befitting for a "weapon restricted" trait. IMO they should make Deadly Aim a general trait for ranged attacks and make Signets of Power the pistol / harpoon gun related one while also changing the activation condition from "when you kill a foe" to "upon landing a critical hit". At least that way there would finally be some synergy between the weapon the specialisation and the skills.

TBH I kinda want to have an ascended (T2) and a legendary (T3) version of the runic set (both the armor and the BP). But whatever it's going to be it probably heavily involves doing strike missions.

I don't think that the HP of the Matriarch is the problem here. I'd say it generally boils down to a combination of two things:

1st: the ones fighting it before the zerg arrives fighting a downscaled version which is designed for maps with less participation

and 2nd: the ones fighting it probably "know what they are doing" as in they actually do some decent damage which IMO is the main "issue" here and you can't really address it with scaling either since this would require the game to "know" how "strong" everyone (not just in theory but also in practice) is

And there is really nothing to be done in regards to its HP. Either you balance the meta around "the average player" meaning people with decent damage are going to faceroll it or you balance the meta around what the more "hardcore" part of the playerbase is capable of doing meaning it's going to be almost unplayable if the map is rather empty and no hardcore players are around to "carry the casuals".

IMO legendary weapons should have their own weapon themed skill sets.

It depends, I take pretty much anything as long as I have my fun but I do prefer the content to also have replay value which is something severely lacking from the vast majority of OW maps. Heck I'd even prefer a casual friendly (as in actual casual friendly and not some kind of "stepping stone" to more difficult content) dungeon like system over 5 more "dead" OW maps.

> @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > > The only way to bridge PvE and PvP balance is to have monsters as threatening as players so you need to dodge, block, cleanse, CC, ...

> > That didn't work even in GW1, where mobs used exactly the same skill system as players. The difference between mob AI and player behavious was simply too great, and players ended up being able to operate in ways mobs could never duplicate. As such, skill splits between modes were also a case there.

> >

>

> But trying helps

Unless is doesn't, depending on what you value A-Nets balance through nerfing approach has made several things less fun for many people. A-Net might say stuff like "we increased cooldowns to make the choice of using a skill more meaningful" but all I read here is "were going to make the gameplay slower and duller".

Not to mention the countless times where their "trying" made the whole thing worse because of all the collateral damage it caused.

The fire and ice boss combination in the Specimen Chamber during a lag spike.

When it comes to the beatle I just want a proper racing mode with proper racing tracks, not these improvised OW tracks we have rn.

I agree, in some aspects the fear of "power creep" (whether justified or not) is holding the game back on multiple occasions. One prominent example of this would be the Field Tech Turrets from LW S4E3.

> @"mindcircus.1506" said:

> The dream the developer has in that the player has the same look, feel and effect of any given power regardles where it is used.

In that regard they already failed, one of the main reasons I don't like WvW / sPvP is how their changes affect the gameplay of certain builds compared to their PvE counterparts.

We won't get to play other races except of course as combat tonics (e.g. Kodan) which are generally just reskins of the already existing races (which makes the fact that you can't use mounts while being transformed even more frustrating).

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"nanomidgy.9180" said:

> > Bump this topic. It's been more than 2 years now and still not even an answer.

>

> Bumping threads is against the [forums CoC](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/342/save-forum-moderation-and-infraction-system). Just sayin'

>

> Examples of Content that May Receive a Notice:

>

> Duplicate posts

> Posts that quote removed content

> Necro-posts (comments in an obsolete thread)

> Posts that are off-topic, derailing, "bumps," etc.

Looks like this part of the rule section could use some rework. "duplicate posts" + "neco posts" would technically mean that you wouldn't be allowed to discuss topics at all if they have been discussed before as you would either have to create duplicate threads or "neco posts" in order to do so.

Personally I'd get rid of the "neco posts" rule. Whining about necroposting has always been one of the stupidest complaints I've seen on internet forums as using an already existing thread makes a hell of a lot more sense than spamming the same thread over and over again.