Megametzler.5729

> @"Shaogin.2679" said: > The problem is Solo Queue. People think this toxicity exists only in sPvP, but it is actually present in Fractals, Raids, and other instanced PvE content as well. The big difference is, in the PvE game modes we have more control over who we group with. If someone is being a toxic jerk, we can kick him. We can also just block that player and **choose** to never play in a group with them again. We can also specify **exactly** what kind of group we are and what we are looking for in the LFG. This is why toxicity is less rampant in PvE game modes, because the environment doesn't support it. > > In sPvP however, you are **forced** to play with whatever teammates Anet assigns you, even if they are known trolls that you have blocked. This is the type of environment that these toxic players flourish in. In PvE, these toxic players find it harder and harder to get into groups as more players avoid grouping with them. In sPvP though, there are no consequences for their actions. They can be as toxic as possible, and they know that no matter what they do, they can just queue up for another match and be forced onto someone else's team. > > Now of course some people will say that it is just unfair for players to team up in PvP, they can't find a team, there aren't enough players, whatever. Solo Queue is not the solution to any of these problems though. As for fairness, this is a multiplayer game, that is the main selling point of MMO games. I find it absolutely insane that I cannot play with a team of my friends in an MMO. Also, you **can** find a group, you **choose** not to. Anet finds a group for you no problem every time you queue. We have a great LFG tool just for finding groups. Even with the most difficult content to find groups for, such as raids, players take it a step further and form Discord communities. > > As for the lack of players currently in sPvP (geez I wonder why), the solution still isn't Solo Queue. If you do not have enough players for everyone to make their own teams and play against other teams of equal skill, then how does allowing Anet to make the teams solve anything? If there are a lack of players, then there needs to be different game modes with smaller teams or better incentives/improvements to the game mode to build the player base. But just saying "Screw it, swap to Solo/Duo Queue and put everyone in these crazy messed up toxic teams" is the wrong answer. > > And I just know there is going to be that one person that comes in here talking about how we have Tournaments, yes, we do. And you know what? Tournaments are some of the most fun I have had in sPvP. Hell I remember one night we went in just to get the gold, and actually won the entire Tournament. kitten was exciting as hell. Unfortunately, those Tournaments are only every 6 hours and, depending on your team's skill level, you may only play a couple of matches. Tournaments also don't award Ascended Shards of Glory. So go ahead and get out of here with that weak argument. It is no less toxic in unranked. :wink:

No item farming before being able to enjoy playing. :)

> @"Filip.7463" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"UN Owen.2794" said: > > > raiken and ito wintraded obviously and there is proof from multiple sources that has been sent to anet yet nothing happened and they are recieveing their titles. there is literally not a single person checking reports anymore so feel free to wintrade as much as possible from now on > > > > Just out of curiosity, what is that evidence? > > > > Not doubting you, I played them before and they are nowhere near top 10. But that doesn't count as evidence. > > There are screenshots of their alt accounts in opponent team disconnecting / afking whole match. There are also some screenshots of whispers Have those been sent to Anet support? I mean, nobody reads the forum... > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"UN Owen.2794" said: > > > raiken and ito wintraded obviously and there is proof from multiple sources that has been sent to anet yet nothing happened and they are recieveing their titles. there is literally not a single person checking reports anymore so feel free to wintrade as much as possible from now on > > > > Just out of curiosity, what is that evidence? > > > > Not doubting you, I played them before and they are nowhere near top 10. But that doesn't count as evidence. > > Some things are just obvious. > > For example: > > 1. I live alone with a toddler. > 2. I just filled the cookie jar with cookies before I lay down to take a nap. > 3. I wake up and the cookies are gone out of the cookie jar. > 4. The toddler looks at me and says "Show screen shots or it didn't happen". > 5. And even though I don't have screenshots of the toddler eating the cookies, it's pretty obvious that the toddler ate the cookies. > > A law student, I see.

Something that comes to my mind to have a famous aftercast: dagger air auto attacks. Lightning Whip always had a pretty significant aftercast: After the second hit, it takes a moment until the next skill activates.

Aftercast is something which is part of the attack animation, but cannot be stowed or anything. It basically prevents the next attack to follow up. Ele doesn't really have bad aftercasts though... more like bad animations, at least on sword weaver. :tongue: Haven't played staff in ages, but in the back of my mind, that was horrible... €: Not sure how the precise definition is, but sword fire 2 could be counted as a terribly long aftercast, because it is not stowable.^^

> @"UN Owen.2794" said: > raiken and ito wintraded obviously and there is proof from multiple sources that has been sent to anet yet nothing happened and they are recieveing their titles. there is literally not a single person checking reports anymore so feel free to wintrade as much as possible from now on Just out of curiosity, what is that evidence? Not doubting you, I played them before and they are nowhere near top 10. But that doesn't count as evidence.

> @"UN Owen.2794" said: > raiken and ito wintraded obviously and there is proof from multiple sources that has been sent to anet yet nothing happened and they are recieveing their titles. there is literally not a single person checking reports anymore so feel free to wintrade as much as possible from now on Just out of curiosity, what is that evidence? Not doubting you, I played them before and they are nowhere near top 10. But that doesn't count as evidence.

It makes me very sad that people are so toxic. :disappointed: Yes, one could argue that that is just part of any competitive scene online, but that does not make it any better. First, I do think ranked is better in terms of fair and competitive matches, you should be right there. However, it make one of my suggestions impossible: Play with some friends. Then you can laugh it off when some toxic child throws around some insults, usually just covering own mistakes. Works only in unranked with more than 2 though. Second suggestion is to disable chat. Can be problematic because some players actually try to help and give good advices, but as long as Anet doesn't promote helpful behavior but implements wining poses over dead bodies as the final screen of the game, you can't really expect much respect to come from the playerbase...

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > > > This kind of already exists in the format of ATs, but they really should make ATs more frequent even if they lower the rewards when doing so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my opinion they need to remove ranked mode completely, and start doing monthly seasons for ATs. Then they can tie old ranked rewards to unranked for the pve grinders, and transist the rating/badge system to AT matches per monthly AT season only. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, how would you design such a monthly AT season? Care to elaborate a little further? Only full teamQ, varying compositions, individual rating? Or really just pre-determined teams for a season? > > > > > > > > > > Easiest format and how to explain it would be taking literally the exact ranked rating system we have now in terms of the actual algorithm functions tied to rating gain/loss and badge icons, and then just apply it to ATs. > > > > > > > > > > So a monthly AT season starts ok, everyone gets the soft reset or w/e. Then you make teams with whoever you want each AT and you gain/lose your individual rating based on that just like in ranked. And yes, it would most certainly be full 5 man premade teams ONLY. If it wasn't, it would defeat the entire purpose of this idea, which is to eliminate the monkey business that has ruined ranked mode. > > > > > > > > > > Let everyone else go farm unranked for legend wings imo. > > > > > > > > > > Actual competitive players don't care about rewards beyond winning matches and gaining clout. It just means so much more when it's legit and not full of monkey business. I'd love to see it again in GW2. > > > > > > > > Then why not just go ahead with OP's suggestion and introduce tPvP and get rid of ATs altogether? ATs could be changed to be only the monthly version for the top 4 to 8 teams. > > > > > > > > Just introduce (full) team Q seperate to soloQ. I believe a lot of people still enjoy soloQ, so why get rid of it? I doubt a majority will be willing to participate in full team Q only and step down to unranked. I, for my part, am interested in rating but too casual to schedule my time table to 4 other players in my skill range... > > > > > > More about this ^ > > > > > > The only reason why anyone enjoys solo queue is because they are unaware of how much match manipulation is happening in it. And the reason why that match manipulation happens is clout chasing. (...) > > > > No, I am having fun and I rarely see match manipulation. And if they do in other games, I don't care. My personal rating does not change, I am barely affected. > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > (...) > > > And you don't need to schedule a time for a hard organized group to play in ATs. It is very easy to go into the LFG and find a group last minute that ranges from g3, bottom plat, p2+. The only groups that are difficult to get into are the strongest groups comprised of players who actually could win the MAT. Everyone else can easily get into a group for ATs in the same exact way they form groups for fractals or anything else. It's absolutely no different. This isn't hopeful garbage I'm telling you here. This is coming from someone who runs 2 to 3 ATs a day. It is not difficult to form a 5 man team for ATs. > > > > I rarely have the time to play several games a day, including waiting time for the next round. I am a very casual player, I play a game here, I play a game there. I usually don't make the 120 games necessary to finish the season, but I am still in Plat3, experiencing fun and challenging matches. > > > > I don't want the rating system taken away from me and I don't see a reason why it should. I should not get punished for other people's match manipulation and botting. > > You just aren't noticing how much match manipulation is happening. It may different on EU, but it's horrendous on NA as of season 25 to the point that most people consider season 25 the official end of ranked already. > > The rating system would be taken away from you. It would just shift to ATs where it belongs so no one can be match manipulated by synch queues. Don't get me wrong: I am all for more team queue options. Be it a seperate ranked Q or implementing it in ATs or however. I am also sure there is (some?) match manipulation happening in EU. It doesn't affect me though. My main focus is keeping one queue for trolling and one queue for actual serious - as far as that is possible - gameplay. One queue for short queue times and quick and random fun, doesn't even need a real matchmaker at this point. And one queue for more competitive games, longer queue times. I currently have this and I would like to keep this. And it would not impact you at all, so why get rid of it?

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > This kind of already exists in the format of ATs, but they really should make ATs more frequent even if they lower the rewards when doing so. > > > > > > > > > > In my opinion they need to remove ranked mode completely, and start doing monthly seasons for ATs. Then they can tie old ranked rewards to unranked for the pve grinders, and transist the rating/badge system to AT matches per monthly AT season only. > > > > > > > > Hmmm, how would you design such a monthly AT season? Care to elaborate a little further? Only full teamQ, varying compositions, individual rating? Or really just pre-determined teams for a season? > > > > > > Easiest format and how to explain it would be taking literally the exact ranked rating system we have now in terms of the actual algorithm functions tied to rating gain/loss and badge icons, and then just apply it to ATs. > > > > > > So a monthly AT season starts ok, everyone gets the soft reset or w/e. Then you make teams with whoever you want each AT and you gain/lose your individual rating based on that just like in ranked. And yes, it would most certainly be full 5 man premade teams ONLY. If it wasn't, it would defeat the entire purpose of this idea, which is to eliminate the monkey business that has ruined ranked mode. > > > > > > Let everyone else go farm unranked for legend wings imo. > > > > > > Actual competitive players don't care about rewards beyond winning matches and gaining clout. It just means so much more when it's legit and not full of monkey business. I'd love to see it again in GW2. > > > > Then why not just go ahead with OP's suggestion and introduce tPvP and get rid of ATs altogether? ATs could be changed to be only the monthly version for the top 4 to 8 teams. > > > > Just introduce (full) team Q seperate to soloQ. I believe a lot of people still enjoy soloQ, so why get rid of it? I doubt a majority will be willing to participate in full team Q only and step down to unranked. I, for my part, am interested in rating but too casual to schedule my time table to 4 other players in my skill range... > > More about this ^ > > The only reason why anyone enjoys solo queue is because they are unaware of how much match manipulation is happening in it. And the reason why that match manipulation happens is clout chasing. (...) No, I am having fun and I rarely see match manipulation. And if they do in other games, I don't care. My personal rating does not change, I am barely affected. > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > (...) > And you don't need to schedule a time for a hard organized group to play in ATs. It is very easy to go into the LFG and find a group last minute that ranges from g3, bottom plat, p2+. The only groups that are difficult to get into are the strongest groups comprised of players who actually could win the MAT. Everyone else can easily get into a group for ATs in the same exact way they form groups for fractals or anything else. It's absolutely no different. This isn't hopeful garbage I'm telling you here. This is coming from someone who runs 2 to 3 ATs a day. It is not difficult to form a 5 man team for ATs. I rarely have the time to play several games a day, including waiting time for the next round. I am a very casual player, I play a game here, I play a game there. I usually don't make the 120 games necessary to finish the season, but I am still in Plat3, experiencing fun and challenging matches. I don't want the rating system taken away from me and I don't see a reason why it should. I should not get punished for other people's match manipulation and botting.

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > (...) So you want to keep the current system of ATs with the ratings of ranked, get rid of ranked altogether and just shuffle the rest of the players into unranked? I fear ATs as a system are way too half-baked to rely on them so much. And I fear too many people would be very irritated that one of their game modes (one for trolling, one for more serious play) gets deleted. We just need a more regular option to teamQ. Swiss improved the system, but... it is still far from good.

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > This kind of already exists in the format of ATs, but they really should make ATs more frequent even if they lower the rewards when doing so. > > > > > > In my opinion they need to remove ranked mode completely, and start doing monthly seasons for ATs. Then they can tie old ranked rewards to unranked for the pve grinders, and transist the rating/badge system to AT matches per monthly AT season only. > > > > Hmmm, how would you design such a monthly AT season? Care to elaborate a little further? Only full teamQ, varying compositions, individual rating? Or really just pre-determined teams for a season? > > Easiest format and how to explain it would be taking literally the exact ranked rating system we have now in terms of the actual algorithm functions tied to rating gain/loss and badge icons, and then just apply it to ATs. > > So a monthly AT season starts ok, everyone gets the soft reset or w/e. Then you make teams with whoever you want each AT and you gain/lose your individual rating based on that just like in ranked. And yes, it would most certainly be full 5 man premade teams ONLY. If it wasn't, it would defeat the entire purpose of this idea, which is to eliminate the monkey business that has ruined ranked mode. > > Let everyone else go farm unranked for legend wings imo. > > Actual competitive players don't care about rewards beyond winning matches and gaining clout. It just means so much more when it's legit and not full of monkey business. I'd love to see it again in GW2. Then why not just go ahead with OP's suggestion and introduce tPvP and get rid of ATs altogether? ATs could be changed to be only the monthly version for the top 4 to 8 teams. Just introduce (full) team Q seperate to soloQ. I believe a lot of people still enjoy soloQ, so why get rid of it? I doubt a majority will be willing to participate in full team Q only and step down to unranked. I, for my part, am interested in rating but too casual to schedule my time table to 4 other players in my skill range...

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > This kind of already exists in the format of ATs, but they really should make ATs more frequent even if they lower the rewards when doing so. > > In my opinion they need to remove ranked mode completely, and start doing monthly seasons for ATs. Then they can tie old ranked rewards to unranked for the pve grinders, and transist the rating/badge system to AT matches per monthly AT season only. Hmmm, how would you design such a monthly AT season? Care to elaborate a little further? Only full teamQ, varying compositions, individual rating? Or really just pre-determined teams for a season?

For the first time in years, someone seems not to confuse the matchmaker with GLICKO. Makes me kind of happy.

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > > most rangers will agree that kitten decap druid. > > > They should probably nerf ancient seed too because kitten that trait, then they can go ahead and nerf it again and again and THAN they can think about making druid a proper support instead of this pile of smelly cheese. > > > > > > P.S > > > reducing gs KB to 100 might be a buff, but in my personal opinon it just looks super silly, make it 150 or 200 please. > > > > > > PSS > > > srsl kitten decap druid with a stick. Sideways. > > > > Unfounded bias right here. Why there got to be so many haters for none competitive build/class. leave my druids alone! we are few! > > > That is a fake game and you know it. There is 2 (TWO) thieves in that game! Silver tier maximum! Freaking nerf thief!

> @"KrHome.1920" said: > > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > > @"TrollingDemigod.3041" said: > > > > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > > > how is nerfing decap druid, which is hardly even competitive at all, counted as good? they did nothing to dragon hunter which is the most broken class right now > > > > > > Decap builds should be straight deleted, what's the point of the "capture the point" gamemode if you just get "denied", are you guys so scared to actually face your opponents in fight and need a cheese to hold your cookie? > > > Also, stop using "but but but xyz is more broken than abc!" as an argument, it's really annoying. > > > > the more variety of gameplay styles, the richer the game. it's a bunker build where you have to hold out against your enemies for a long time. face them for a long time. not just button spam to delete them. it's a very valid addition to the game's varitey. anyways the adjustments aren't bad. people need to stop complaining about different gameplay options. that's really stupid and annoying. > No it's not. If you care about surviving instead of fighting, then play a survival game. Effective bunkering destroys the mechanic of a capture point based game mode. And if someone wants to kill fast, they should play a shooter. What kind of argument is that? :lol:

> @"Nightcore.5621" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > People: Don't balance for low ranked players! > > Low ranked players: *get discouraged by toxic builds and leave PVP* > > People: Why do we play with siver tier kitten that matchmaker?!?!?!?!? > > > > If you were in unranked, I suggest to hop into ranked. The matchmaker is much less random there, though you might still have some tough games during non-prime time. > > i play only ranked lol. its a clown fiesta most the time people are afk or someone leave i never played anything so bad like this gamemode Long time neglection... :wink:

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > > > > > > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What could it do? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't catch the thief? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The way a guardian beats a thief is by standing on point and waiting for the thief to come close and make the mistake of fighting toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The way a thief beats guardian is to refuse to play that game. > > > > > > > > > > > > u must be be doing something wrong given guard is thiefs hard counter and is usually a favored match up for the guard. Most guards I face even with a shadow shot successful usually immediately return the favor with higj damage burn stacks, usually if ur even close enough to touch a guard with melee ur eating burn etc that delete a teefs hp quick. Thief can clear em sure but is eating more stacks when trying to engage again. They kite u use ur scepter and Jesus beam lol or spirit weapon for high burn stacks. Guards have options vs thief and is actually a favorable fight for the guard, maybe u should practice more. > > > > > > > > > > You've missed the part where I said I was talking about power-guardian. It really helps to read all of the words. > > > > > > > > > > Burn-DH is an entirely different situation. > > > > > > > > > > You're also STILL ignoring that this isn't about which class is favoured in the matchup. This is about which strategy has the best chance of winning for the thief. > > > > > > > > > > Nobody ever said that thief was favoured in this matchup, so why do you keep arguing that point? > > > > > > > > > > I'll say it again, very very slowly. This thread, is not about which matchups does thief win. Not about that. Not. About. That. It is about which strategy gives the thief the highest chance of winning, even if that chance is slim. > > > > > > > > Regardless whether ur playing power guard or not i doubt its as easy as shadow shot and repeat. U are right I missed the power guard part, props are due to u then good sir for not jumping on the fotm burn guard. To that I say carry on. > > > > > > It really is that simple. > > > > > > Guardian defense is based around blocks. > > > > > > You have an unblockable skill. > > > > > > Why would you waste initiative on anything else? > > > > Only the blinding projectile is unblockable, not the damaging hit. > > > > Not arguing with your point though. > > It clears the aegis and gives space for a few 111s for free before ducking back out. > > Guard out-damages thief in the long term, but thief can do more in the first 1s of an engage. Well, it clears Aegis by blocking an attack, so... kind of it's intended? Quick attacks make block less effective by design. Except you are using FC with built in evade of course. Again, not disagreeing with your point, just saying the unblockable part is not as bad as it seems reading the tooltip. Unblockable port and blind is still tough for Guard of course.

People: Don't balance for low ranked players! Low ranked players: *get discouraged by toxic builds and leave PVP* People: Why do we play with siver tier OMFG that matchmaker?!?!?!?!? If you were in unranked, I suggest to hop into ranked. The matchmaker is much less random there, though you might still have some tough games during non-prime time.

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > > > > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > > > > > > > > > > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? > > > > > > > > > > What could it do? > > > > > > > > > > It can't catch the thief? > > > > > > > > > > The way a guardian beats a thief is by standing on point and waiting for the thief to come close and make the mistake of fighting toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > The way a thief beats guardian is to refuse to play that game. > > > > > > > > u must be be doing something wrong given guard is thiefs hard counter and is usually a favored match up for the guard. Most guards I face even with a shadow shot successful usually immediately return the favor with higj damage burn stacks, usually if ur even close enough to touch a guard with melee ur eating burn etc that delete a teefs hp quick. Thief can clear em sure but is eating more stacks when trying to engage again. They kite u use ur scepter and Jesus beam lol or spirit weapon for high burn stacks. Guards have options vs thief and is actually a favorable fight for the guard, maybe u should practice more. > > > > > > You've missed the part where I said I was talking about power-guardian. It really helps to read all of the words. > > > > > > Burn-DH is an entirely different situation. > > > > > > You're also STILL ignoring that this isn't about which class is favoured in the matchup. This is about which strategy has the best chance of winning for the thief. > > > > > > Nobody ever said that thief was favoured in this matchup, so why do you keep arguing that point? > > > > > > I'll say it again, very very slowly. This thread, is not about which matchups does thief win. Not about that. Not. About. That. It is about which strategy gives the thief the highest chance of winning, even if that chance is slim. > > > > Regardless whether ur playing power guard or not i doubt its as easy as shadow shot and repeat. U are right I missed the power guard part, props are due to u then good sir for not jumping on the fotm burn guard. To that I say carry on. > > It really is that simple. > > Guardian defense is based around blocks. > > You have an unblockable skill. > > Why would you waste initiative on anything else? Only the blinding projectile is unblockable, not the damaging hit. Not arguing with your point though.

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > (...) > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. Isn't it even more difficult as burn guard? Because they have almost zero cover condis and thief cleanses single stack with evading?

Against them: Kite and use range. The main bursts have very low range (Primordial Stance - shockwaves coming from the ele - and Pyro Vortex - small flames you absolutely need to step out of). Save a stunbreak for when they attack with Pyro Vortex: It usually follows one of these three CCs: Gale, Gale Strike or Tailored Victory. Watch out for those, they are the main burst windows for fire weavers. Apart from that: Keep disengaging when you have no small cleanses left. The burst might be avoidable, but the various small sources of burning (fire aura, sword 2 etc.) will chip you apart slowly. How to kill them: CC. They have extremely poor stunbreak (usually Twist of Fate on a 75 s CD) and los access to stability (Stone Resonance on a 50 s CD and Lava Skin on... 20ish s CD?). All only one stack, low duration. Then burst. Condi or power is both fine. Wait for them to use water 2, then burst when they switch into air or fire (when in fire, they have had their fire aura proc and can't immediately switch into water or earth for their defenses). It is a little hard to track in the beginning, since they have defenses on the secondary attunements too (earth especially), but you will learn to spot the windows with time. As a weaver: First of all, you will have to get a feeling of when to switch into which attunement. It is tricky and not as straight forward with fire weaver as compared to for example water weaver. Mainly because fire is not only offense, but also your main source of cleanses. Water for healing and evades, some soft CC. Earth for protection and lots of defensive skills. Air for swiftness when kiting and some mobility and support in projectile denial. However, dual skills make it even more complicated: You might want to start your burst in air/earth for Gale Strike, then switch to fire for fire/air and Pyro Vortex. That requires some time to get used to. Try to vary between offense and defense. When facing power builds, jump between fire and earth for high might uptime and damage. When kiting use water or just when expecting big burst skills and avoiding them with water 2. Air is always good when facing rangers and stuff, anything with projectiles. And quick CC of course. For sustain, you often need to prepare for enemy bursts: pre-switch to earth for protection so you can have the invul when switching our of it. Don't switch into fire, when expecting a +1. Precast some dual skills for small barriers, generally try to use those as often as possible, most of them are pretty neat. One more thing: Use combos. Especially jumps. Jumps in fire fields give fire aura, which cleanses. Jumps in your water field heals as much as a blast finisher does. That's what I can think of spontaneously. :wink: Keep at it, it is hard to get into, but I find it very fun and rewarding. At least when you are looking for a bruiser/side noder. For support you need to look elsewhere, for strong +1 builds too. But I just like the style and with some time, you will get the hang of it. :smile:

Just looking at the class in PVP without the bigger picture, it was okay to slightly nerf the sustain of Weaver bunkers. It is not really a good choice, because Stone Resonance was never spammy - it is an active skill with a 50 s CD. They should've addressed the actual spammy things like barrier on dodge, which involves barely any skill or timing. It is also not okay considering other, much more serious offenders remained basically untouched: power Herald and burn DH. Ele has always had its counters, which also remained untouched pretty much. Weaver needs to be strong in duels, because the whole build is extremely slow and easy to kite. Bad suggestions on the forum, poor execution and no consideration of the bigger picture leads to the patch being not really good at all for PVP.

> @"Akilles.4320" said: > The patch was a move in the right direction, much better now. > A nerf overall the duelist builds, so the side node fights can be quicker and get to the teamfight at mid. > And promotes other builds (not strong enough before) to rise up, so we can have more build diversity across the board, that's how it's done, very good job ArenaNet. Power herald barely got adjustments and burn DH basically none at all. However, I agree that the nerfs to sustain are the way to go to enable more build diversity. I disagree with the actual nerfs (for example, weaver stays just as spammy as before. The actual active skills got just weaker). But we all know where this poor suggestion came from.

> @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (...) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On another note: should ANET balance's focus on MAT or high level ranked? I think it might be better to balance based on high level ranked. Because the majority of games are ranked games. And in ranked only duo que is allowed. Uncoordinated games are very different from MAT games. Therefore, the meta on the metabattle might be slightly misguilded. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The majority of games are low ranked games. They should not be excluded either, maybe even considered first. When you kitten off your playerbase, nobody will care about the few good players. Saying something goes rampant in lower ranks does not make a build okay, when the people stop playing there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree about the first part, many things stayed untouched and at the same time, there were some poor decisions included. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, you cannot balance a game based on players do not have some level of knowledge. I am not saying 1800+ but p2 should be fine. MAT is just a different story. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I strongly disagree. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you allow all those toxic newbie-farmers to haress lower ranks nobody should be surprised there is a population problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mean, this game is out for 8 years. Of course experince players are better than newbies. If you focus on balancing on lower tiers then the game will be more kitten, personal skill does not matter, and what matters are class and comp. This bad trend has been in place for a while. This is why, when I play a fresh new accout despite winning 1v1 and 1v2 at far, yet I still lost my second placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This game has good pvp system. And if you balance according to gold1-2 players, then skill does not matter, then more and more ppl will quit. I realy dont understand your logic.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never said **only** balance for lower ranks. I said **include every single rating range**. And ATs, if you like. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you ignore the situation in lower ranks, why would anyone be surprised about low population? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lower ranks means : they dont care or they are new or they dont understand the game, or they are just very bad mechaincally for example, click all abilities by mouse. Tell me how to balance base on these players? This will only make the game worse. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet 90% of the players are in those rating ranges. If you have toxic builds which leads to 50% of those to quit the game, nobody will be happy. People already complain about low population, we all - and Anet first - need to start considering why that is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you mean by toxic builds? I think there will be more toxic builds if balance based on lower rank,. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All those one-shot builds before February like FA weaver and power mesmer. > > > > > > > > All those stealth-condi builds like condi thief or - currently - burn DH (which is strong even in higher brackets, but way less prevalent). > > > > > > > > All those AI builds like MM necros. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Buffing because of lower ranks might be difficult to do, but nerfing needs to be done. Otherwise it would be like doing tax regulations only for the super rich. Surprise - the people are not happy with it. Or, in our case, we have low population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > based on my impression, high players do not play those builds. At least not the majority of them, The majority of them play other builds~ Brun DH should be gone in high rating matches. But trapper condi soulb~~ its also cancer~ > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mostly right (burn DH sees some play up into highest ranks), but those are - or have been - haressing lower ranks and were complained about. :smile: Those builds might not be objectively OP and have their hard counters in higher ranked play, but when they make lower ranked people abandon PVP, nobody should be surprised about the low population situation we are having. > > > > > > > > > > You really cant balance based on golds. Because another important part of pvp is map rotation, and know how to kite around. These has nothing to do with balance. > > > > > > > > You can. And it has. > > > > > > > > You should **consider** (not as your only source!) it for reasons mentioned above. I am not going to repeat myself. Just think about where this low population comes from. > > > > > > .... i am pretty confident that you are wrong, but do not want to waste more time on this. > > > > > > ok..Maybe one last note: > > > > You can. And it has. > > > In which patch does dumping down the game acutally benefitted game? The Thief adjustment of angle to chagne the distance of dagger 2; the nerf on portal etc... These dumping down changes do not help the game. > > > > > > Think about 2-3 years ago. How many low effort high reward builds you see? There is no condi druid, condi thief, trapper DH, flamethrower Scrapper. All these kitten builds emerge after the half done patch. > > > > > > Further dump things down, then there is no incentive to get good, because it does not matter, and the pvp will be truely dead. It's already sad to see p1 p2 games, ppl do not know how to rotate, how to kite, and tunnel vision on mid and close.... > > > > kitten, I can't stop. > > > > 1. it is not about dumbing down the game. > > > > 2. Nerfing toxic builds in low ranks has zero effect on the higher ranked players. Those builds simply don't work there. > > > > 3. We need to stop only regarding the top 5% of the players for balancing. If the other 95% have no fun in PVP, we will keep our population problem. That is a major issue. > > > > 4. Stop the chauvinism. 95% are more important than 5%. If any sports loses its playerbase, it loses all relevance. Why should Anet only cater the top 100 players, when they are the only ones left? Why should they invest any balancing effort into those 100 players, when there are 100.000 in PVE? > > You remove those builds and you'll teach new players that in GW2 you can do well in PvP while facetanking everything . They won't ever feel the need to dodge anything or be aware of particular builds > > > I only get toxic whispers when playing meme oneshot builds in unranked, farming obviously low rated players. That makes me part of the problem, but it shows there is something wrong. We need to encourage new players, not discourage them with stupid builds. When there are 10 threads of low rated players complaining about one build, there is a hundred times more out there who lose interest in PVP because of that build. Do not buff builds that don't work with low skill ceiling, that might make those problematic in higher ratings. But don't keep telling newbies to just "git gut and dodge" when many people have problems with specific builds. And I repeat myself: Do not **only** balance for average skill. But take them into consideration. I know, I know, that would require actual effort and not just listening to a few who basically tell you what to do (often with poor argumentation and insight). But we're talking about theoretical aims here.