Twilight Tempest.7584

> @"Faux Play.6104" said:

> My understanding is physical limitations are a factor with the OP. Regardless, sticking to the origional comment about nerfs, this is why memser got nerfed, and rightfully so:

> 

>

While you're posting propaganda about builds that haven't existed anytime recently, would you post similar ones for Boonbeast, Protection Holo, Firebrand (for this one, you can even take a present day screen), etc.?

Yeah, a long removed build is totally the reason why "memser [sic] got nerfed" into the ground last week. Totally isn't because of bronze propaganda like your post and everyone who bought into it.

> @"Lazze.9870" said:

> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:

> > How anyone can argue that pre-patch Beastmode wasn't a straight upgrade to core Ranger without a trade-off (permanently giving up something available to core) is beyond me.

>

> It was a straight upgrade to its mechanic, no one in their right mind should disagree with that.

>

> But at the cost of using a relatively mediocre traitline with few good options at the master and grandmaster levels.

This isn't unique to Soulbeast.

> Other elite specs comes with weapons and skills that somtimes defines the meta, the soulbeast dagger never did, and the stances are both hit and miss.

Yeah, some do. But again, Soulbeast isn't alone. Pretty sure shield never became meta defining for Herald. Mirage axe hasn't seen meta use since 2018 thanks to nerfs. Staff Daredevil wasn't meta for much of its life. Just to name a few.

The main reason dagger never saw meta use is probably because condi-Soulbeast was never meta in competitive modes. Dagger does see niche use in certain PvE situations. Pretty much every profession has some "hit or miss" utility sets as well.

None of this means that Soulbeast wasn't a very advantageous upgrade over core Ranger without any complete loss of core abilities the way it is for other elite specs.

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:

> > How anyone can argue that pre-patch Beastmode wasn't a straight upgrade to core Ranger without a trade-off (permanently giving up something available to core) is beyond me.

>

> Because the pet is complete trash that exists in pvp just to deploy CC , plasma, and a smoke field and is the only "class mechanic" that requires you to compensate for rather than leveraging to your benefit.

>

> No thief player or Ele begrudgingly deals with initiative or attument swapping

>

> No mesmer ever considers their clones to be a problem they have to adjust their playstyle for

>

> Your logic is "Ranger was fine and SB made it too good" rather than "Ranger was hobbled with antiquated game design and SB made it functional"

This discussion isn't about core Ranger. It's about whether pre-patch Soulbeast had a legitimate trade off.

One could similarly say "Engineer was hobbled with antiquated game design and Holosmith made it functional." That doesn't mean Holosmith doesn't need a tradeoff.

How anyone can argue that pre-patch Beastmode wasn't a straight upgrade to core Ranger without a trade-off (permanently giving up something available to core) is beyond me.

> @"Shadow.1345" said:

> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:

> > > @"Shadow.1345" said:

> > > Gutting scepter/staff ambush affects PvE.

> > But it doesn't need to be gutted. Damage simply needs to be moved away from clone ambushes (and autos) over to the player's direct attacks and/or shatters.

>

> That's what gutting means.

Does it? Mind linking me a definition of "gut" that means taking something from one place and moving it elsewhere? You know, as opposed to simply removing it?

To use your own response to Bravan above:

> @"Shadow.1345" said:

> Well thank you for ~~that long explanation for~~ your own personal definition of ~~active/passive~~ _"gut"_. It is, however, just your own personal definition. Words do have definitions, though, and if you expect people to not take words at their generally agreed upon definitions and just your own personal definition instead you're going to find trouble communicating your ideas.

‾\_(ツ)_/‾

EDIT: Anyway, Shadow, since you are confident that Mirage is perfectly fine with a 50 endurance cap--a view you are perfectly entitled to--would you be so kind as to demonstrate it by putting together some in-game evidence? If you're onto something that works, while others are just being myopic, more power to you.

> @"Zoser.7245" said:

> > @"LolLookAtMyAP.8394" said:

> > Mesmer voters are misreading the topic. OP doesn't mean abused as in "harassed and attacked" but "exploited for gain". Firebrand, Ranger, and some are even saying Thief are the biggest offenders.

>

> Well., it depends from the point of view that you look at it. **This forum often looks more like a witch hunt than anything else.**

And one class in particular has been the perpetual target of witch hunts, until now. The angry mobs making baseless claims born of fear and ignorance have accused, tried, and burnt it at the stake.

> @"Shadow.1345" said:

> Nerfing conditions nerfs Core, Chrono and Mirage, not just Mirage.

Not if adjustments are focused on ambushes.

> Nerfing or removing IH nerfs power too.

Which is why IH should not be touched, contrary to the popular misguided claim that "IH is the problem." If anything, IH should be made the grandmaster minor trait for normalized balancing of all mirage builds. Either way, the other grandmaster major traits should be replaced with useful alternatives.

> Gutting scepter/staff ambush affects PvE.

But it doesn't need to be gutted. Damage simply needs to be moved away from clone ambushes (and autos) over to the player's direct attacks and/or shatters. Damage is still preserved in both game modes. It is simply applied in a more active, less passive manner. Several people have been proposing this type of change for a very long time to no avail.

> Also with the philosophy of not changing the functionality of skills across modes I think reducing endurance is the best way to fix the problem of Mirage Cloak. IH doesn't have a CD so adding one changes the functionality of the trait.

I must disagree that reducing endurance (in this case, halving the endurance bar) is consistent with the philosophy of not changing the functionality of skills across modes. The two-dodge endurance bar has been the only constant across all builds and game modes since the beginning (except on Daredevil). Dodging is even a hallmark of GW2 versus similar games. To now disrupt that constant--for any class--eight years into the game's life cycle, is probably the most extreme change ever made. By altering such a basic and fundamental aspect of the way this game is played, it surpasses any complete rework of a given spec mechanic, any given e-spec "trade off", etc.

Going from having up to two dodges available at any time in PvE, particularly on a specialization whose design revolves around deriving both its offense and defense from dodging, to having only one in competitive modes, is utterly jarring. It's an absolute upset to the combat rhythm between modes. It is equally problematic to veteran muscle memory as to newcomers who start off in PvE and embark on competitive. It is, frankly, the worst change in the history of this game, as far as I'm concerned.

> @"Odik.4587" said:

> I see guardian as their favorite toy hence why its god tier in every game content, so dont expect hard nerfs :)

Welcome to Guardian Wars 2! :)

Mirages still have too much purple. Purple is so OP.

Also, they have a skill bar.

Firebrand should be Chrono'd. Or Mirage'd. Take your pick.

J/K. Nothing deserves that. Really.

At this point everyone should just lay their Mirages to rest next to Chrono, play them only in PvE if at all, and boycott them entirely in competitive modes (I mean do we have a choice?). Then Anet can ignore this foolish decision with actual usage stats to prove it. Mesmer: the only profession in the game with no viable e-specs in competitive.

> # Mesmer

>

> Mirage

> * We don't know what to do with this specialization so we are removing it from competitive play until further notice, if not indefinitely.

^FTFY. At least that would have been more upfront.

> # Mesmer

>

> Mirage

> * We don't know how to rework this elite spec so we are temporarily removing it from competitive play until further notice if not indefinitely.

FTFY

We've been suggesting alternatives in several threads, including the official Preview and "Update Update" threads inviting feedback, since this abomination of a spec removal was announced. Not a single acknowledgement from the powers that be. We can go through the exercise again here, but honestly, it's like talking to a wall.

At this point everyone should just lay their Mirages to rest and boycott it in competitive modes. Then they can ignore the foolish decision they made with actual stats to prove it, just like they (still) are with Chrono.

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> Just see how it plays out, enough crying over "my class gets hit". Nobody cares, the broad direction is sorely needed and **there will be casualties but it can be tweaked at a later date**.

Chrono, Druid, and Scourge don't inspire much hope.

> @"Lincolnbeard.1735" said:

> > @"Leonidrex.5649" said:

>

> > Axe 3 -> this should more reliably hit, and more reliably teleport after its target. Have the ability at least try to teleport on the same elevation as the target, teleporting at the bottom of the stair as melee weapon sucks, expecially since its random AND evade, so you are forced to use it meaning the wapon WILL screw you over, just a matter of time.

>

> People have complained about this since pof beta, ANerf changed it's "accuracy" a little bit before release. So chances are they've no clue how to make it less clunky and buggy.

Could they just make it like Rev sword 3 that always tracks its target, or would that be broken?

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said:

> Torch 5 -> I dont know what can be done, but the phantasm should be able to land its attack more reliably, currently its a joke.

Make it chase and land like Ranger's Bambi?

You know those one-sided blowout matches most of us hate? Capricorn magnifies any inherent imbalances between teams and punishes the weaker team mercilessly.

It is the only ranked map where the objective cannot be ignored. If you happen to be teamed up with players who are--inexperienced--you can easily be on a team that ignores the bell to its doom.

Even if your team knows not to cede the bell to the other team, the outcome heavily favors team fighters and point controllers (support, bunkers and area-deniers). The battle for the bell can be drawn out and epic, even timing out before there is a victor. Or it can be brutally one-sided if the team comps are a poor match. It isn't fun being on the team without a support Firebrand, that also won't focus the enemy Firebrand so there's even a chance at breaking through the enemy team's boon spam, and preventing signet resurrections. Doubly ridiculous if the enemy team has stacked Firebrands. You can have Capricorn matches where your hapless team simply gives away the bell every time, or a comp is so heavily favored it just steamrolls every bell.

If the outcome of PvP matches were based only on which team could dominate mid-fights, they would all be played on Capricorn. Capricorn, more than any other map, removes all the other win conditions and rotational strategies that exist aside from mid/team-fights, leaving only a single path to victory, that favors only one approach. In solo queue Capricorn, the matchmaker is but a glorified coin flipper.

**TL;DR**: All the frustrations people have with being mostly at the mercy of the nine random strangers the matchmaker assigns them to are intensified in Revenge of the Capricorn because there is only a single win-condition that boils down to being on the team with the better team fight. With fewer options, matches tend to be snowbally, overly decisive, and brutally punishing to the weaker team.

I'm pretty sure population is at an all time low. Even when I queue during prime time lately it's taking noticeably longer than usual. And as already mentioned, queue duration seems to correlate with match quality.

After playing daily for the last several seasons, I'm on the verge of calling it quits myself. The mostly lopsided matches, the crushing loss streaks, the occasional toxic players, and the never-ending cheese meta have taken their toll. :(

Don't worry, OP. You probably won't see many Mirages post patch. So you'll never have to learn to deal with them. Enjoy thief.

The "trade-offs" being introduced are all part of Anet's efforts to retroactively rework elite specs to be alternative (horizontal) options to core specs, rather than improved (vertical) upgrades.

@"bravan.3876", I agree that balance should be targeted towards individual overperforming specs and any overtuned aspects they may have, rather than creating simplistic "trade-offs" for the sake of the goal above, and calling it a day. That's lazy balancing, and there isn't a good track record of it thus far.

You're absolutely right that far too often, we see things altered to become clunky, unfun, or lower skill cap, often without even addressing the underlying issues. I'd nominate Mirage as the biggest proof of this.

I think where they're going wrong is their tendency to tunnel vision the trade-offs agenda towards altering the profession's core mechanic on e-specs--that is, the F skills. This is a very limited approach that may be convenient, but inhibits the granular attention to problem skills and traits that is actually needed.

What's worse, by focusing only on chopping something out of the profession mechanic, they're too often gutting the essence of the spec. Again, see both Mesmer e-specs.

I can only hope that after the dust settles from this mega update, they really hone in on the inevitable outliers, and are willing to make both the right adjustments, and revisit the bad ones.

I've been trying this for the last few days in my regular routine. Based on an FPS counter and my subjective impression, I want to say it has somewhat increased overall average FPS. It seems like I'm seeing higher frame rates more often.

Unfortunately, the lows remain the same according to the counter. In things like map-capped world bosses such as post-reset Tequatl and Ley Line Anomaly, frame rates dip to the same lows they always did. However, I want to say it doesn't feel as choppy as I remember, and as sluggish as the rates themselves would imply. Even during the lowest frame rates, my CPU and GPU usage still hover around 40-45%. I don't recall what they were prior, but I don't think there has been a huge change.

I was hoping this would help with the lows a bit more and maybe make more use of my seemingly underutilized hardware. But there does seem to be some noticeable improvement, and I have yet to encounter issues besides the initial missing shaders on the character portraits on each startup. Keeping it installed for now.

@"bravan.3876"

I think you are confusing "trade-off", as Anet means it according to some of their update explanations, with the concept of "limitations" built into e-spec mechanics.

"Trade-off" as Anet defines it, is permanently sacrificing something from the core spec in exchange for something different in an elite spec.

Whether intended trade-offs are reasonable, or how effective or skilled the respective mechanics are, are separate issues.

* Reducing pet stats on Druid was an intended trade-off, whether or not it was wise.

* Replacing Steal with Swipe was an intended trade-off, whether or not it was wise.

* What they did to Chrono was an intended trade-off, whether or not it was wise.

We can also see Anet's meaning of trade-off in the late-in-life change they made to Revenant. Recognizing that Herald and Renegade completely lacked trade-offs compared to core, they added the F2 skill, Ancient Echo, as an exclusive skill to core Revenant, only available when an elite spec is not taken. Whether Ancient Echo is worth picking the core spec over the elites is debatable, but the relevance is that Anet only considers there to be a trade off if the e-spec completely lacks something available to the core spec.

What these examples all have in common is the complete and permanent lack of something from core in the elite spec.

Clearly, you cannot say the same for current Soulbeast. It simply gains a new mechanic and associated advantages on top of the core spec without permanently giving up anything from it. If Soulbeast wants the core benefit of two swappable pets, it's still available simply by not using the added elite mechanic.

Losing access to pets while merged is a limitation built into the added elite mechanic, the way Heat is a limitation built into Holomode. But neither is inherently a trade-off versus core because core doesn't have access to the elite mechanic in the first place. In short, Soulbeast has what Ranger has in terms of pets, plus more.

To be clear, this "trade-offs" distinction is somewhat academic, and only part of the broader balance discussion.

I always wished I could have experienced sPvP before the powercrept, short TTK, overloaded tool tip, rapid skill spam, high visual clutter era. Like many, I was looking forward to this big shakeup and reduction in global power levels. But I just can't get excited about it or the future of sPvP when the spec I've been loyal to since I started is, without exaggeration, effectively being removed from competitive modes.

It doesn't take encyclopedic game knowledge to realize how ill-advised reducing Mirage to one dodge is. Many excellent points have already been made, by Mirage mains and non-mains alike, as to why this is so, and I will not repeat them.

If ever there was a proposed change that needs to be walked back before it happens, it's this. There have been a number of head-scratchers in the past, and they should definitely be revisited. But making Mirage the only spec in the game with half a standard endurance bar in competitive modes is an entirely different level of WTF. We're talking about a drastic change to the one and only constant across all specs and modes since the beginning (Daredevil notwithstanding): the standard two-dodge endurance bar.

Never mind how antithetical this change is to what Mirage is--its offense, defense, and basic design all revolve around Mirage Cloak, and have been allocated around this fact. Never mind how unplayable Mirage will be in competitive modes for all but the godliest players. How is one even to cycle between PvE and PvP/WvW without finding their basic combat rhythm completely upended? Much balancing effort seems to go into not making skill splits too functionally disparate across modes. What happened here? The difference between a one versus two-dodge endurance bar will be palpable, and absolutely jarring going from PvE to competitive.

There have been countless suggestions as to how to balance Mirage, any number of which would be preferable to this change. From reducing the clone cap to two, to reducing clone auto-attack and ambush damage to virtually zero (and ideally moving that damage to the player's own attacks or to shatters), it baffles me why the most draconian of all possible changes, which is all but certain to backfire if the goal is to encourage active, skillful play, is what we're faced with.

Please. Reconsider this.

@"Azure The Heartless.3261" @"viquing.8254" @"ZDragon.3046"

Just want to acknowledge your nice replies without derailing too much. Apologies if I sounded harsh. I just feel the dedicated Mes community has for the most part been pretty reasonable concerning balance. For reasons unknown, good suggestions have rarely been implemented, in favor of nerfing around the root issues, leaving traitlines in tatters, introducing clunky mechanics, and leaving but a few playable builds. If it happens, this proposed endurance nerf may be the final nail in the coffin for the class of casual 50%+ nerfs. That may be music to some peoples' ears, but I do hope I'm wrong.

> @"ZDragon.3046" said:

> > @"SeikeNz.3526" said:

> > why dont change mirage to "if you pick infinite horizon you have 1 or 2 less clones available? will be better than destroying it with one less dodge

>

> Probably because they want it to have more risk with the reward of a trait that provides both sustain for the clones and improved dps at the same time

> Ideally Infinite horizon would have been better as a minor trait that always procs clones to perform their ambush attacks but does not let them avoid incoming damage so long as the caster is not stunned

>

> That should have been how it designed from the start.

>

> At the moment that trait provides a lot and now players want to come up with ideas to avoid only having 1 dodge yet didnt want other players input months ago and simply always told them to "just get good and learn to dodge ambush attacks"

>

> 3-5 months ago or longer...

> **Other profession Players**

> Nerf IH it does too much, Mirage should not be able to dodge while stunned.

> **Mirage Players**

> No its fine just learn 2 play. We have trade off cause we don't roll anymore we should be allowed to dodge while stunned. while our clones deal damage to you for landing your perfectly timed stun.

>

> Currently as of the notes seen above

> **Mirage Players**

> Just not let us dodge while CC'ed anymore but let us keep the endurance omg! WaHt R u DoInG!

> **Other profession Players**

> (silence)

>

> Like for real though i dont really know what to say anet really wants you to have the top level of skill to use this trait it seems is it fair? Prob not.... but was it fair months ago when everyone was trying to say "this is not fair"... no not really

I think you're letting your grudge against Mirage get the better of you here. You're active enough in game and on the forum to know better.

**"We have trade off cause we don't roll anymore we should be allowed to dodge while stunned."**

I don't know what posts you're reading, but I don't think I've ever seen a "Mirage player" insist that dodging while CC'd remain, let alone is healthy. In fact, quite the opposite. Removing this was probably one of the most common balance suggestions by Mirage mains going back through 2018, and even during pre-PoF feedback.

The "don't roll anymore" point related to the fact that unlike a standard dodge roll, Mirage Cloak doesn't physically move the player our of harm's way, which can be problematic for getting out of AOEs. It was brought up in regard to the debate over MC's extra duration and the fact that Anet originally made it longer than that of the standard roll to compensate for the lack of movement. Mirages lost that battle anyway when MC got nerfed down to standard dodge roll duration, a duration not even long enough to cover casting most of those dreadful ambushes you hate. This point had nothing to do with dodging while CC'd, which basically everyone agreed doesn't belong.

**"just get good and learn to dodge ambush attacks"

"we should be allowed to dodge while stunned. while our clones deal damage to you for landing your perfectly timed stun."**

I imagine there is some deliberate exaggeration here, but please direct me to any posts in the past year+ where Mirage mains said this. If anything, there have been ongoing discussions about the best way to reign in ambush damage and passive play, some of which I think you even partook in.

Like, I know you're knowledgeable enough to see that halving endurance is not the way to go, but that old grudge kicks in and you can't express it without kicking a spec while it's down. Everyone has builds they dislike, but misrepresenting the community behind them is rather low in my opinion.

Double duos still no match for double FBs though :tongue:

Scoreboards from start and end of match:



> @"Crab Fear.1624" said:

> > @"Xentera.4560" said:

> > > @"JETWING.2759" said:

> > > > @"Xentera.4560" said:

> > > > Ranked is unenjoyable, and almost unplayable the way it is. Having 2 players with the same tag using VoiP gives an unfair advantage against any random PUG. Fixing it should not be that hard tbh.

> > > > And yet it still happens way too frequently...

> > > > My question: what needs to happen before this matter is given the priority it deserves?

> > >

> > > You could do the same, invite a friend to play Guild Wars 2 with you and duo queue with him. If you are playing on a Lan House or Cyber Coffee, you can get a way better advantage...

> > > - Invite one or more friend to play Guild Wars 2!

> >

> > That does not change the fact that the vast majority of players in ranked are soloQ, and they are being placed at a disadvantage against a team with a duoQ, for the benefit of the very small percentage of players who duoQ. How easy it is to duoQ is really irrelevant.

>

> no.

>

> you choose, they choose, **the majority chooses not to duo**.

>

> if you think it is an advantage and you don't do it when it's allowed....lol

>

> **if duo goes away, daed gaem**

Maybe rethink the bolded parts?