Einlanzer.1627

I find it to be a bit too much of a grind at this point. Some grind is okay, but considering how many stat combos there are and the fact that you can't really switch them it's too much.

It really is more of a problem with the gear system, though. If it was easier to swap stats on ascended gear than it was to get new pieces it wouldn't bother me as much. For that reason, I consider the bloodstone ones worth getting but not really the others.

What they should do is keep the BR ones as they are today since they are a better investment, and make all subsequent ones a bit easier to get.

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Sigmoid.7082" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > The volume of changes they hint at is the OPPOSITE of what they need to be doing

> >

> > And what exactly should they be doing, according to you?

> >

> Somehow me knowing exactly what they should be doing is an indication of knowing what they shouldn't be? Some bad logic right there.

>

> Judging by your tone, you believe that introducing so many changes at the same time is the correct path? Tell me, what makes you think that's going to work for them THIS TIME, considering in all the balance patches in the past, they demonstrate they struggle to achieve with the few changes they make? Didn't I just read they made HUNDREDS of changes in splits? Are you honestly going to sit there and tell me you think I'm wrong? I guess you REALLY want me to come back and call you out after the patch or something?

>

>

I actually agree with you for a change. While I've long thought they needed to do more with balancing, they probably should have just made some general announcements about what they were planning then increased the scope and frequency of iteration.

Part of me is excited, but I'm not totally convinced making 900 changes in one patch is the right way to go - numerous games have utterly killed themselves trying things of that magnitude. It's even more true without a full test strategy involving players. Seems like something an out-of-touch or amateur dev/leadership team would do.

I agree with your criticism of the "you're the grand hero" style of storytelling, but I'm not sure I agree that it would be feasible to overhaul it in this way at this point.

It actually makes me angry they have yet to introduce new weapon types for the game and roll them out to class's core options.

Talk about a huge bang for buck expansion item. Yes, they would have to make new skins/animations. Big whoop - that's extremely normal for MMO development and should be expected by all devs and players. It should be seen as one of the best ways to generate player interest and expand customization & honestly always would probably have been better than elite specs (they listened to Nike way too much there for a while). They also should get away from the whole "themed set" approach of BL skins and instead just do one-offs. It would be far more engaging.

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> Welcome to the reason most games stick to mostly human shaped, upright-standing races. Trolls and Worgen in WoW have hunchbacked models with the same graphical issues.

>

> To make an upright Charr look right, they couldn't use the present models. GW2 Charr don't look even remotely natural standing upright; necks are way too long, among other issues. They'd need to create new models closer to GW1 Charr concepts...

>

> 

>

> ...and THEN they would have to redesign literally every skin in the game to fit the new models. That's the kind of major development work that happens in pre-alpha or alpha stages of development, not seven years into stable release. Not gonna happen at this mature stage of GW2's lifespan.

Man the original concept art for both charr and norn look way better than the models we ended up with in-game.

> @"CptAurellian.9537" said:

> So, they're finally fixing one entirely self-created issue. I'm almost impressed.

I wonder if they've acknowledged internally yet that building the whole system around direct monetization was a huge mistake. Overengineered the whole thing, wasting god knows how many manhours, and generated a lot of ill will for a feature that should have been nothing but a simple and exciting gameplay enhancement that would generate good will and hype.

> @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> new core weapons would have to be balanced, since the skills would prompt new gameplay changes.

> Imagine if Revenant didnt have hammer and got it. Look at how many times coalescence of ruin have been nerfed.

So? Is "it would need balancing" ever a good reason to not do something? No.

I agree fully with the OP.

Yeah this looks really interesting and really happy to see positive movement on the communication front.

In light of the recent announcements and Cal's good threads on PvP and WvW balance, I wanted to take a minute to express a few thoughts/concerns on balance in the bigger picture -

Most people seem to be excited by the idea of doing more skill splitting between PvE & PvP, but I'm not sure I share this. It feels a bit like band-aid fixing things that are facets of larger systemic issues. I think it's important to keep a holistic perspective on combat balance across all three game modes and avoid letting them become too siloed. Many things get missed when there's a hyperfixation on balance in one mode or another. There are a few examples I can think of right off-hand:

Historically, balance changes have been more concerned with PvP (even though PvP balance isn't particularly good). This has a few effects, but one obvious one is the assumption of shorter engagement times, which diminishes the role of the #1 skill and enhances the role of cooldowns in an encounter. One of the big "misses" here is the relative balancing of auto-attacks, which carry a lot more weight in PvE than they do in PvP. Since the auto-attack on a weapon sets the baseline damage pressure of a weapon in a longer engagement, a weapon with an undertuned #1 skill will **absolutely** underperform in PvE while it doesn't necessarily in PvP. This is something that at times has gone years seemingly without being noticed or corrected (such as Thief's P/P or Ranger's Longbow) and in some cases is still a problem in the game (such as Elementalist staff). The issue is there doesn't seem to be any coherent design philosophy around how this is balanced and managed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be surprised.

Other examples are the efficacy of control effects & stealth which are also balanced around PvP and therefore the assumption of short engagements with quick deaths/quick resets. This leaves most control effects as well as Stealth feeling underpowered in PvE. Stealth should be a fun strategic utility in PvE when instead it's mostly just used to get big damage on an opening attack. Shouldn't there just be a general design rule that control effects and Stealth last x% longer in PvE than they do in PvP to accommodate the difference between mobs & players, and wouldn't that help reduce the need to try to balance individual skills between PvE and PvP without touching their damage components? After all, shouldn't mob statistics be modeled after player statistics so skills can work in the same way for both?

Secondly, a huge portion of the unhealthy power creep in the game revolves around two things - a.) the over-proliferation of boons, and b.) the mechanical changes made to conditions since launch. In my opinion, these are not PvP issues but are game-wide issues. Condition damage scaling is too high with durations that are too long, so there's a reliance on overpowered mechanics to combat it. For example, most condi-clearing skills and traits are overtuned as a way of dealing with high condi damage and Resistance negates all condi damage instead of doing something sensible like reducing it by 50%. In PvP, this forces players to build around being able to deal with incoming conditions. In PvE, it means that too much condi damage goes to waste, making it generally inferior to Power builds rather than simply a bit more specialized like it should be.

It really feels like most of need for skill splitting between PvE and PvP is to deal with issues that are more foundational and needing to be corrected either with mob mechanics/AI or with generalized differences such as the control one above.

Here's the deal with heroes - we already have them in the game. They are the player's various companions you fight alongside in instances.

The problem is that this isn't a fleshed out system and it should be. They should have bios in the story journal, appear in a HUD during combat, have adjustable AI & skills, and a light-weight way to mange them as companions. Entering a story instance should let you preview your fixed companions, let you modify their skills/AI, and let you add one or two optional ones that are featured as "unlockable". You should be able to acquire them as a collectible and take them into classic dungeons as well as story instances. All of that would be amazing.

They should **not** be usable in the open world.

There are two big-picture balance issues IMO -

First - Condi is poorly designed in a way that leads to different problems in both PvE and PvP. Increasing the durations to make them more like EQ dots was a bad direction to go in. GW2 has fast-paced combat, so Condi should be short duration with moderate damage output. Its effectiveness should mostly be tied to target armor instead of fight duration or the prevalence of cleanse/resist mechanics. Condi gameplay is too capricious and clutchy. Condi needs to be "nerfed" without being nerfed. Nerf durations (and therefore total damage application), make Resistance reduce condi damage by 50% instead of negating it altogether and increase the availability of cleansing while reducing its power (i.e. set stack limits or other ways to narrow the scope on them). This would significantly reign in the power creep we've seen but also allow condi to play better in casual open world play. It would also decrease the over-emphasis on building around condi cleanse in PVP and allow for more experimentation.

Second - there's just too much boon application flying around. Too many skills and traits grant them and they are too shareable. Some, like resistance, are also just OP as fuck. You should not be running around constantly with 20 stacks of might and 100% fury uptime. unless you have a heavy dedicated support build. Be more conservative with Boons.

An ancillary item is that I would probably just increase base health, Vitality scaling, or both modestly.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > There are still a lot of people here missing the point, unfortunately. The point is simple:

> > > >

> > > > Perception - Offense scales way higher than defense, so offensive stacking is necessary and defensive stats are useless (in PvE)

> > >

> > > That's not the reason defence is useless in pve. It does not become the reason for defence being useless in pve no matter how often you keep repeating this nosense.

> > >

> > > Defensive stats are useless in pve because they are simply not needed. You can splash them in if you need a crutch to support your bad gameplay. That does not change the fact that they are simply not needed.

> > >

> > > **Most classes gain way better defence via traits and skills rather than gear.** Changing the build would often make a far bigger difference than splashing in defensive stats. Not to mention that once you grow accustomed and more skilled at your class, you can change traits and skills free of charge. Where as you are stuck with kitten defensive stats on all gear sub ascended, and ascended you need to reforge at a cost too.

> > >

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > Reality - Power scales the most of any attribute, but Toughness and Vitality scale defense a lot more than Precision and Ferocity scale offense

> > > >

> > > > Going from 1000 to 2000 power increases your damage output by 2.0 x

> > > > Going from 1000 to 2000 precision + 1000 ferocity combined increases your damage output by about 1.5x.

> > > > Going from 1000 to 2000 Toughness and Vitality combined increases your defense by 2.2 to 2.9 x depending on class

> > > >

> > > > Observation - Precision + Ferocity are not necessary to be effective with a power-based build. They are utility options, just as Vitality, Toughness, Expertise, Concentration, and Condition damage are. Vitality and Toughness are potentially useful even in PvE because they increase your TTL by more than the loss of TTK from not using Precision and Ferocity.

> > >

> > > Perception and ferocity provide less of a benefit than power, but given that the benefit of defensive stats is 0, they provide a bigger benefit no matter how useful they are.

> > >

> > > Arenanet could literally buff defensive stats to be twice as potent as they are now. That would change absolutely NOTHING in class performance or necessity for defensive stats.

> > >

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > @"Aigleborgne.2981" said:

> > > > > > @"Asum.4960" said:

> > > > > > Literally 95% of mobs in the open world you can burst down without taking a single hit by combining high damage with chaining CC's.

> > > > > > The more you reduce your damage by investing into defensive stats, the longer fights take, the more damage you take.

> > > > >

> > > > > While I agree with your last sentence, I disagree with the first.

> > > > > It is easy to quickly burst down one or two melee mobs. With some aoe cc, you can even go up to 5. Beyond this number, you reach your skill target cap and it becomes more difficult to kite without beeing hit.

> > > > > On top of that, you will face range attack, range aoe spells, not to mention cc, cripple, immo, chill.

> > > > > Let's take a simple example, shall we? Barradin's crypt, 2nd veteran calls 5 archers to help him. Last one is a mage with many ranged allies.

> > > > > Guess what? Many die there or are downed even with elite spe.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's a lot more difficult to handle ranged mobs especially when they have aoe and conditions that target movement ability.

> > > > > Now, if you play a squishy berserker profession like elementalist, you can go down in no time.

> > > > >

> > > > > I have played these examples in tanky gear and it was easy. Sure longer to kill, but I could outheal their damage.

> > > > > I have also experienced your last sentence : my tanky character was not enough durable and die in situations where a berserker gear could have done relatively easily.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lastly, when you solo champion in open world, one mistake in berserker can downed you and then it's over. It is especially difficult if it can ranged you to death.

> > > > >

> > > > > I would still prefer offensive gear but I don't underestimate defensive one.

> > > >

> > > > I really don't understand how it is so many people come into these threads and act like you can go through PvE without ever getting hit. I get hit all the time and I'm sure I'm not terrible at the game. In fact, when I'm with a group in a zerg I see other people getting hit and going down all the time, usually more than I do. **So I know it's not the norm to just coast through PvE avoiding all damage through active defense.** The idea is quite preposterous.

> > >

> > > Depending on the situation, and for most open world, it kind of is for skilled players. The only really dangerous fights are some meta events or maybe some stray champion enemy which you want to solo. How many ultra dangerous enemies do you encounter in your regular pve maps?

> > >

> > > Maybe you are not as skilled as you think you are. There is a comprehensive open world section on metabattle which provides quite a few builds for open world and story content. Most of them are running offensive stats, yet are very durable. Maybe take a look and adapt your builds.

> >

> > uh-huh, yeah.

>

> Hey, I'm not the one trying to convince others that defensive stats are needed. That was literally the very first meta this game had at launch, for around 2-4 weeks. Then people realized how the dodge button works.

>

> I think my thief even still has her very first exotic PVT set in her inventory.

No one ever said "needed." You just read that into it.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > Is it your opinion that bunker builds that use stats like Nomad or Minstrel work really well solo in PvE? Because that would be a surprise to me.

> Depends on what you want to achieve. They can do wonders for your survivability, but the downside is that their killing power is really low, so even small fights get extended till infinity. Considering that the fights in open world are generally not that difficult, offensive stats would obviously be worth more. Remember though that does not mean they are more effective - just more useful in a certain specific set of situations.

>

> Notice also, that "being useful" was not what your post was about. It was purely about effectiveness and scaling of traits - and in this, defensive traits are as effective as offensive ones. They become ridiculously OP when pushed to extreme - it's just that both are OP in _different_ categories.

>

> You're trying to ask, who "works better": Usain Bolt, Shaquille O'Neal or Muhammad Ali.

>

No, but that's precisely the point I'm making - I don't think it's possible to quantitatively assert full superiority of one over the other. I have always worked with an assumption that defensive stats need to be twice as effective as offensive stats to have the same value, which is why I used to argue they were out of balance because I thought that wasn't the case - i was falling in with the "offense scales better than defense" crowd, which is a massive oversimplification of the mechanics.

It turns out is is the case with VT vs PF, which means that they are actually quite balanced with each other. This means that works best will be highly context dependent. What this means, though, is that VT is more competitive than players believe it is, and the full-glass meta has a lot of groupthink behind it. That's the only point I'm making.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > There are still a lot of people here missing the point, unfortunately. The point is simple:

> >

> > Perception - Offense scales way higher than defense, so offensive stacking is necessary and defensive stats are useless (in PvE)

>

> That's not the reason defence is useless in pve. It does not become the reason for defence being useless in pve no matter how often you keep repeating this nosense.

>

> Defensive stats are useless in pve because they are simply not needed. You can splash them in if you need a crutch to support your bad gameplay. That does not change the fact that they are simply not needed.

>

> **Most classes gain way better defence via traits and skills rather than gear.** Changing the build would often make a far bigger difference than splashing in defensive stats. Not to mention that once you grow accustomed and more skilled at your class, you can change traits and skills free of charge. Where as you are stuck with kitten defensive stats on all gear sub ascended, and ascended you need to reforge at a cost too.

>

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > Reality - Power scales the most of any attribute, but Toughness and Vitality scale defense a lot more than Precision and Ferocity scale offense

> >

> > Going from 1000 to 2000 power increases your damage output by 2.0 x

> > Going from 1000 to 2000 precision + 1000 ferocity combined increases your damage output by about 1.5x.

> > Going from 1000 to 2000 Toughness and Vitality combined increases your defense by 2.2 to 2.9 x depending on class

> >

> > Observation - Precision + Ferocity are not necessary to be effective with a power-based build. They are utility options, just as Vitality, Toughness, Expertise, Concentration, and Condition damage are. Vitality and Toughness are potentially useful even in PvE because they increase your TTL by more than the loss of TTK from not using Precision and Ferocity.

>

> Perception and ferocity provide less of a benefit than power, but given that the benefit of defensive stats is 0, they provide a bigger benefit no matter how useful they are.

>

> Arenanet could literally buff defensive stats to be twice as potent as they are now. That would change absolutely NOTHING in class performance or necessity for defensive stats.

>

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > @"Aigleborgne.2981" said:

> > > > @"Asum.4960" said:

> > > > Literally 95% of mobs in the open world you can burst down without taking a single hit by combining high damage with chaining CC's.

> > > > The more you reduce your damage by investing into defensive stats, the longer fights take, the more damage you take.

> > >

> > > While I agree with your last sentence, I disagree with the first.

> > > It is easy to quickly burst down one or two melee mobs. With some aoe cc, you can even go up to 5. Beyond this number, you reach your skill target cap and it becomes more difficult to kite without beeing hit.

> > > On top of that, you will face range attack, range aoe spells, not to mention cc, cripple, immo, chill.

> > > Let's take a simple example, shall we? Barradin's crypt, 2nd veteran calls 5 archers to help him. Last one is a mage with many ranged allies.

> > > Guess what? Many die there or are downed even with elite spe.

> > >

> > > It's a lot more difficult to handle ranged mobs especially when they have aoe and conditions that target movement ability.

> > > Now, if you play a squishy berserker profession like elementalist, you can go down in no time.

> > >

> > > I have played these examples in tanky gear and it was easy. Sure longer to kill, but I could outheal their damage.

> > > I have also experienced your last sentence : my tanky character was not enough durable and die in situations where a berserker gear could have done relatively easily.

> > >

> > > Lastly, when you solo champion in open world, one mistake in berserker can downed you and then it's over. It is especially difficult if it can ranged you to death.

> > >

> > > I would still prefer offensive gear but I don't underestimate defensive one.

> >

> > I really don't understand how it is so many people come into these threads and act like you can go through PvE without ever getting hit. I get hit all the time and I'm sure I'm not terrible at the game. In fact, when I'm with a group in a zerg I see other people getting hit and going down all the time, usually more than I do. **So I know it's not the norm to just coast through PvE avoiding all damage through active defense.** The idea is quite preposterous.

>

> Depending on the situation, and for most open world, it kind of is for skilled players. The only really dangerous fights are some meta events or maybe some stray champion enemy which you want to solo. How many ultra dangerous enemies do you encounter in your regular pve maps?

>

> Maybe you are not as skilled as you think you are. There is a comprehensive open world section on metabattle which provides quite a few builds for open world and story content. Most of them are running offensive stats, yet are very durable. Maybe take a look and adapt your builds.

uh-huh, yeah.

There are still a lot of people here missing the point, unfortunately. The point is simple:

Perception - Offense scales way higher than defense, so offensive stacking is necessary and defensive stats are useless (in PvE)

Reality - Power scales the most of any attribute, but Toughness and Vitality scale defense a lot more than Precision and Ferocity scale offense

Going from 1000 to 2000 power increases your damage output by 2.0 x

Going from 1000 to 2000 precision + 1000 ferocity combined increases your damage output by about 1.5x.

Going from 1000 to 2000 Toughness and Vitality combined increases your defense by 2.2 to 2.9 x depending on class

Observation - Precision + Ferocity are not necessary to be effective with a power-based build. They are utility options, just as Vitality, Toughness, Expertise, Concentration, and Condition damage are. Vitality and Toughness are potentially useful even in PvE because they increase your TTL by more than the loss of TTK from not using Precision and Ferocity.

Yeah male norn have the worst model in the game IMO. There's something just really off about the proportions that doesn't exist with the females. I think they really should do a cleanup effort. Of course I also think they look too human when they really should look more like a rugged giant race, but that's just me.

> @"Aigleborgne.2981" said:

> > @"Asum.4960" said:

> > Literally 95% of mobs in the open world you can burst down without taking a single hit by combining high damage with chaining CC's.

> > The more you reduce your damage by investing into defensive stats, the longer fights take, the more damage you take.

>

> While I agree with your last sentence, I disagree with the first.

> It is easy to quickly burst down one or two melee mobs. With some aoe cc, you can even go up to 5. Beyond this number, you reach your skill target cap and it becomes more difficult to kite without beeing hit.

> On top of that, you will face range attack, range aoe spells, not to mention cc, cripple, immo, chill.

> Let's take a simple example, shall we? Barradin's crypt, 2nd veteran calls 5 archers to help him. Last one is a mage with many ranged allies.

> Guess what? Many die there or are downed even with elite spe.

>

> It's a lot more difficult to handle ranged mobs especially when they have aoe and conditions that target movement ability.

> Now, if you play a squishy berserker profession like elementalist, you can go down in no time.

>

> I have played these examples in tanky gear and it was easy. Sure longer to kill, but I could outheal their damage.

> I have also experienced your last sentence : my tanky character was not enough durable and die in situations where a berserker gear could have done relatively easily.

>

> Lastly, when you solo champion in open world, one mistake in berserker can downed you and then it's over. It is especially difficult if it can ranged you to death.

>

> I would still prefer offensive gear but I don't underestimate defensive one.

I really don't understand how it is so many people come into these threads and act like you can go through PvE without ever getting hit. I get hit all the time and I'm sure I'm not terrible at the game. In fact, when I'm with a group in a zerg I see other people getting hit and going down all the time, usually more than I do. So I know it's not the norm to just coast through PvE avoiding all damage through active defense. The idea is quite preposterous.

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> Also there's this little gem:

>

> **"The challenge is that the skill disparity between average players and hardcore players is extreme. We’re talking about ten times damage output. You can’t necessarily put a DPS check that the average player is going to be able to overcome without making the fight entirely trivialized for the hardcore."**

> -Mike Z - [https://pcgamesn.com/guild-wars-2/pvp-raids-world-restructuring](http://https://www.pcgamesn.com/guild-wars-2/pvp-raids-world-restructuring "https://pcgamesn.com/guild-wars-2/pvp-raids-world-restructuring")

>

> This says a lot about the range of player capabilities and I continue to point this out wherever I can. Player performance means a lot, and until there's a reason to perform well, people likely won't push to any sort of "bar". For lack of a better phrase, "sloppy" or "unrefined" playstyles, builds, and players will have no reason to buckle up and hit something with 100% of their attention span.

>

> This isn't everyone, and I hope it's not as flippant as it looks, but I know a lot of people aren't here because the combat system is neat and offers a lot, but instead because the combat with PvE mobs doesn't demand much from them. It's cool for them to have their cake and eat it too, but I consider myself to be pretty capable at the game. I'll die in PvP or WvW many times more often than I will ever die in hardest fights in open world PvE that aren't mechanical gotcha traps.

This seems like a massive embellishment to me, but, regardless a lot of this is tied as much if not more to build selections and party comps than it is to player skill. Also, PvE combat isn't all easy. Some of it is and some of it isn't. Story instances in particular tend to be punishing in their difficulty.

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> I quit reading after awhile, so sorry if this has been covered, but the OP is saying something that I discovered roughly 5-6 years ago. The fact is that, for any problem with a finite perimeter, the most efficient shape is a square where each side is equal length. A balance of offense and defense is going to, in a vacuum, be the most efficient way to build your character. Although I would argue that running full Marauder is the best option, because it has more total stats overall and sacrifices very little damage for a comparatively large amount of health.

>

> In a vacuum... that's where the problem is. See, the game isn't "in a vacuum." Among the other things I discovered are the reasons why you should always run glass:

>

> (1): You don't need the extra defenses. All classes were designed to have sufficient health and armor to survive in the game. I don't just mean with tactics and active mitigation. I mean straight up face tanking enemies. Even on my thief, who sits at 11k health, I will straight up face tank vet mobs that I'm fighting, because I will kill them much sooner than they will ever kill me. For the entirety of core Tyria, the vast majority of HoT, and most of PoF, you don't even need to dodge. You can just run in swinging, and win. In the cases where you can't do that, by and large you can't just run in while wearing PVT gear, either. There are champions that will utterly blow you away, no matter what gear set you're wearing.

>

> (2): You make more money. The fact is that berserker gear kills things the fastest, which gives you loot faster, which lets you do more things that give you even more loot. There isn't a single dungeon speed-run that used soldier gear. No, face-tanking hits in soldiers is not faster than avoiding them/killing things faster with berserkers. Whether you're in the overworld, or in fractals, you'll want things dead as fast as possible.

>

> (3): Things in this game are on a timer. Sometimes it is a hard timer, like a clock on the event. Sometimes it is a soft timer, like trying to prevent enemies from killing protected NPCs. Sometimes it is an overworld timer, like trying to complete an event before another event starts on a different map. Either way, you're on a clock, so it is beneficial to be able to do as much damage as possible. Even in events themselves, spawns are frequently set on a timer, so it is more beneficial to kill things faster than it is to be durable. We have the rally mechanic in this game, and their degenerating health bar is itself another timer. It is better to kill things faster for your teammates as well. If an enemy mob is attacking your teammate and not you, that is yet another timer in the teammate's health. Again, it is better to kill that mob faster.

>

> (4): Active defenses are made up of far more than just dodging. In reality, the active defenses are more about using the right skills and having proper tactics. If you have the right tactics, you don't need to dodge. Shields, aegis, invulnerability skills, blind fields, long duration CC, ranged burst, massive healing skills, etc. Every class has access to these, and can use them for great effect while sacrificing little to no DPS. For example, on my thief again I use Pistol Whip when fighting multiple enemies in close range. Pistol whip is a stun + evasion skill which also does a lot of damage. By spamming this skill under quickness (deadeye, btw), I am able to avoid most damage while obliterating the enemies, no dodging required. Likewise, if things get too hot I can just pop a single Black Powder, to blind all of the enemies and render them helpless. Against a really strong enemy, I go into full evasion tank mode and time my pistol whips / flanking strikes to avoid their attacks directly, letting me survive endlessly against the most lethal of blows.

>

> Now, the thief is a strong example, because they can blind and dodge forever. But this applies to all classes. Knowing how to fight is the important part, so if you're aware of what the enemy does and how they do it, then it is easy to win.

>

> (5): Glass cannons are more flexible when it comes to scaling defense and offense. You probably noticed that there is A LOT of defensive traits, and A LOT of defensive utilities, and A LOT of defensive weapons and tactics. We tend to call berserker based builds "glass cannons", but they're really not. If you end up in a situation where more defenses are necessary, you can swap out utilities or traits for more defense. For example, on my Weaver build I tend to run Arcane Shield, which while not being part of the super-leet meta DPS build is nonetheless really useful as a shield and a stun break. If I'm in a really dicey area, I'll swap Superior Elements for Master's Fortitude for a quick health boost. Though it hasn't happened yet, I can also swap to bolstered elements and equip stone resonance for pulsing barrier. All of this is a lot of extra defense, but I'm still wearing Berserker Gear.

>

> The opposite is not true for Soldiers. See, Berserker gear allows for peak performance in damage, but can easily change tactics to become incredibly durable through active defenses. But Soldiers doesn't allow for peak performance. You can't change tactics to do more damage. Once you're face-tanking an enemy while using all DPS traits/utilities... that's it. If you need more damage for some reason, you aren't going to get it. This puts a hard limit on the performance of Soldiers. Those passive defenses are only useful under the presumption that you will be taking lethal damage without them, and that all attempts to avoid damage are inferior to just being more durable at 66% damage output, and only in situations where it is necessary to take the damage instead of avoiding or mitigating it through other means. That just doesn't happen.

>

> ---------------------------------

>

> If we're talking about PVP and WvW, I would almost never recommend full berserker, precisely because it isn't an efficient distribution. But PVE is a whole different matter. You don't get quickly ambushed, you aren't under constant high damage from enemies, enemies generally don't run away or cleanse disabling conditions. If you're in PVE, you're going to want to build for the most damage possible, whether that is Berserker, Viper, or Griever. It will make you more money in the long run, everyone around you will love you for your damage, and also it is quite fun to blow everything up like a walking agent of death.

So, you never die or get downed in PvE running full glass? You must be amazing, or farming Queensdale and fighting one enemy at a time. Also, what you said about utility options being all defense is completely untrue. I recently swtiched my Revenant build to one that uses Rolling Mists with high Fury uptime, which means that I hit the crit cap with relatively little Precision, which means that those extra points are much better spent on Vitality or Toughness.

> @"Dante.1508" said:

> Its simple..

>

> Its loot systems.

> Its over use of cash shop.

> Its currency systems.

> Its grind.

> Its lack of updates.

> Its forced Raids and Fractals to get items.

> Its over costed living stories..

> Its inane meta train focus.

> Its horrible balance

> Its poor pvp centric game modes

> Its content being way to frustrating for the standard customer.

> Its customers on the forums..

>

> They are some of the main issues this game never progressed compared to other mmorpgs. Yes Guildwars 2 is free to try.. And its a cheaper alternative but look what you get for that.. And honestly its not really cheaper over time.

>

As someone who's played this game a pretty good bit going all the way back to launch, this list is pretty damn accurate. I think they've over-focused on the LW concept and under-focused on pretty much everything else, so you have poorly designed systems and balance issues that have sat static for years while, on top of that, very few new features come in.

I'd also like to emphasize "its content being way too frustrating for the standard customer" <- I think this is a bigger deal than people realize. The story instances, for example, are often so punishing they aren't fun. Even as an experienced gamer who does not suck at this game, I throw my hands with "WTF" quite often when fighting story bosses. Most people I know that started playing the game at launch and left shortly after were put off by what a sloppy mess dungeon encounters were. Of course that was before all the power creep we have now making them kind of a breeze.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> @"Einlanzer.1627"

> Damage is applied equally against all mobs, so it "scales" according to the number of enemies your skills can hit at the same time. Toughness also is applied equally against all attacks - it reduces damage of every attack against you. Vitality however doesn't work that way, because hit points are a depletable resource. That can significantly affect your calculation, depeding on what you're fighting.

>

> By the way - again, you don't see the whole picture. For some reason you look look only at hybrid stats. What you should really look into is the survivability of _dedicated_ bunker builds (nomad, minstrel). Only by looking at those (and looking at them in action, not merely at some calculations someone did) you will really see how OP can defensive stats be when properly used.

Well, I'm intentionally only looking at Soldier's vs Berserker's in this case because the two stat spreads give an easy reference point for understanding the relative efficacy of Precision, Ferocity, Toughness, and Vitality, which is what I was most interested in. I'm not necessarily trying to compare different stat combos in general.

Is it your opinion that bunker builds that use stats like Nomad or Minstrel work really well solo in PvE? Because that would be a surprise to me.

> @"Harak.8397" said:

> My warrior runs Berserker weapons, (A,A / GS ) Knight armor and Marauder trinkets. I'll skip the build details but when all is said and done I have roughly 23k HP, just over 3000 armor and something in the ballpark of 2.4k, 2.5k power ( I forget... I abuse "for great justice" alot )

>

> Earlier this week I was farming Blood rubies in Bloodstone Fen and doing the meta event going up against the Jade Armors. I realise that most of the warriors with me in the furball were probably zerkers and doing more damage than I did but when the Jade constructs managed to send us all flying back, I was the only one getting back up ( with less than a 3rd of my HP ) and back at it. During that time, the others were being massaged off the floor behind me, not doing any damage and preventing the massaging players fron doing any themselves. By the time another big hit came, I was back at full health to eat it again ( thank you healers! )

>

> For older players like me who may no longer have the keen reflexes ( or skills ) we used to have, defensive stats allow me to not be a burden for my team while providing a fairly constant, if modest damage output.

>

> I understand that if you never get hit, offensive stats only is the way to go but yeah kitten happens.. and it has fangs.

Right. But the idea that there's anybody that's so good at the game they never get hit is asinine. Maybe if you're just repeating the same simple encounter with a single mob all the time. That's why I said in the OP that "get gud dodge moar" is a brainless meme.

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > @"starlinvf.1358" said:

> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > > > > Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

> > > > > > > People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me **without providing any evidence. I finally found it**, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

> > > > >

> > > > > The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

> > > >

> > > > It's called data. Data = evidence.

> > >

> > > Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

> >

> > I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

>

> Or assuming that living on the east coast in the U.S. means that you have better odds of winning the lottery because a larger percentage of the winners are from there.

>

> A couple things that the OP is ignoring is how much damage is done to an enemy is relation to the enemy's HP and how much damage the enemy does to them in relation to their own HP. Using soldiers with a 50% drop in DPS, and twice the effective HP, can cause the enemy to out-sustain them depending on the enemy's stats.

Soldier's does 2/3 the damage that Berserker's does. Berserker's has between 1/3 and 1/2 the EHP that Soldier's does depending on class. Your argument is more likely to apply the other way around, with players out-sustaining mobs in Soldier's when they wouldn't in Berserker's.

That's the entire point - Vitality + Toughness has a greater effect on TTL (not factoring in Dodge) than Precision + Ferocity does on TTK. People think it's the opposite and it isn't. I'm not saying that means V/T is always better than P/F. This depends on a crap ton of variables, and you likely wouldn't want to run all Soldier's regardless. I'm simply saying it's a lot more balanced and competitive than people think it is and that there **are** compelling reasons to use some V/T including in PvE - at least some forms of it.

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> There are several important things to know when talking about defense in Guild Wars 2.

>

> The game tries to keep a fast pace in combat while making sure that active defense is rewarded more than passive defense (allegedly). This type of design choice is particularly noted with the Nerfs to Defy Pain on the Warrior some time ago, notably on the competitive modes, yet there are better options in PVE as well. However, the game does not like to provide much access to extremely powerful defensive skills. I'll pick on Warrior again just a little bit, but Shield Stance on the shield "5" is normally on a 25 second cool down for a 3-second guard. You're quite vulnerable for a whole 22 seconds before you can block for 3 seconds another time.

>

> That said, there's a pretty good balance between choosing to dodge something or choosing to use a skill to evade it in some fashion to otherwise mitigate damage. However this particular concept differs greatly in methodology between PvE and the competitive modes at large. There are few *individual attacks* that you would consider dodging in PvE. Instead you would typically Dodge to avoid an AoE on the ground that you cannot run out of quickly enough. At least for me.

>

> PvP & WvW are a whole other issue - there, a player needs to be recognizing the opposing players most dangerous moves. Typically you need to dodge someone's CC in order to avoid death by CC locking or just by the damage you'll take after being cc'd the first time at all. Unless you're fighting a champion in PVE, most of the mobs hits aren't going to be life or death. However in those competitive modes, literally every strike an opponent makes against you puts you precipitously close to defeat much faster.

>

> Another thing to keep in mind in this conversation is the idea of sustain as well, although not specifically relating to the primary heal skill's activation. Many, but not all, builds have some method of keeping you in the fight without having to spend the time to cast your healing skill. It could even be bolstered by food that allows you to lifesteal or regenerate over time Etc. Time spent waiting to be healed is not necessarily a waste by any stretch, but it prolongs the combat, not shortens it.

>

> As far as stats go, I feel like it depends greatly on the game of that you're playing. I'd write more, but its late. Maybe I'll check in tomorrow...

>

>

Most of this is true, however, it's a fallacy to distill all PvE into "you're fighting a single mob and dodge all of its slow, heavy hitting attacks" which is what I feel people are running with when acting like defensive stats are useless in PvE. This is clearly a caricature of PvE and not how most PvE combat actually occurs - certainly not when just doing stuff solo.

In reality, you are often chain-killing and fighting hordes at a time while taking a lot of damage, most of which it isn't possible to dodge, so you absorb it, boon up, heal through it, and kill as fast as possible (which dodging slows you down in doing). But if increasing your defensive stats improves your Time to die more than Precision/ferocity improves your time to kill (which is what this data reveals), there's a compelling case to be made that giving up a portion of the latter for some of the former is very effective even in PvE.

> @"starlinvf.1358" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > > > > > > > Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

> > > > > > > > > People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me **without providing any evidence. I finally found it**, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's called data. Data = evidence.

> > > > >

> > > > > Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

> > > >

> > > > Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

> > >

> > > No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

> > >

> > > In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

> > >

> > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

> > > >

> > > > Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

> >

> > It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

>

> I disagree, therefore your argument (what little there tries to be) is invalid.

Here you go: data is always evidence, it just isn't always enough to draw a conclusion. In this case, though, it is, because we're looking at simple data points and drawing a simple conclusion. Berserker's increases your offense by 50% over Soldiers, but Soldiers lets you take twice the amount of damage that Berserker's will. That means that Toughness + Vitality scales better for Defense than Precision + Ferocity does for offense.

But, how's this for something better - let's let Ayrilana turn this thread into a preposterous & abstract argument about what does or does not constitute evidence - a very typical Ayrilana contrarian tactic, and then act like I'm the one who did something wrong.