Einlanzer.1627
-
Posts
1,016 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Einlanzer.1627
-
-
> @"starlinvf.1358" said:
> > @"Westenev.5289" said:
> > The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.
> >
> > If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).
>
> Except it isn't...... Full glass has always been risky, even among classes with higher base HP. Its dodges and invulnerability frames that allow the Glass Meta to work, since dying in one hit matters less when you can consistently avoid being hit/taking damage.
>
> This simple fact the game's design is exacerbated by the poor threat AI mobs pose; yet the line between Potato fights and Legit threats is based on number of strikes per second. Situations where the number of strikes overwhelms the players active defenses is what it takes to make things dangerous. But this 2 fold issues is made 2 folds further in how the Devs try to compensate by increasing the damage per strike to be more punishing to players who don't use, or can't manage active defenses.... only to have it scale out of control rapidly with Enemy count.
>
> So from a defensive perspective:
> - 1 mob attacking allows you to meter out your defenses and cool downs.
> - Multiple mobs are manageable if their attacks are heavily spaced out, or execute attacks with close timing to allow a batching effect for defensive actions
> - They stop being manageable as soon the number and timing strikes become effectively constant
> - And that problem made worse across the board with how mob attacks load their damage
>
> The Contrast to PvP gives clear examples to the underlying problem. PvP is about Opportunity, Pressure and Counter play. PvE, at its core, is a simple war of attrition. Thats why the most dangerous mobs in the game are ones that have attacks that are similar to what players have, or have special mechanics that makes Raw DPS ineffective. Those that don't are simply about who can reach lethal damage first; with the majority not even taking actions to avoid or mitigate damage at all.
>
> You take away the active defenses, you actively force players to have to soak damage. And in doing so, change the entire dynamic of combat and buildcraft priority.
I think the downed state has a lot to do with the design of PVE encounters. There's a big part of me that wonders if the game would be better off without it.
-
> @"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.
-
> @"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.
-
> @"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.
-
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> TL;DR damage scales up almost 10x from base damage values, stacking toughness and vitality make you survive 1-2 more hits you probably could have dodged.
No, this is completely incorrect and shows you didn't read my original post.
-
> @"Westenev.5289" said:
> The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.
>
> If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).
You.... really aren't understanding my point.
-
> @"whoeverxwins.1279" said:
> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:
> > > @"whoeverxwins.1279" said:
> > > The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).
> > >
> > > The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.
> >
> > No that's actually overstated. Toughness only generates threat against certain enemies, and this is a non issue if you're doing PvE solo.
>
> You are still way better off with more vitality against a bad dodge than toughness. And toughness won't save someone who insists on standing in AOE rings.
They aren't in a competition with each other. They actually are about equally effective (though with different applications) and synergize really well with each other. Toughness's benefit is that it increases the effectiveness of healing. Vitality's is that it helps counter condition damage. But they both increase the effect of the other. Having a small to moderate amount of both tends to work better than having only one of the two. It's exactly like Precision and Ferocity.
-
> @"whoeverxwins.1279" said:
> The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).
>
> The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.
No that's actually overstated. Toughness only generates threat against certain enemies, and this is a non issue if you're doing PvE solo.
-
> @"saerni.2584" said:
> Rifle has a few advantages over pistol:
> * Range
> * Variety of boons
> * Stealth access
> * Projectile denial
> * Movement
> * Better synergy with traits (stealth on dodge)
>
> Pistol/Pistol has:
> * Interrupts
> * Better might generation (but may be redundant if running M7)
>
> If you are running Hybrid then Pistol/Dagger beats rifle. But that involves a different playstyle and build design so....Rifle is probably better for you in a power rifle vs power pistols comparison.
>
P/P also has way better synergy with Invigorating Precision, one of the best traits Thieves have access to.
I'm not sure why everyone is dissing P/P here. The only thing bad about it is it has no built in multitarget at all, but it's a very viable set. It's arguably more generally usable in PvE than Rifle is with the latter being a lot more situational.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> I’ve played in both soldiers and berserkers and found that I had more survivability with berserkers. The best defense in this game is having a good offense. The less time something has to kill you, the safer you will be. Defensive stats do not offer enough sustain to make up for the damage loss.
No, that's the point I'm making. I used to think this too, but as you long as you don't give up Power, you actually gain more sustain than you lose in offense. I'm not necessarily saying it's always objectively better, but it's certainly more competitive than people think it is and is arguably optimal depending on how you're playing.
For example, on my Revenant, I have near 100% fury uptime and Rolling Mists keeps crit chance so high that a lot of Precision is totally wasted and is much more useful going into Toughness/Vitality (or really any other stat.)
-
I've posted about this numerous times, but after doing a lot of research I've had some eye-openers.
"Damage scales more than Defense, so defensive stats are mostly useless."
This appears to be true on the surface, but actually isn't. Defense is only two stats that are weighted more or less equally, while (power) offense is three stats with distribution significantly weighted toward one of them (Power.)
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. The key thing to remember is that you never want to sacrifice Power for defense unless you're full condi or playing a full support build in a group. But taking some Toughness/Vitality instead of Precison/Ferocity actually isn't a bad tradeoff **even in PvE and especially for solo/open world builds**. People love to say "get gud and dodge moar", but this is kind of a brainless meme. If you're playing solo in the open world and regularly engaging multiple mobs - you'll eat plenty of hits. Bolstering your defense even a little bit can help you maintain battlefield control and makes it much less likely you'll get downed. The other thing that people seem to forget is that, while mastering dodging is very important, it also interrupts your outgoing damage. This means there are a lot of circumstances where absorbing damage is more efficient than dodging. Vitality + Toughness allow you to get away with doing that a bit more.
This is why so many sets have Power primary. I think making a Berserker primary with some Soldier or Valkyrie pieces mixed in is probably the best way to play Power in both PvE and PvP in many cases (yes, better than Maruader's) - you sacrifice no Power while having a healthy mix of Precison, Ferocity, Vitality, and Toughness.
-
Here's my list of needed improvement. Individually some of them are pretty minor but they all add up:
**Hero Panel/UI**
Add a summary of each traitline in the hero panel
Separate equipment from wardrobe – give the latter its own tab in the main left-nav
Rename Healing Power and Condition Damage (Spirit and Animus?) and revert profession attributes to flavor names
Reorganize Mastery Lines around regions instead of expansions
Give Living World Season 2 & 3 proper titles in the Story Journal, like "Icebrood Saga"
Add a section in the story journal for biographies of different NPCs you encounter
**General Gameplay**
Give Revenant a profession attribute
Start adding profession-specific attributes to gear stats
Add a Hud for companions in story instances & ability for minor AI customization
Remove awkward two-person cutscenes from PS
Re-add LW1. Can be done piecemeal through LW instead of one big release.
Change the way balance occurs – patches should be more frequent and more macro in scope
Legendary gear is not very immersive or rewarding - should be more than cosmetic but less than power creep. Think horizontal expansion.
Rebalance condition damage, shorten durations, and make resistance reduce cond damage by 50% instead of totally negating it.
**Going forward – Living World & Expansions**
Use Living World for saga-style open world and story instance additions
Use Expansions for everything else – focus on large bundles with start-to-finish side stories, dungeons, new character options including races, classes, weapons, traits, and skills, masteries, pvp maps, and totally new features such as hero systems.
-
> @"Game of Bones.8975" said:
> They could bring in contract or contingent workers to temporarily help with each project as needed and let them go when finished.
>
> I am more interested in new professions/specializations and new map expansions than story lines and which NPC lives or dies, but I may be in the minority there.
>
You aren't. That's the problem. Even for people that are interested in that stuff, it doesn't hold their attention or generate hype the way gameplay expansions do. I'm not sure why Anet doesn't seem to realize this.
-
> @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> I don't think they have the current capacity to do both, hence they've decided to stick to LW seasons. :/
They have 200 employees. This is a management/organization problem, not a capacity problem.
-
> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:
> You're going to have to specify your build here. On my herald, using a standard Devastation + Invocation + Herald build with full berserker, i'm sitting at 91% crit chance with no additional outside bonuses from traits, sigils, or runes. Considering that is lower than 100%, none of my precision is going to waste.
>
> That said, I do run Diviner in the overworld sometimes.
I specified in the OP that I run Rolling Mists with near 100% Fury uptime, which means that anything over 60% crit chance is basically going to waste. Your 91% crit chance is going to waste if you maintain Fury throughout most fights.
-
> @"zealex.9410" said:
> I think story content and some ow content is cool tho with expansions because they too take a spot between lw releases or at least used to.
>
> Also the story told in expansions is told better because it has a start, a finish and no 2,3 or 4 month breaks inbetween.
Well, they could add start-to-finish side stories as expansions from the Gem Store while the main story would progress in a saga format through the LW.
-
I think the right way to do this, basically permanently, is to continue doing both expansions and the LW but to conceptually separate their respective foci
LW would be the vehicle through which new open world zones and story content would be updated
Expansions would the vehicle through which everything else would be added - dungeons, weapons/skills, classes, races, pvp maps, features/systems
There is no need for any interdependence between the two. Expansions can be released basically whenever and apply to all LW content, and can be available as major "bundles" (big enough to generate hype) through the gem store. Think theme packs like skill bundles, race bundles, etc. I also think it's time to revise some aspects of the PS and re-do/re-release LW1 - potentially as an expansion in this case.
-
Shortbow compensates for its situational utilities by having a very strong autoattack - one of the strongest ranged ones in the game. While I wouldn't go so far as to say it's optimally designed, I think it does fine.
-
Running a Power/hybrid Renegade in OW with Rolling Mists and very, very high Fury uptime. This basically means most of my Precision goes to waste, so I'm looking for the best alternative to a full Berserker/Maruader set. I'm of the opinion that defensive stats are slightly undervalued in OW, so right now I'm running a mix of Soldier, Berserker, and Cavalier gear to minimize my Precision overflow and instead focus a bit more on Ferocity, Vitality, and Toughness.
What I don't like about Cavalier, though, is that it's Toughness primary meaning you're giving up a bit of Power which you basically never want to do.
Meanwhile, Soldier's is a little too defensive minded and means I give up more Ferocity than I want.
Would most people consider Valkyrie a good investment for this type of build? What other suggestions are there?
-
This game has had mediocre to poor leadership for a long time - basically since it launched. Anet reviews are rife with complaints about excessive project churn/failure, disengaged/siloed department heads, and failure to appropriate money for worthwhile endeavors. This excess of bureaucracy is clearly visible in the way the game has been developed ever since it launched, namely how slow feature releases and iteration are despite Anet having a staff of over 200 people, and shows how unprepared Anet leadership was to move so quickly into the AAA space.
I'm not sure to what extent this falls to Mike O, or Colin, or Mike Z, or NCSoft, but it's clear that a culture shift is needed. I just hope this change takes the game in a better direction instead of a worse one. One that will increase focus on gameplay features and repeatable, immersive content over mobile-style monetization and over-emphasis on story & zerg gameplay.
-
They unfortunately boxed themselves into a corner with races. I'm not sure how they didn't realize they were doing this with their grandiose plans for the LW. I still think there are some options for adding new races that really need to be explored, though, and the fact that Anet is so dismissive of the idea of new races is one additional thing that doesn't speak well of their leadership.
1. Simply disable story content for new races. I.e. add Kodan and Tengu, but require a purchase and/or level 80 to unlock them and disable story content for them. In other words, they would be treated as bonus/auxiliary races instead of main races and you would always have a main of one the original 5 for story progression.
2. Have them simply emulate existing races for story content. I.e. a Kodan might share the Norn story.
3. Add several new races at once and give them a new, shared personal story. It wouldn't even matter if it was much smaller in scale than the original PS (I'm sure a lot of people would actually appreciate it). The work to implement them into the LW would be a lot smaller.
-
Much like a lot of other things such as new weapon types, it could happen, but I doubt it. I'm not hopeful we'll get much of anything but more of the same from here on. Anet kind of proved themselves incapable of managing this game very well for the last 7 years.
-
So, it looks like Anet wanted GW3 and NCSoft wanted them to focus on GW2. Which one is correct?
-
I think this will be a tremendous boon to the average player who runs two-three different builds per toon and two-three different toons.
Offense & Defense
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
> @"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.