Balance with a Sledge Hammer

[Axl.8924]

I got a question:Why not add a longer duration to conditions if you are planning to nerf necros dmg and people keep crying about condis, but only way for them to be truly useful is:

 

A have massive duration like in everquest and wow.Some can last up to i think 20-30 mins

B:you would have to nerf most condi cleanses.

 

Just get it over with, i'm sick of necro being slapped around with the nerf bat.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @mygamingid.5816 said:

> > @Astralporing.1957 said:

> > > @mygamingid.5816 said:

> > > If all that matters is being the best at a thing, then Necro will never be there. Necros have a bunch of generalist utility with objective value and that will always keep them off the top spec.

> > Like it keeps off top spec Eles and (lately) guardians, for example.

> > ...oh wait.

>

> Staff Weaver brings fire fields to raids. They have the lowest health, lowest armor value, no support, no damage mitigation, weak CC, long channels, some channels that prohibit movement, require scholar uptime, and only work against large hitbox? Or D/F condi, which doesn’t have the channeling issues, hitbox issues, massive AOEs, or require scholar uptime, but is otherwise just as selfish and fragile?

>

> Firebrand is only at the top due to how venoms are attribute (see also: Thief). I do agree that all Guardian specs are OP due to widespread damage mitigation utility. I’ve been expecting nerfs to aegis, blocks, invulns, and evades for a while, but ArenaNet seems far more scared of how healing impacts the game - barriers are similarly treated.

 

Don't limit yourself to single elite specs. Tempest has both better utility and better dps (by far) than necro. DH has better dps, utility, and it's survivability is not any worse.

 

Don't try to explain Necro lack of DPS by "a bunch of generalist utility". As far as support is considered, Necro is (and always was) one of the worst classes around. Basically, the only "tradeoff" they get for being mediocre at everything is a second health bar. Which is something many necros would happily trade for being able to have either dps or support (or both) on the meta level. Scourge was supposed to be an elite spec making such a trade. We all know how that ended.

 

(all that above is about PvE, by the way. Yes. i know that in PvP modes it's a bit different, but that's not a good justification at all)

 

 

[Kuldaj.9518]

> @"Robert Gee.9246" said:

> * Shade Recharge vs Duration - I'm going to have to disagree about the recharge needing to stay in lockstep with the duration. Changing those values is how we adjust uptime and uptime was the area we intended to target with PvP and WvW splits.

> * Bug or Feature - Some bugs become can become features, others don't. The Desert Shroud repeatedly proccing Dhuumfire wasn't something we felt should be kept. If Scourge needed to rely on buggy behavior to be competitive then we need to fix the bug before we figure out what needs to be improved to make it competitive. If the bug is causing blowouts in other areas of the game then we need to fix it even sooner.

 

The whole kit of a scourge is tied in to their shades being up. Honestly at this point, if I could use a torch on a core necromancer I could probably do more damage than a scourge. Because the shades currently (and based on how you all "balanced" reaper, probably won't be) actually useful in pve content where the scourge can stand in melee range. Since almost every fight in fractals/raid require stacking to maintain buffs and such not being there would just hurt. If you can't maintain at least 2 shades up at pretty much all times it will become a problem. Bosses move, sometimes only back and forth if a scourge can't maintain a shade (if they will be useful) in those areas then their damage will be horrid.

 

All of the skills should come from both the scourge and the shades. If a scourge is standing in melee with two shades the boss should get hit from the necromancer and from one of the shades. They should count as separate entities. The Dhuumfire "bug" should become a feature in PvE (at least) but maybe only from the necromancer itself. If it was to be looked at. Say Dhuumfire would only proc when you place a shade (F1) and then once when you activate F5.. So that is limiting the scourge to applying 1 burn every 15 seconds (F1) and one burn every 20 seconds (F5). So a Grandmaster trait can apply FIVE 3 second burns every 45 seconds.

 

You say, as developers you have to be subjective about balance. Great. Then be subjective. You have content where lots of classes/builds which are pretty much entirely useless. There is so much of "Don't play (Class) in PvX mode" and it isn't even players being jerks or elitists. It just literally can not be played in that mode because it can not perform.

 

**So be objective, balance your classes and specializations. Each class should have AT LEAST one build that is competitive in every game mode. And it shouldn't be the SAME build for every game mode, because if you all keep that up, then what is the point of having specializations. **

 

I don't come to the forums often, but come on. You have entire classes where either NONE or only ONE build is actually competitive for that entire class.

 

 

[Lily.1935]

Necromancer doesn't just need a simple "Buff" we've been getting slow buffs for years and it hasn't budged our position. Buffs clearly haven't been working. What we need is an overhaul of many of our traits and skills. Similar to the Dervish update in GW1. In fact the dervish was in a very similar situation to us. Except it wasn't allowed to be that way for nearly as long.

[Saracen.2691]

Why do you hate us, ANet?

[Castitalus.6359]

> @Lily.1935 said:

> Necromancer doesn't just need a simple "Buff" we've been getting slow buffs for years and it hasn't budged our position. Buffs clearly haven't been working. What we need is an overhaul of many of our traits and skills. Similar to the Dervish update in GW1. In fact the dervish was in a very similar situation to us. Except it wasn't allowed to be that way for nearly as long.

 

I'd like to see the second health bar go, but I'm hesitant we'd get any defensive options in return.

[Zoltreez.6435]

> @Castitalus.6359 said:

> > @Lily.1935 said:

> > Necromancer doesn't just need a simple "Buff" we've been getting slow buffs for years and it hasn't budged our position. Buffs clearly haven't been working. What we need is an overhaul of many of our traits and skills. Similar to the Dervish update in GW1. In fact the dervish was in a very similar situation to us. Except it wasn't allowed to be that way for nearly as long.

>

> I'd like to see the second health bar go, but I'm hesitant we'd get any defensive options in return.

 

Second healtbar should stay its Unique and lets face it Reaper Form is AAAAWEEEEEEEESOOOOOME!!!!.... we need some other defensive stuff NEXT to the second healthbar that we can rotate during a fight when Shroud is on CD......

 

Shroud as a def CD is FINE the prob is there is nothing else after it that we could use.... so people just Bait it force us to use and then we are sitting ducks with no way to defend ourselves.....

 

btw Scourge does not have a second health bar.......

[DeceiverX.8361]

> @Maunzi.3764 said:

>that we needed ... a full glass cannon spec in order to get viable dps with necro.

 

 

I mean I hope that's how it would be considering everyone else with "viable" numbers is doing the same.

 

Big thing people fail to realize is that the necro does enough damage to clear raids. It does. Period.

It's just necro doesn't do enough damage to clear raids *competitively.* in *optimized* environments.

 

The lack of inclusion of the necromancer isn't a failure of the balancing of necro, but the play environment in PvE. The encounters aren't designed to take advantage of other mechanics aside from damage, and the community is so obsessed with optimal clear speeds from "elite" grind-based objectives that the strengths and diversity the differing professions bring is not considered.

 

Meanwhile, the profession is utterly decimating the PvP formats and completely ruining a lot of the same degree of competition directly as a consequence of requested changes to boost PvE values. We literally lost our competitive league on the sheer basis that the integrity of the PvP formats was not good enough, directly as a result of PvE-oriented/designed changes and implementations. First from the players themselves when they got up and quit, and then the backing from the ESL.

 

The same exact principle is applied to the entire promotion of condition-oriented play in PvE over power; conditions, especially on a number of builds that are still deemed overpowered, were already mathematically overpowered even before their various buffs in the name of PvE viability.

 

I really think the biggest fault to ANet, and this community, is that we are taking the wrong approach in trying to improve the game for everyone. Split balance is a more-confusing and not appealing solution; it directly causes a lot of confusion, especially new players, and makes the developers end up responsible for a lot more possible combinations of effects and numerical tweaks. It multiplies the work and without someone understanding everything about all of the balance, you have major issues when trying to tweak skills and traits on the conceptual level. Changing *how* something works becomes immensely more challenging. This also delays balancing cycles and generally makes things harder for everyone.

 

Instead of looking to strictly numerical values of PvE, we should look to unify them under the constraints of a PvP perspective, and then look to change the PvE encounters themselves to work with these dissimilar numbers. It involves more people to make changes, but it makes everyone's work a lot clearer. Any value-splitting that proves to be very necessary with no workaround on a concept too good to give up can then be performed, based on metrics derived from those in charge looking at the respective content modes.

[Castitalus.6359]

> @Zoltreez.6435 said:

> > @Castitalus.6359 said:

> > > @Lily.1935 said:

> > > Necromancer doesn't just need a simple "Buff" we've been getting slow buffs for years and it hasn't budged our position. Buffs clearly haven't been working. What we need is an overhaul of many of our traits and skills. Similar to the Dervish update in GW1. In fact the dervish was in a very similar situation to us. Except it wasn't allowed to be that way for nearly as long.

> >

> > I'd like to see the second health bar go, but I'm hesitant we'd get any defensive options in return.

>

> Second healtbar should stay its Unique and lets face it Reaper Form is AAAAWEEEEEEEESOOOOOME!!!!.... we need some other defensive stuff NEXT to the second healthbar that we can rotate during a fight when Shroud is on CD......

>

> Shroud as a def CD is FINE the prob is there is nothing else after it that we could use.... so people just Bait it force us to use and then we are sitting ducks with no way to defend ourselves.....

>

> btw Scourge does not have a second health bar.......

 

The second health bar is the entire reason why we don't have defensive options worth anything outside of it, hence the old "Master the shroud" comment from a dev that was meme'd to death.

[Slayer.7318]

See my problem is the necromancer does not know what it wants to be . HP is high on it but high HP can also be a downfall . With the lack of life draining abilities of a actual necromancer feel and with the life drains we have being pretty pointless it kills that style of how a high hp vampiric caster game style would play . Not being able to get Vigor naturally ( not counting random chance from boon stealing or anything like that ) or much else to help dodge or block but better life drain and more attacks that could life drain would of made a nice swap from those mechanics and make playstyle a little more different from the other classes . Power wise it has low power . I can understand that to some degree (maybe not so much on reaper but core and scourge ) as when I think necromancer s I usually think of hexes and rituals and such making the foe suffer from conditions but then I feel the conditions traits excluding bleed on chilled for reaper do not really contribute much. Maybe give necro some more poison moves and have a bleed and poison deals more damage trait . And maybe a trait like infectious wound or something that gives bleeds a chance to do poison too or something . DPS of a necro I feel should be in their hexes and conditions and a necro getting stronger with proper trait usage from having conditions (corruption skills ) and their support being rituals (wells) and such that condition or damage one self to give them and allies buffs and such . When I think of necro and it’s 2 specialisations I think core being condition , Reaper being that more power based (instead of bleed freeze should have a way to lower def past the stacks of vul to make them more viable (like maybe something like with chilled a new rebuff that makes the enemy have the equiverlent of 5 stacks of vul so long as the necro has chilled the foe ) and scourge being support based (more like that vampiric drainer and ritual necro I spoke of earlier) but instead we got reaper wanting to be condition based and core and scourge being .... something idk what . Again I am taking this from a pve level not so much pvp or wvw.

[Maunzi.3764]

> @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> > @Maunzi.3764 said:

> >that we needed ... a full glass cannon spec in order to get viable dps with necro.

> Big thing people fail to realize is that the necro does enough damage to clear raids. It does. Period.

> It's just necro doesn't do enough damage to clear raids *competitively.* in *optimized* environments.

 

Big thing you completely fail to realize is that everyone else already realizes this.

 

Necro does way less damage than everyone else. it is technically still enough for raids - nobody doubted this. It's just that bringing ANYONE else is a much better choice.

That is the problem people are complaining about. You should read what people actually write first, before arguing against strawmen.

 

Why should groups bring something that is always a worse choice, when better choices are available? Groups are only acting rationally here, by picking better choices. This is what balancing needs to fix, and why games with better balance fix such issues.

 

By the way: Your "optimized" environments are "nearly every raid group, including training runs". Even the training discords want the holy trinity of Chrono, cPS and Druid before even starting, because it just performs better in practice. I've checked three different ones, including one claiming to have over 2000 members, and not one asked for Healers: They ALL ask for cps/chrono/druid in raid signups.

 

If balancing is done around fringe groups that almost nobody ever experiences, then balancing fails. Imagine if PVP balancing was done about fringe compositions that never happen, instead of the actual fights every player experiences. That balance would suck, right? That's the balance you want in PVE. it's a terrible idea.

 

> Meanwhile, the profession is utterly decimating the PvP formats and completely ruining a lot of the same degree of competition directly as a consequence of requested changes to boost PvE values.

 

This is factually untrue. While you claim that "requested changes to boost PvE values" are to blame, this perception is solely due to your bias, and does not stand up to scrutiny.

 

We have proof that your statement is blatantly false. The PvE values were only fine due to a BUG. We know this from multiple statements from the developers. In other words, PvE balance was never tested, nor even considered. If it had been, the bug would have either been noticed, or the testers would have realized the intended playstyle performs awfully, and would have buffed it (resulting in even more broken PVP). The PvE problem was so obvious that people pointed it out in the beta weekend, ANY amount of internal testing would have caught it. The PVP problems were also evident, and were also unfixed after the beta weekend.

 

That is the problem here: Scourge was untested for both PVE and PVP, and thus had problems in both. This is a recurring theme with PoF specs, several of which have major issues. It is very likely that they were rushed before balance testing could be done.

[Lalainnia.3598]

Even after these "nerfs" scourge is still great and not a burden at all any fight that has adds it excels why? Epidemic which is base necro funny enough just that scourge has actual dps that isn't annoying as heck to use compared to reaper and base necro is just meh add in epi and they're right up there or even higher especially in your daily decent pug raid.. Sabetha, Xera, Mursatt, Gors, Sloth even with the condi removal on sleeping, Matthias they're just nice on even without epi. All of that on top of the aoe condi conversion a decent 2k aoe barrier and some might cushioning.

 

The fact that Scourge was considered top dps on a small target hitbox boss WITHOUT epi was pretty much absurd. The sad part is that scourge didn't really get nerfed it had a BUG fix that resulted in a massive dps loss. The good side is that anet already stated they're going to be increasing scourge dps back up with the next balance patch wait and see what happens because even now scourge is perfectly fine on any fight that uses adds.

[Dadnir.5038]

> @Slayer.7318 said:

> See my problem is the necromancer does not know what it wants to be.

 

In fact, the necromancer have a very clear design and objectif. All it's tools tends toward this end. What's sad is not that it doesn't know what it want to be but that what it want to be is to limited.

 

The necromancer is designed to it's very end to be a condition manager. Someone that is a master at **manipulating** conditions.

- High health pool and the shroud meant to let the necromancer live with conditions on him

- sending back condition

- corrupting boons into conditions

- gaining life or life force due to conditions

- applying conditions

- supporting ally via soft conditions

- drawing condition from allies

- ... etc.

 

Everything the necro have walk him toward an utopia that is the "condition manager".

 

The game is not friendly toward such a design, yet anet push this square design again and again throught the circle that is gw2. That's why when the square is to little in front of the circle, the necromancer feel weak in the game but playable. While when the square is to big for the circle it destroy everything.

 

That's why scourge hurt the game this badly, anet pushed again even more condition management on it, making the scourge overflowing with boon corruption and even more condition management tools. There was so much of it that, on top of some unintended behavior of the mechanisms (which were already working like that when they officially showed the scourge before PoF) that the circle known as gw2 exploded.

 

> @Lalainnia.3598 said:

> The fact that Scourge was considered top dps on a small target hitbox boss WITHOUT epi was pretty much absurd. The sad part is that scourge didn't really get nerfed it had a BUG fix that resulted in a massive dps loss. The good side is that anet already stated they're going to be increasing scourge dps back up with the next balance patch wait and see what happens because even now scourge is perfectly fine on any fight that uses adds.

 

Ridiculous, epidemic add 0 dps on a single small target. You know, every professions see their dps skyrocket when they aoe on multiple small foes and only guardian and elementalist see their dps skyrocket when they attack large hitbox foes. Your argument would be valid (and epidemic totally overpowered) if epidemic were also applying the conditions on the foe that's used to spread conditions. Sure epidemic is convenient but using epidemic is the same as using meteor shower, it simply does damage in an area.

 

As for the promises of an increased dps from anet, no long time necromancer will ever believe it before seeing it live in game. The scourge mechanic is bound to evolve in the next month, the shades are bound to have flashy "tells" attached to each time they will be triggered, it's a good thing yet this will also reduce the scourge dps. The devs talk about giving more power yet we already know that there will be some incoming power loss. Most likely in the next months they will take as much as they will give until they find the profession in a "good place" in PvP/WvW and then they will stop caring. We've already had enough of this BS with Reaper.

 

 

[Maunzi.3764]

> @Lalainnia.3598 said:

> The fact that Scourge was considered top dps on a small target hitbox boss WITHOUT epi was pretty much absurd.

 

it really wasn't, and we can see in cold, hard numbers that Scourge was actually weaker both single target and in cleave damage than several other specs that still are strong. In fact, scourge was actually weaker single-target damage than several HoT specs even in its "OP" state. Actual raiddata shows this over and over again.

 

And Epidemic? Epidemic was only OP if you had multiple scourges, and that situation shows that Epidemic should have been adjusted to not allow bounced conditions to bounce again. A problem that still exists, and still needs adjustment. The hypothetical situation of 5 scourges in the same group should not be reason to nerf the class so one scourge is useless, it should be reason to ensure that no skill can create a situation where more than one class is OP (same reason Chronos, Druids and Warriors need serious nerfs to their support uniqueness). "Balance" where a class is only useful when you have five of them is terrible. The only way to balance is to make sure that one scourge or five scourges doesn't matter for the individual's performance.

 

That scourge was inherently "OP" in PVE was a meme created by angry PVP/WvWers (where scourge should have been nerfed, and needs more nerfs). It's not supported by facts.

[Kam.4092]

I consider this a bug fix, and not balance. I don't really get the title of the thread. I'm surprised it's still going.

 

I hated Shade stacking, and am glad it's gone. It was annoying. Knowing that it was a bug made me happy. Time to wait for the next balance patch. I wonder if people will still be upset then, hopefully not.

 

 

 

 

[Maunzi.3764]

>I don't really get the title of the thread. I'm surprised it's still going.

 

Well, there's a guy called Kam.4092 that explained why it's still going:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/11001/thanks-for-this-anet#latest

 

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is the end result. How we get there is irrelevant, because the player only has this end result to work with.

 

 

[mygamingid.5816]

> @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> > > @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > >that we needed ... a full glass cannon spec in order to get viable dps with necro.

> > Big thing people fail to realize is that the necro does enough damage to clear raids. It does. Period.

> > It's just necro doesn't do enough damage to clear raids *competitively.* in *optimized* environments.

>

> Big thing you completely fail to realize is that everyone else already realizes this.

>

> Necro does way less damage than everyone else. it is technically still enough for raids - nobody doubted this. It's just that bringing ANYONE else is a much better choice.

 

Under this belief, only four classes should ever be welcome: Druid, Chrono, PS Warrior, and (insert top DPS for target boss here). Anyone even 1dps worse is *worse* and should be shunned. It’s a terrible proposition, but raids are terribly designed. Necro won’t ever be top DPS, so why bother?

 

Or is there some point where Necro has “enough” DPS? If so, what is that point?

 

> That is the problem people are complaining about. You should read what people actually write first, before arguing against strawmen.

>

> Why should groups bring something that is always a worse choice, when better choices are available? Groups are only acting rationally here, by picking better choices. This is what balancing needs to fix, and why games with better balance fix such issues.

 

Why play something that isn’t the absolute best choice for any encounter? Why are you dragging down your game experience and that of everyone around you by playing a trash tier build?

 

EDIT: To be clear, I don’t think Necro is trash tier, but the raiding community is apparently enforcing that designation based on “not the support we need,” “support we need is not as good as others’ support” and “not enough DPS.”

[Drarnor Kunoram.5180]

> @mygamingid.5816 said:

> > @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > > @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> > > > @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > > >that we needed ... a full glass cannon spec in order to get viable dps with necro.

> > > Big thing people fail to realize is that the necro does enough damage to clear raids. It does. Period.

> > > It's just necro doesn't do enough damage to clear raids *competitively.* in *optimized* environments.

> >

> > Big thing you completely fail to realize is that everyone else already realizes this.

> >

> > Necro does way less damage than everyone else. it is technically still enough for raids - nobody doubted this. It's just that bringing ANYONE else is a much better choice.

>

> Under this belief, only four classes should ever be welcome: Druid, Chrono, PS Warrior, and (insert top DPS for target boss here). Anyone even 1dps worse is *worse* and should be shunned. It’s a terrible proposition, but raids are terribly designed. Necro won’t ever be top DPS, so why bother?

>

> Or is there some point where Necro has “enough” DPS? If so, what is that point?

 

34-35k DPS. That's the average for competitive builds and opens the door for Scourge to be taken for its condition management in some encounters.

 

However, that damage output needs to be reached with _at least_ one utility slot open for what little bits of, well, utility, a Scourge actually can bring. Sand Swell, for example, is a pretty good skill and can lead to some new strategies due to being up far more often than Mesmer portal. Doing this will open Scourge up as an actual contender in more encounters, rather than just Slothasuar and Matthias.

 

And no, the Might stacking is never going to be a reason to bring a Scourge unless Phalanx Strength gets completely gutted.

[Atticus.7194]

> @Kam.4092 said:

> I consider this a bug fix, and not balance. I don't really get the title of the thread. I'm surprised it's still going.

>

> I hated Shade stacking, and am glad it's gone. It was annoying. Knowing that it was a bug made me happy. Time to wait for the next balance patch. I wonder if people will still be upset then, hopefully not.

>

>

>

>

 

Dude... next to no one is complaining about the shade stacking nerf, we all knew that was unintended and coming, keep up. What we are complaining about is the completely random Dhuumfire + Sand Shroud nerf that landed squarely on PvE and took us out of the meta.

 

And yea people will still be upset because if going by Reaper standards anything they offer will be far too little to compensate for what they've taken.

[Kam.4092]

> @Atticus.7194 said:

> > @Kam.4092 said:

> > I consider this a bug fix, and not balance. I don't really get the title of the thread. I'm surprised it's still going.

> >

> > I hated Shade stacking, and am glad it's gone. It was annoying. Knowing that it was a bug made me happy. Time to wait for the next balance patch. I wonder if people will still be upset then, hopefully not.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> Dude... next to no one is complaining about the shade stacking nerf, we all knew that was unintended and coming, keep up. What we are complaining about is the completely random Dhuumfire + Sand Shroud nerf that landed squarely on PvE and took us out of the meta.

>

> And yea people will still be upset because if going by Reaper standards anything they offer will be far too little to compensate for what they've taken.

 

Oh I forgot about the Dhuumfire thing. :/

[DeceiverX.8361]

> @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> > > @Maunzi.3764 said:

> > >that we needed ... a full glass cannon spec in order to get viable dps with necro.

> > Big thing people fail to realize is that the necro does enough damage to clear raids. It does. Period.

> > It's just necro doesn't do enough damage to clear raids *competitively.* in *optimized* environments.

>

> Big thing you completely fail to realize is that everyone else already realizes this.

>

> Necro does way less damage than everyone else. it is technically still enough for raids - nobody doubted this. It's just that bringing ANYONE else is a much better choice.

> That is the problem people are complaining about. You should read what people actually write first, before arguing against strawmen.

>

> Why should groups bring something that is always a worse choice, when better choices are available? Groups are only acting rationally here, by picking better choices. This is what balancing needs to fix, and why games with better balance fix such issues.

>

> By the way: Your "optimized" environments are "nearly every raid group, including training runs". Even the training discords want the holy trinity of Chrono, cPS and Druid before even starting, because it just performs better in practice. I've checked three different ones, including one claiming to have over 2000 members, and not one asked for Healers: They ALL ask for cps/chrono/druid in raid signups.

 

That's exactly what I just said; that's a player and combat encounter design problem, not the lack of necromancer's raw damage. Everyone acts like nobody can complete a raid without an optimal group or refuses to do so otherwise. A group can raid with literally anything if they're half-decent on their respective classes. People would rather optimize their groups for speed-clears because there's no incentive to do anything but that; PvE is not rewarding in the experience of combat itself these days, and it's because of encounter design, and the approach to GW2 by content designers in other facets of the game has been through repetition of the same dull content.

 

That's why this is a problem. You're only ever going to see one meta build or comp. You're only ever going to see one weapon set used. You really think other professions' classes are cool with the PvE raid mentality? News flash: They're not. Because a lot of people like playing other kits or builds or concepts. That's why this problem isn't about the necromancer; you can put necromancers into the DPS meta with tons of skill splits and so on. It won't change the mentality of running what's optimal, as you've just described, and it sure as hell won't fix the problem for the strict meta of everyone within the confines of it. And you can't just make every weapon deal the same DPS. That makes no sense when you factor in things like risk, zoning, AoE, etc.

 

> If balancing is done around fringe groups that almost nobody ever experiences, then balancing fails. Imagine if PVP balancing was done about fringe compositions that never happen, instead of the actual fights every player experiences. That balance would suck, right? That's the balance you want in PVE. it's a terrible idea.

 

Balancing should be done to incorporate any and all builds into some form of scheme for an adaptive metagame. If designers only ever toy with what's being played, there is no way for a metagame to respond. Balancing to the fringe is usually positive because when you look at GW2 in particular on the design-level, most of the builds are strong or weak not from numbers perspectives but from design perspectives. There are a ton of kits that unless you just downright break the numbers into being totally overpowered, they'd never supersede what's being played, just because the design is weak. So no, you need to balance for the fringe by doing things like reworks or re-organizations. Kind of like how we need to see PvE content itself adapt to what can only be described as a stale meta for a game which has been conceptually "solved."

 

> > Meanwhile, the profession is utterly decimating the PvP formats and completely ruining a lot of the same degree of competition directly as a consequence of requested changes to boost PvE values.

>

> This is factually untrue. While you claim that "requested changes to boost PvE values" are to blame, this perception is solely due to your bias, and does not stand up to scrutiny.

>

> We have proof that your statement is blatantly false. The PvE values were only fine due to a BUG. We know this from multiple statements from the developers. In other words, PvE balance was never tested, nor even considered. If it had been, the bug would have either been noticed, or the testers would have realized the intended playstyle performs awfully, and would have buffed it (resulting in even more broken PVP). The PvE problem was so obvious that people pointed it out in the beta weekend, ANY amount of internal testing would have caught it. The PVP problems were also evident, and were also unfixed after the beta weekend.

>

> That is the problem here: Scourge was untested for both PVE and PVP, and thus had problems in both. This is a recurring theme with PoF specs, several of which have major issues. It is very likely that they were rushed before balance testing could be done.

 

I was even referring to condi reaper and the necromancer in general, not just the scourge. Historically, the necromancer has been the highest-priority kill-target in the PvP scenes since the very start of this game because of its potential to completely obliterate multiple foes and turn a fight on a dime in a very short period of time when not focused and continuously punished. This isn't disputable, either. It's been this way since the start. Like the mesmer, the necromancers' mechanics are not cohesive with competitive speed-clearing of PvE content. That's all PvE is in this game - a formula. On the other hand, it has historically always been fairly dominant in PvP and seen as a very valuable asset to have on any team, squad, etc. for the reason that its kit is actually quite good in every scenario when the fight isn't about optimizing group damage output over all else.

 

The necromancer as a whole is probably one of the better-designed professions in this game. The problem is that the popular PvE content and the optimized paths to completion of it do not require what the necromancer brings on the conceptual level.

 

Nothing is going to change that unless they just make something about the necromancer overpowered. Like as we just saw with this past bug.

 

Talk skill splits and necromancer buffs all you want, but they aren't the real answer. The same thread about X profession/build/weapon will pop up within a few days/weeks even if they managed to split everything "perfectly" to allow for all classes to work well in raids. It's a never-ending and impossible problem. There is quite literally no solution by trying to out-balance it except to remove all classes and builds or to remove all open-ended components from the game. Give players an incentive to bring diverse groups to encounters is what needs to happen. That's only solvable via encounter design.

 

I'm not complaining about the scourge being OP or ANet failing to test anything. It's just that asking for buffs to the necromancer's damage makes no sense other than cover symptoms of a greater problem.

 

And trying to solve symptoms is the reason we're in the mess we are. Burst meta? Passive freebies for everyone. The "berserker meta?" Buffing condi/nerfing power didn't do a lot to address the one-way-to-play mentality; it just went to classes for comps and not gear. The overdamage problem in the game? More blocks and negation, break bars, and so on. Necro brings nothing to groups? Slap some random utility on them. None of the real problems have been solved.

[Zoltreez.6435]

> @Atticus.7194 said:

> > @Zoltreez.6435 said:

> > > @Atticus.7194 said:

> >

> > > - Reaper was already way too OP with the go into shroud and instantly kill your enemy without actually doing anything except for pressing one button

> >

> >

> > You sir right here right now lost EVERY single credibility you had on the forums.........

>

> Hope you're not talking about me, that was a quote from @Klypto.1703

 

yeah excuse me qouting can be a bit buggy on the new forums.....

[Maunzi.3764]

> @mygamingid.5816 said:

> Under this belief, only four classes should ever be welcome: Druid, Chrono, PS Warrior, and (insert top DPS for target boss here). Anyone even 1dps worse is *worse* and should be shunned. It’s a terrible proposition, but raids are terribly designed. Necro won’t ever be top DPS, so why bother?

 

You don't videogame much, I see. Classes are taken if they are within 5-10% of whatever is currently top, because that's usually the acceptable range.

 

We know this from, oh, every other MMORPG on the market, where the exact same social dynamics apply. We also know this from the last years of GW2, where, oh, this dynamic showed itself again :)

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> The necromancer as a whole is probably one of the better-designed professions in this game. The problem is that the popular PvE content and the optimized paths to completion of it do not require what the necromancer brings on the conceptual level.

 

Like it has been said MANY times already, this thread is about PvE, not PvP or WvW. Although that's a complete different discussion where I would probably disagree with you as well (PvP has no consistent good builds, it's always been an FotM (Flavor of the Month) based game-mode, where all classes had their superior builds ones, and the Necro has been in there as well, just like any other class (can't we all remember the hammerbow, or the infamous trapper DH, or the unkillable auratank ...)) and the different game-modes can be balanced on their own as well! So for argument sake, please treat GW2 PvE as a complete different game then the other modes. It makes this discussion much more on-topic!

 

Anyway, I completely disagree with your statement that the necro is well designed at least not in the balancing field (the lore, look and feel, etc. is actually really nice, probably one of the main reasons I still like to play it). Since 2012, it has never really been on top of ANY chart, save from the brief period of time when the Reaper and Scourge got introduced. That's ok if it's like a real general good at everything class on ALL points: say top 3 everywhere, but that not the case either! Let me back this statement up. We can make a really difficult diagram/list on what points you could balance your professions on, but to keep it simple, let's consider the 'holy trinity':

1) Support: I think we can all agree that at the very moment (and definitely in history) there are a lot of classes that if you spec them the right way, they're all better than the Necro (reaper and Scourge): we all know the Chrono is with it's boon/alacrity share, the might stacking PS Berserker, the Revenant and Druid for its healing potential. And then a few that are not seen that often but still have more potential than the Barrier Scourge: the Water Ele/Tempest/Weaver and reflection/prot Guardian (DH/FB). I wouldn't even be surprised if an engineer would be even have more potential than the Necro, but let's give the Necro that one: which makes him no. 7 (out of 9) in support!

2) DPS: Well, just look at the charts, it's quite simple: we're pretty much the lowest now (9 out of 9)! And always have been in a terrible spot for that matter. Even if you split DPS into Power and Condi DPS, we're bad at both ...

3) Crowd Control (CC): It's difficult to make a list here, I know we're definitely not the worst, cause we have quite some soft CC if we consider the Necro as a whole (PvE) in the form of Chills and Cripples, etc. But if you only consider the Scourge, we actually lost a lot of access to Chill which is not improving our CC potential. Anyway, you can definitely spec a Necro (Reaper) to do decent CC. But top: NO: that's for the Mesmer, Ranger, Thief and probably even Engi and Warrior will have more potential as well

 

......

[Dadnir.5038]

He said that it's one of the better designed not one of the better balanced... I'd say that all professions have good design and that there is plenty enough variety of design to be satisfy with it, as for balance... there is still a lot of work needed for it to become satisfying and that's not limited to the necromancer.