NO Downstate should STAY permanently. - [Merged]

[Sobx.1758]

> @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:

> > @"JTGuevara.9018" said:

> > Yup! We're back to boon-ball squads...

>

> Then fix that?

>

> D:

 

Yes, by removing downstate :)

[Sobx.1758]

> @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > > And this is why Battle Maul used to finish downs.

> > >

> > > Anet, bring back Battle Maul finish and ignore the care bears.

> >

> > No thanks, battle maul finishing downs made being outnumbered even worse than downed state does. My god, that made roaming completely unfun.

>

> Sure as hell helped with zergs though, and created a pseudo no downstate. Can't complain about maul finish and want no downstate at the same time mate.

 

...you kind of can though. Downstate helps the outnumbering side (more). The same outnumbering side can relegate additional players to mount stomp. I get what you're aiming for here ("you complain about the downstate, so keep maul finishers to get rid of downstate"), but pretty sure in reality both of these just additionally help outnumbering side more than it does the outnumbered one.

 

(yay, same thread every month! :D )

[diomache.9246]

> @"Luclinraider.2317" said:

> All of the esports scene and the competitive pro's from WoW arena who gave GW2 a go at launch all said down state needs to be removed in order for GW2 pvp to be competitive or move forward.

> Anet refused to admit their mistakes and sealed GW2 fate with regard to PvP.

> Even 8 years laters I still see the weekly post begging for downed state to be removed from WvW and SPvP....but the PvP community is long gone and all that's left are bots and new players who leave after a month lol.

> Really sad because the games combat is fantastic, but their failure to admit their mistakes and remove downed state and rally from PvP has been the biggest thing working against pvp from the start.

> Sucks when you're your own greatest enemy lol.

 

WoW Arena was never competitive and neither balanced and isn't even comparable to GW2 PvP. Why the heck would someone from another game that doesn't even play it should be listened to?

[Teratus.2859]

> @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > @"Jugglemonkey.8741" said:

> > > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > > > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > > > And this is why Battle Maul used to finish downs.

> > > >

> > > > Anet, bring back Battle Maul finish and ignore the care bears.

> > >

> > > No thanks, battle maul finishing downs made being outnumbered even worse than downed state does. My god, that made roaming completely unfun.

> >

> > Tbh tho, I can't really fault a zergling replying to this saying "just don't go down then" considering that's basically what roamers are saying to zerglings regarding no downed state.

> >

> > If they changed down state so you get one res per 60s and if you go down again you skip downed state and die, that would be fair enough of a middle ground for me I think.

>

> I would say that the middle ground is one res from downstate per 60s, after that its straight to defeated. I would say that to compensate they'd have to extend the invulnerability period a little bit. Res skills get thrown around and you may not be ready to react the moment you rally and could almost immediately go into defeated without a small bump in the invulnerability window.

 

This is exactly the kind of thing i'm thinking of as well.

One downstate per battle then dead, and make it so the downed penalty cooldown doesn't tick down while in combat so players will have to break out of the fight and wait a full minute or two to get their downstate back or risk going down again and dying.

Thieves could take good advantage of this as well by picking off or harassing these players hanging around the battle so they can't get their downstate back.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > > @"Jugglemonkey.8741" said:

> > > > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > > > > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said:

> > > > > And this is why Battle Maul used to finish downs.

> > > > >

> > > > > Anet, bring back Battle Maul finish and ignore the care bears.

> > > >

> > > > No thanks, battle maul finishing downs made being outnumbered even worse than downed state does. My god, that made roaming completely unfun.

> > >

> > > Tbh tho, I can't really fault a zergling replying to this saying "just don't go down then" considering that's basically what roamers are saying to zerglings regarding no downed state.

> > >

> > > If they changed down state so you get one res per 60s and if you go down again you skip downed state and die, that would be fair enough of a middle ground for me I think.

> >

> > I would say that the middle ground is one res from downstate per 60s, after that its straight to defeated. I would say that to compensate they'd have to extend the invulnerability period a little bit. Res skills get thrown around and you may not be ready to react the moment you rally and could almost immediately go into defeated without a small bump in the invulnerability window.

>

> This is exactly the kind of thing i'm thinking of as well.

> One downstate per battle then dead, and make it so the downed penalty cooldown doesn't tick down while in combat so players will have to break out of the fight and wait a full minute or two to get their downstate back or risk going down again and dying.

> Thieves could take good advantage of this as well by picking off or harassing these players hanging around the battle so they can't get their downstate back.

 

Yeah, I can see that being a viable tactic.

[Widmo.3186]

> @"diomache.9246" said:

> > @"Luclinraider.2317" said:

> > All of the esports scene and the competitive pro's from WoW arena who gave GW2 a go at launch all said down state needs to be removed in order for GW2 pvp to be competitive or move forward.

> > Anet refused to admit their mistakes and sealed GW2 fate with regard to PvP.

> > Even 8 years laters I still see the weekly post begging for downed state to be removed from WvW and SPvP....but the PvP community is long gone and all that's left are bots and new players who leave after a month lol.

> > Really sad because the games combat is fantastic, but their failure to admit their mistakes and remove downed state and rally from PvP has been the biggest thing working against pvp from the start.

> > Sucks when you're your own greatest enemy lol.

>

> WoW Arena was never competitive and neither balanced and isn't even comparable to GW2 PvP. Why the heck would someone from another game that doesn't even play it should be listened to?

 

Yes, I like potatoes. Actually no, I dont, but pineapple pizza is good.

[Jeran.6850]

> @"Sceinna.3561" said:

> I've asked for this almost 10 years ago when I still played. It's been 6 years since I last played GW2 now. Not because of the game, just don't have time for gaming in general, sadly enough.

>

> Downed state is something only zergs and PVE benefit from, in PvP it plays a huge role too ofc, but in WvW it ruins a lot of fights.

>

> I remember 1v10 fights where I had to down a guy so many times he instantly died. Downed once is fine, if you go downed twice within a minute you should stay down. The penalty isn't harsh enough.

>

> - Laela Blackbird

 

 

Playing something like thief or ranger, picking a target out of ten people and, as you say, downing THAT target (more than once), is not a 1v10. Its just you, taking advantage of an unbalanced class (s build). Looking at the name "Laela Blackbird", i am pretty sure you do play ranger...

Anyway, what you picture here is one of the reasons to KEEP the downstate, not to remove it.

[ledernierrempart.6871]

> @"Jeran.6850" said:

> > @"Sceinna.3561" said:

> > I've asked for this almost 10 years ago when I still played. It's been 6 years since I last played GW2 now. Not because of the game, just don't have time for gaming in general, sadly enough.

> >

> > Downed state is something only zergs and PVE benefit from, in PvP it plays a huge role too ofc, but in WvW it ruins a lot of fights.

> >

> > I remember 1v10 fights where I had to down a guy so many times he instantly died. Downed once is fine, if you go downed twice within a minute you should stay down. The penalty isn't harsh enough.

> >

> > - Laela Blackbird

>

>

> Playing something like thief or ranger, picking a target out of ten people and, as you say, downing THAT target (more than once), is not a 1v10. Its just you, taking advantage of an unbalanced class (s build). Looking at the name "Laela Blackbird", i am pretty sure you do play ranger...

> Anyway, what you picture here is one of the reasons to KEEP the downstate, not to remove it.

 

so you are okay with those kind of builds because downstate exist? wouldn't it be better to remove downstate and nerf those builds?

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> > @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:

> > > @"JTGuevara.9018" said:

> > > Yup! We're back to boon-ball squads...

> >

> > Then fix that?

> >

> > D:

>

> Yes, by removing downstate :)

 

For completeness.

 

> @"JTGuevara.9018" said:

> ...who's players BARELY go down! It's a monumental task just to take ONE down.

 

Changing downstate won't change the "monumental task" to get them down in the first place. Sounds to me like a balance issue causing players to make a Meta-build(s) that OP finds problematic.

 

Not sure I'd try to apply No-Downstate like it was flex tape to everyone's perceived problems, but that's my opinion. OP seems to think it will "COUNTER" zergs, so to each their own.

 

D:

[kash.9213]

We need a reworked downstate, taking it out entirely isn't necessary and gw2 combat would be bland. Don't be lazy with your build or approach, you have as much freedom with your build as those squads and group comps you're complaining about.

[Jeran.6850]

> @"ledernierrempart.6871" said:

 

> so you are okay with those kind of builds because downstate exist? wouldn't it be better to remove downstate and nerf those builds?

 

Hello friend,

 

you like to play some kind of "devils advocate", which i am usually fine with, but... if anything about my opinion about "these builds" isnt very clear know, i dont know what else to say. Of course I am not fine with these builds, even though i may be biased (everyone in this forum is somehow, so what).

 

There isnt the slightest glimpse of a chance, that Arenanet would ever adress the problems that will arise, if the downstate will be removed. Stealth is a topic that had been talked about YEARS before the first "no downstate"-event, but Arenanet refuse to change the mechanic.

 

There are so many things that are wrong, and its not only on the "roamer" side of things.

 

Why does Firebrands do HAVE to have access to waterfields, and even more condition clear than on guardian (with trooper rune)?

Why is stance-sharing so weak on Soulbeasts in comparison to tempests aura share?

Why is it still possible for a warrior to jump into 50+ people, disabling siege, getting out unharmed - literally invincible, undefeatable, for 10+ seconds.

Why does ranger longbow 5 doesnt have a line-of-sight-requirement?

Why can rev skills teleport their character through obstacles?

 

No, i am not ok with these builds.

I dont believe Arenanet will adjust anything the way it should, if the downstate will be removed permanently. So i want it to stay, for now.

 

Btw, i did say several times, that i want to keep the downstate, but change the downstate abilitys, the hp in downstate and the rally mechanic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ASP.8093]

> @"Jeran.6850" said:

> Why is it still possible for a warrior to jump into 50+ people, disabling siege, getting out unharmed - literally invincible, undefeatable, for 10+ seconds.

 

Err, this one's easy to answer: because if nobody could do this, then the game would actively be worse.

 

Blowing all your cooldowns to heroically buy time for other defenders to show up is the entire purpose of a Siege Disabler, and there's sufficient counter-play in the form of projectile defense, CC, and just plain spacing stuff out instead of building six catas right on top of each other. Some of the best fights I've ever had in WvW were made possible by Siege Disabler shenanigans.

[Svarty.8019]

TBH it got boring pewpewing people in zergs after a while.

[Svarty.8019]

> @"SpellOfIniquity.1780" said:

> > @"Svarty.8019" said:

> > > @"DeceiverX.8361" said:

> > > > @"Svarty.8019" said:

> > > > 1. SKILL is not necessarily desirable.

> > > > 2. I would prefer it if people didn't justify everything with "this/that should be deleted because it doesn't promote skilled play".

> > > > 3. If you demand that everybody who pays RL money to the gem store be skilled to play the game, the company may very well go bust.

> > >

> > > Why the hell would anyone play a competitive game/mode with skilled play being rewarded as not being a, if not THE primary concern? At the very least, why should there ever be mechanics that actively work against promoting people to do better and being rewarded for it?

> > >

> > > That's like saying pro sports should solely be based on a raffle of random civilians and not athletic accomplishments. That makes absolutely no sense lol.

> > >

> > > If you don't want to win by being better at the game than your opponent, why are you playing player versus player games/formats at all?...

> >

> > This is not a sport, it is a passtime, a hobby, something you don't do as a job. It's deceitful to compare it to a "ProFESSIONAL" sportsperson, where their livelyhood depends on the outcome.

> >

> > I like strawmen as much as the next strawman, but meh, nice try. I guess your name is appropriate, at least.

> >

> > WvW is a unique gamemode. As much as the PvP crowd has desperately tried to take over with consistent whining on the forums, and GETTING THEIR WAY for the most part, the mode at it's heart is about making friends and doing things together. The fact that those things tend to be zapping enemies or being zapped is a secondary concern to many of us.

> >

> > The sooner we all (including the developers) acknowledge that not everybody here is trying to be amazing at 1v1, the better off we'll all be.

>

> WvW is not about 1 v 1, correct. But it is a diverse environment with a variety of ways to be played. Some require greater effort and knowledge than others and are demanding of the player(s) involved to be skilled and to improve to succeed. The way WvW has evolved, both via the community and balance, has severely lessened the reward of intelligent game play on a smaller scale. Many players who prefer this aspect of WvW are rightfully frustrated as their efforts are so often squandered.

>

> People are entitled to play WvW as casually or as seriously as they like, as they are the rest of the game. But there should be no prejudice against those who seek to better themselves whether it's for the sake of their server or for personal gain. Everyone should be rewarded equally, though the means by which those rewards come may vary - some through material, others through discipline. It is ANet's responsibility to appease everyone to the best of their ability and not to favor either side.

>

> If you think it is wrong or silly for people to want to get better, that's okay. But demanding others appeal to your vision of what WvW should be is called bigotry and I doubt if you'll get much support for being so asinine.

 

After all of that holier than thou ranting, you imagine that I've got some "vision" and that I'm a bigot? You've literally laid out YOUR vision of what WvW is and then projected wrongness onto me for a vision that I haven't even stated. The hypocrisy is astonishing. I like your cheek, you've got some gall.

 

 

[Shroud.2307]

> @"Svarty.8019" said:

 

> After all of that holier than thou ranting

 

> projected

 

? ? ?

[ArchonWing.9480]

Some people are never on the winning side of any fight that required their contribution so they won't get it. They may react with fear and anger against those that succeed every now and then, as they've never done it.

 

Please be understanding. ;)

 

Also on a side note Elixir S+superspeed is probably enough on its own to get out of a jam, but U usually > C. I would not rely on C to save my life since a CC is gg but you can still use cleansing sigils, while there is no sigil that gives stab or stunbreak. Ofc I run Bulwark because I am too lazy to switch vs bigger group, but meh; won't tell people how to play their toons. I'd rather nitpick pointless whatifs in videos instead.

[Shroud.2307]

> @"ArchonWing.9480" said:

> Also on a side note Elixir S+superspeed is probably enough on its own to get out of a jam, but U usually > C. I would not rely on C to save my life since a CC is gg but you can still use cleansing sigils, while there is no sigil that gives stab or stunbreak. Ofc I run Bulwark because I am too lazy to switch vs bigger group, but meh; won't tell people how to play their toons. I'd rather nitpick pointless whatifs in videos instead.

 

Elixir U is like, mandatory in every build for me now. It's one of those skills that has become so stacked it can work with pretty much any stat/trait alignment and still be extremely beneficial to have. Spectral Walk, "Shake It Off!" and Shadow Step are some of the other skills in the game that are just so versatile and stacked with strong effects that they become oppressive to other skills by almost always being a better choice.

 

Also, I think Elixir C is a good choice in smaller fights but becomes worse the larger the scale of the fight because like you said, all it takes is one CC and it's gg.

 

This is a different topic to the thread subject entirely, but what ever.

[BeepBoopBop.5403]

> @"Seryi.7936" said:

> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > @"scerevisiae.1972" said:

> > > very very few people actually like it.

> > *(only about 70% of the people but lets totally live in the magical land of opposite truth)*

> I rarely post, but I just needed to chime in for emphasis. If there's anything glancing at the forums proves, it's that there's good reasons why the average poster *isn't* in charge of game design nor balance decisions. Very, *very* good reasons.

> > @"BeepBoopBop.5403" said:

> > Content like this is not hard to make for yourself if you actually try to fight outnumbered. This situation is not uncommon at ALL and is hardly worth filming if not for all the 'no downstate' discussion.

> This same situation can happen in PvP to a lesser extent, yet the complaints about down state are much, much less frequent there in spite of being overall a far more competitive environment. I wonder why none of the top percentile complains about it? I mean, it's such a carry for bad players, right?

 

You serious? You can't think WHY this would not be as big of a problem in PvP? Could it be because PvP is contained to 5v5 people in a match? Could it be the lack of minstrel revive bots? I wonder /s

[Doug.4930]

> @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:

> > @"ledernierrempart.6871" said:

> > i can already see people shouting at duelists because they get downed by their opponents and give them points...

> > but the real issue would be a group of friends accross 2 servers with one downing repeatedly the other group and another one revivng them as fast as possible so you get to farm points, XP or whatever this would give you.

> > thus arenanet will never give any reward for simply downing someone.

>

> If you think this doesn't already happen with finishes and just wait till OOC to let buddies rez and swap sides to get points/abuse the system I got a lack of war in Ba Sing Se to sell you...

 

I think the actual difference this makes is extremely negligible, besides people who actually want to grind the same activity over and over again could just go to PvE and make 10 times as much in half the time.

[Doug.4930]

> @"Threather.9354" said:

> Terrible idea, downstate is perfectly fine, maybe they could tune down ress speed a tiny bit to make ress skills like IoL and banner more dominant.

>

> Don't play a game for rewards.

>

> On summits stream it was funny how he thought downstate was stupid and didn't even try to rally/heal himself up whenever it happened. This is how I imagine you no downstate lovers, you give up already before you're actually dead. If your issue is that enemy resses downs you make too easy, then ask for ress speed nerfs, not removal of downstate. Also some downstate autoattacks do little too much damage while others feel like they do nothing.

 

Yes but actually no. Because us no downstate lovers are usually in downstate getting cleaved by a group 2-3 times our size. Which is one of the biggest problems with downstate. If you go into downstate against a larger group GG you're dead 99% of the time. If you go into downstate while fighting for the larger group then GG you get revived 99% of the time.

 

Thats the problem.

[Doug.4930]

> @"jpsssss.7530" said:

> I'd honestly agree, but the number of commanders that baby rage and go silent when they die instead of still issuing instructions is insane. I'd rather have the enemy be able to power res than have my commander be useless more often than not. Granted that's an issue with players, but its something I've noticed.

 

Like you said though it is a player issue. Can't sacrifice the games balance to appease 5% of players who actively pin up.

[Doug.4930]

> @"Antioche.7034" said:

> > @"Mauzi.5892" said:

> > > @"Antioche.7034" said:

> > > > @"Mauzi.5892" said:

> > > > > @"jpsssss.7530" said:

> > > > > I bet you play a cancer one-shot/nuke build. There are some builds with little to no counterplay options (*cough* thief and ranger *cough) and they always come out of the woodwork on no downstate weeks

> > > >

> > > > this is just wrong. I see ranger and thieves ALL THE TIME. It's only during no-downstate-week, that you realize how much you suck, because you can't rally off of some random scrub.

> > > >

> > > > I love the no downstate. Maybe people start playing with more caution and brain instead of going full zerk when they have no skill.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Imagine believing randomly getting oneshot by someone from stealth is being bad at the game. If that's what you call "Playing with more brain", no thanks.

> >

> > Peh - leaaaase... WHO exactly is ONESHOTTING you from stealth?!

> > Whait what do you say? There are thieves in WvW? Must be new...

> > MAYBE dont play full glass-cannon and use some of those other gazllion attribute combinations the game offers. Like Soldiers maybe...

> > It's EXACTLY people like you that run around with their META kitten build and in full zerk gear and then complain when they get outplayed by everybody and who rely on rally to be able to play. Adapt to the situation and get better at the game instead of being a sheep and complaining about change.

> >

> >

> > FACT: downed state is something that favors bad players more.

>

> Imagine saying there are no thieves in no downstate week, to start with. Put more thoughts into your answers if you want to sounds credible.

>

> I don't play full zerk, I play some equivalent of sage/menderbrand from sPvP lately, or DH sometimes. I also rarely get oneshot because I'm reactive enough to press my stunbreaks, dodges or aegis, and because most people playing those builds are terrible players. It's still incredible boring and stupid that they try to oneshot, fail miserably, stealth and port away, just to retry oneshotting you 15 seconds later. That's what I call kitten gameplay.

>

> Btw, I have all of sPvP's top 250 titles if you're worried I don't know how to play and get outplayed by everybody. Not that it's impressive at all, but I don't usually run into much troubles in WvWs 1v1 or reasonnable 1vXs.

>

> P.S : What an incredible surprise that you mention below you are playing some full zerk Deadeye builds. Read irony ofc.

 

So nerf one shot builds. Move assassins signet to an elite skill. Lock stealth attacks after being stealthed for 6 seconds. Repeat similar steps for other problem builds. Its so much easier to actually balance problem builds than it is to degrade the game for everyone by having downstate be the way it is.

[Seryi.7936]

> @"BeepBoopBop.5403" said:

> You serious? You can't think WHY this would not be as big of a problem in PvP? Could it be because PvP is contained to 5v5 people in a match? Could it be the lack of minstrel revive bots? I wonder /s

Sounds to me like an issue with those overperforming builds and certain stat combinations, then, not an issue with down state... which has been part of the design doc of the game since well before the first beta tests and which everyone has either accepted or, better, learned to use to their advantage. If people are *so* above the skill level of these people getting downed constantly, they can secure the kill or use the downed body to their benefit by punishing revive attempts. Especially if your build is optimized for 1vX and you know how to play.

 

And if you're dealing with more numbers than just 5 (which you won't win against if they're even remotely near your skill level... not even equal, just not asleep at the keyboard), then why do you believe you deserve to win in that encounter? Like it or not, downed state is a part of the dynamics and flow of the game's combat, and has been designed as such since the beginning. And like it or not, in a game mode such as WvW, there is always a point when numbers trump individual skill; the game mode will never achieve complete parity between skill levels, builds, or server populations. Nor should it, since many of the proposed "solutions" to these issues will simply result in even more issues than they fix.

 

I'm very glad people like you are not a game designer, nor in charge of any balance passes, if your suggestions are anything to go by.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Doug.4930" said:

> > @"Threather.9354" said:

> > Terrible idea, downstate is perfectly fine, maybe they could tune down ress speed a tiny bit to make ress skills like IoL and banner more dominant.

> >

> > Don't play a game for rewards.

> >

> > On summits stream it was funny how he thought downstate was stupid and didn't even try to rally/heal himself up whenever it happened. This is how I imagine you no downstate lovers, you give up already before you're actually dead. If your issue is that enemy resses downs you make too easy, then ask for ress speed nerfs, not removal of downstate. Also some downstate autoattacks do little too much damage while others feel like they do nothing.

>

> Yes but actually no. Because us no downstate lovers are usually in downstate getting cleaved by a group 2-3 times our size. Which is one of the biggest problems with downstate. If you go into downstate against a larger group GG you're dead 99% of the time. If you go into downstate while fighting for the larger group then GG you get revived 99% of the time.

>

> Thats the problem.

Which still indicate two things:

 

1) It is a problem with numbers, which will always be there regardless of downed state or no. If you keep fighting a group 2-3 times your size and dont win, you need more people.

 

2) It is a problem with multiplicative healing and recovery from downed state, ie it can be significantly reduced by making it 1:1 healing, reducing the speed of healing and removing rally.

 

I dont think it's "perfectly fine" either but unfortunetly we will have arguments between extremes.

[Doug.4930]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Doug.4930" said:

> > > @"Threather.9354" said:

> > > Terrible idea, downstate is perfectly fine, maybe they could tune down ress speed a tiny bit to make ress skills like IoL and banner more dominant.

> > >

> > > Don't play a game for rewards.

> > >

> > > On summits stream it was funny how he thought downstate was stupid and didn't even try to rally/heal himself up whenever it happened. This is how I imagine you no downstate lovers, you give up already before you're actually dead. If your issue is that enemy resses downs you make too easy, then ask for ress speed nerfs, not removal of downstate. Also some downstate autoattacks do little too much damage while others feel like they do nothing.

> >

> > Yes but actually no. Because us no downstate lovers are usually in downstate getting cleaved by a group 2-3 times our size. Which is one of the biggest problems with downstate. If you go into downstate against a larger group GG you're dead 99% of the time. If you go into downstate while fighting for the larger group then GG you get revived 99% of the time.

> >

> > Thats the problem.

> Which still indicate two things:

>

> 1) It is a problem with numbers, which will always be there regardless of downed state or no. If you keep fighting a group 2-3 times your size and dont win, you need more people.

 

Yes exactly the group 2-3 times bigger should win the fight without downstate. Downstate just acts as another boon for the larger group while being a hindrance to the smaller. Why should the larger group get more of an advantage on top of the already present numbers advantage?

 

As much as I would like downstate deleted I could be open to compromise such as some of the changes you suggested.