"Condi Burst"

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Funky.4861 said:

> Assuming the same health, a condi class/burst (whatever) should be able to kill a high-armour target in the same timespan as a power class/burst (whatever) kills a low-armour class.

>

> This isn't even going into buffs/debuffs, immunities, rotations, gear etc (it's much easier to deck a char out in zerker gear than it is vipers).

>

> If a class needs to materially invest and strategise their skills to maximise their damage then it doesn't matter if that damage is from conditions or power. People are just stuck in the old-style of preferring power damage- it's somehow more acceptable to die to something physically hitting you than a stack of bleeds/burn/torment. Perhaps it's because i play necro and thief that i am used to not having any blocks or immunities (bar bandits' defense and DD max 7 dodges with signet and heal skill) that i don't have any sympathy for these ppl crying to nerf condi damage output.

 

Not really, no, because that just makes defense pointless. A condi damage spec should be able to kill a high armored target much faster than a direct damage spec should, but not as quickly as a direct damage spec kills a low armor target.

 

The problem people have is that condition damage is clearly over-tuned on numerous builds. But, actually, you raise a good point - one of the reasons conditions are frustrating is because they are often not telegraphed in any way, so people have no clue how to avoid them and often don't see themselves getting hit by it. This is another advantage they have in addition to bypassing armor, so it's even more evidence that condition damage needs to be reigned in significantly.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @otto.5684 said:

> I think that the path of least work is remove resistance, but make condis subject to all damage reduction mechanics like power (toughness, protection, any and all damage reduction class specific skills). Also, make condis deal no damage to distorted targets. I generally, think that HP pools are due for a buff. People may not remember, but we went through two stages of damage power creep, before HoT with becoming able to equip 3 full trait lines. Then with HoT, with the introduction of elites. Slightly larger health pools will reduce condi nuking impact. I think they should increase HP pools for larges pools by 2K, medium pools by 2.5K and small pools by 3K.

>

> This will require some work on warrior and rev, but most other classes do not have access to resistance anyway.

 

I used to advocate something like this, but, I'm not sure. There are a lot of reworks they could potentially go with, but considering how the damage types were originally designed, I'm not sure this is the path of least resistance.

 

I do support a health buff, though. Even in PvE, one-shotting is way too much of a thing.

[Panda.1967]

To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

 

This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

 

One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

 

If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

[Sir Vincent III.1286]

 

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @saerni.2584 said:

> > You misunderstand me Einlanzer.

> >

> > Of course armor should change those numbers. Just as more or less cleanse can change those numbers.

> >

> > I’m merely pointing out that in order to reduce the burst nature of conditions you need to eliminate the reason why burst is necessary: that is the abundance of cleanse.

> >

> > I don’t mean my numbers as serious suggestions. A condition user can expect to do more or less damage based on cleanses. Just as a power user can expect differences depending on armor. Ignoring that cleanse/armor adjusts the DPS a condition build should ramp up to higher DPS later. A power build should front load their damage.

> >

> > That said, a low cleanse target may die faster to a condition build (be burst down) than to a power build (assuming it has power damage mitigation). Or, a high cleanse target may take less damage even after a long period of time compared to a power build (assuming low armor).

> >

> > But, assuming equal armor and cleanse the short term game should power focused and the long term game condition focused.

>

> Yes, I more or less agree. However, my argument is that cleanses should be less abundant, and that condition damage should be downtuned. This would create better balance between the two, where the average glass target would be more susceptible to direct damage even over the long term. It is my adamant opinion that the paradigm of "conditions should always do more if you assume x length of time" is folly. Maybe if you assume a mid-high range armor value, but not otherwise.

>

> I also will restate my view here that "condi burst" is a red herring. Condi should be burstable to an extent, it just shouldn't result in the high short term damage it does. But, the problem is not the "burst" (as in the rapid fire succession of condition-landing), it's the tuning on the damage ticks. Immunity and cleansing mechanics are too prolific in the game, and too necessary to counter conditions.

 

If what you're suggesting is to be implemented, then the Dev needs to redesign the core mechanic of conditions. It seems that to achieve the goal you want, conditions should not be potency stackable per application; instead, it increases potency overtime which will prevent condi-burst and make cleanses and resistance less of a necessity.

 

For example; I cannot stack bleeding potency and any additional bleeding applcation will only increase the duration -- just as how the non-damaging conditions functions. Then every second the bleeding condition will increase in potency until cleansed or the target dies.

 

Now this may achieve the goal you want, but it will require ArenaNet to reblance everything -- I mean everything -- in the game. So as you can see that will never happen. They might as well make GW3.

[Adenin.5973]

> @Panda.1967 said:

> To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

>

> This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

>

> One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

>

> If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

 

I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

 

With full Vipers gear we get:

Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

Maul dmg: 1559

 

With full Berserkers gear we get:

Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

Maul dmg: 1710

 

**Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

 

Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

 

_Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

 

Used tool:

http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

[DeceiverX.8361]

> @Frostwolve.2916 said:

> My view of the whole thing is, damage has gone up consistently since hot with little to no increase in negating effects.

 

U wot m8?

 

Core game damage had to be increased by roughly 50% in some cases just to be able to deal with some of the more recent additions to defenses.

 

Whether or not the massive increases in damage from post-HoT GW2 are the cause or result of increased amount of negation (major increase in blocks/invulns/etc., permanent stability, protection, vigor, passive damage drop, etc. on a number of builds) is a chicken-and-egg scenario. But saying the negation isn't there is way off.

 

OP is correct, as is Indigo in particular that there's too much of everything these days - but let's face it: It's not going to get better given the income disparity from PvE vs PvP players, since the PvP community is dead.

[thrdeye.1028]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> It's a bad paradigm. Power damage **should** be expected to outperform condition damage against targets with low armor, _no matter how long the fight lasts_. High armor should translate into it taking more than 4 seconds to kill someone, which swings the balance in favor of condition damage.

 

Why? Armor isn't the only factor here. Condition damage also has a ramp up time and damage mitigation skills can be used reactively. Power damage can take advantage of smaller windows of opportunity and those defending against it need to use their damage mitigation proactively. Condition damage needs to be higher to compensate for these disadvantages or there would be no reason to use it.

 

Edit: I should clarify that power builds in general need some love. I just don't think armor should be the primary factor in balancing the two damage types.

[Adenin.5973]

> @thrdeye.1028 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > It's a bad paradigm. Power damage **should** be expected to outperform condition damage against targets with low armor, _no matter how long the fight lasts_. High armor should translate into it taking more than 4 seconds to kill someone, which swings the balance in favor of condition damage.

>

> Why? Armor isn't the only factor here. Condition damage also has a ramp up time and damage mitigation skills can be used reactively. Power damage can take advantage of smaller windows of opportunity and those defending against it need to use their damage mitigation proactively. Condition damage needs to be higher to compensate for these disadvantages or there would be no reason to use it.

 

True, condition damage is like a bet on the future. Your opponent could condi cleanse after you stacked 5 sec+ conditions on him, transfer them right back into your face or use resistance.

With power dmg you get instant feedback, hit or miss. Condition damage is (or should be) like a risky but under the right conditions, more rewarding long term investment

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @thrdeye.1028 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > It's a bad paradigm. Power damage **should** be expected to outperform condition damage against targets with low armor, _no matter how long the fight lasts_. High armor should translate into it taking more than 4 seconds to kill someone, which swings the balance in favor of condition damage.

>

> Why? Armor isn't the only factor here. Condition damage also has a ramp up time and damage mitigation skills can be used reactively. Power damage can take advantage of smaller windows of opportunity and those defending against it need to use their damage mitigation proactively. Condition damage needs to be higher to compensate for these disadvantages or there would be no reason to use it.

>

> Edit: I should clarify that power builds in general need some love. I just don't think armor should be the primary factor in balancing the two damage types.

 

Condition damage has short ramp up time, as it should, and mitigation skills have exploded since condi became OP two years back. There weren't nearly as many of them before. Armor should be the primary balancer. We have too many boons and reactive effects, and it needs to be scaled back.

 

> @Adenin.5973 said:

> > @thrdeye.1028 said:

> > > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > > It's a bad paradigm. Power damage **should** be expected to outperform condition damage against targets with low armor, _no matter how long the fight lasts_. High armor should translate into it taking more than 4 seconds to kill someone, which swings the balance in favor of condition damage.

> >

> > Why? Armor isn't the only factor here. Condition damage also has a ramp up time and damage mitigation skills can be used reactively. Power damage can take advantage of smaller windows of opportunity and those defending against it need to use their damage mitigation proactively. Condition damage needs to be higher to compensate for these disadvantages or there would be no reason to use it.

>

> True, condition damage is like a bet on the future. Your opponent could condi cleanse after you stacked 5 sec+ conditions on him, transfer them right back into your face or use resistance.

> With power dmg you get instant feedback, hit or miss. Condition damage is (or should be) like a risky but under the right conditions, more rewarding long term investment

 

No, it shouldn't. It should be good in some situations (heavily armored foes) and worse in others. They should both be rewarding.

[DeceiverX.8361]

It's a combination of problems. Power is weaker because of permanent spammable protection (something which used to not exist) and other permanent power damaga reduction effects, long cleanse cooldowns relative to very short mass condition application cooldowns, and how a lot of cleanses aren't meant to cope with so many concurrent DoT and cover conditions all at once.

 

There's just too much damage and too many anti-power walls in the way while no real mitigation to conditions aside from a very binary, short-lived boon that also takes top priority in removal.

 

I still think the biggest guilty party is dire/tb gear in respects to WvW, since it's effectively full tank stats and absolutely stupid amounts of damage.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @DeceiverX.8361 said:

> It's a combination of problems. Power is weaker because of permanent spammable protection (something which used to not exist) and other permanent power damaga reduction effects, long cleanse cooldowns relative to very short mass condition application cooldowns, and how a lot of cleanses aren't meant to cope with so many concurrent DoT and cover conditions all at once.

>

> There's just too much damage and too many anti-power walls in the way while no real mitigation to conditions aside from a very binary, short-lived boon that also takes top priority in removal.

>

> I still think the biggest guilty party is dire/tb gear in respects to WvW, since it's effectively full tank stats and absolutely stupid amounts of damage.

 

Yeah, I've made the case in other posts that a lot of the problem with condition damage is that it's weighted too much toward one attribute, which gives it way more flexibility. But this is another problem that would be solved by just reducing condition damage across the board. Viper should be competitive with Berseker. Dire/Rabid/Rampager should not be - they sacrifice some offense for better defense or utility.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> Condition damage should not outdps direct damage in a fight with a low-armor target no matter how long the fight lasts.

 

Why? Because you think it should?

 

You seem to be basing all your thinking on an assumption, that the main point of condition damage is to ignore armor. Unfortunately, that assumption is faulty.

 

If it was the one main point of condition damage, then it wouldn't be a Damage over Time effect. Instead, you'd have something similar to the Blood attribute line of GW1 Necros (or Mesmer's Illusionary Weaponry). Based on that, we can clearly see that it is, in fact, _not_ the main point. The _DoT characteristics_ is. And Anet explained time after time that for DoT to be usable at all, it has to be at least slightly better in longterm fights (if not, everyone would always pick the frontloaded damage over it).

 

Now, the condi burst _is_ a problem that should be somehow dealt with, and i'd be happier if the difference between the damage types was smaller, but i do not believe that what you propose is a good solution to anything. Especially since it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, because it's a problem based on your apparent mistaken understanding of Anet's design goals.

 

 

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

Don't pretend that the armor piercing effect of conditions is negligible. There are countless times where Anet has put enemies into the game with high armor just to be vulnerable to conditions. Vale Guardian, Bristlebacks, Scarlet's blue hologram, Mordrem Husks, etc.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> Don't pretend that the armor piercing effect of conditions is negligible. There are countless times where Anet has put enemies into the game with high armor just to be vulnerable to conditions. Vale Guardian, Bristlebacks, Scarlet's blue hologram, Mordrem Husks, etc.

 

Well, yeah, but the point is that conditions don't rely on this to be effective. It tends to be better than power even against low armor mobs.

> @Astralporing.1957 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > Condition damage should not outdps direct damage in a fight with a low-armor target no matter how long the fight lasts.

>

> Why? Because you think it should?

>

> You seem to be basing all your thinking on an assumption, that the main point of condition damage is to ignore armor. Unfortunately, that assumption is faulty.

>

> If it was the one main point of condition damage, then it wouldn't be a Damage over Time effect. Instead, you'd have something similar to the Blood attribute line of GW1 Necros (or Mesmer's Illusionary Weaponry). Based on that, we can clearly see that it is, in fact, _not_ the main point. The _DoT characteristics_ is. And Anet explained time after time that for DoT to be usable at all, it has to be at least slightly better in longterm fights (if not, everyone would always pick the frontloaded damage over it).

>

> Now, the condi burst _is_ a problem that should be somehow dealt with, and i'd be happier if the difference between the damage types was smaller, but i do not believe that what you propose is a good solution to anything. Especially since it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, because it's a problem based on your apparent mistaken understanding of Anet's design goals.

>

>

 

Because it objectively should if you expect to ever have balance between the two. Let me see how much simpler I can make this for some of you. You have two game modes - one in which fights tend to be long (not balanced around), and one in which fights tend to be short (balanced around). So, if the primary balancer for condition damage is time, then condition damage will always be the primary meta in PvE, unless Anet decides to start balancing around PvE, and then condition damage will become useless in PvP.

 

Condi burst is a made up term that represents an academic hoop to rationalize why condition damage is so strong. Conditions were always intended to be applied quickly, because their original design schema was to bypass armor. The dot format was just thematically worked for that. That's why their durations tend to be in the 3-4 second range instead of the 30 second range. They are not comparable to DoTs in other games. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Panda.1967]

> @Adenin.5973 said:

> > @Panda.1967 said:

> > To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

> >

> > This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

> >

> > One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> > However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

> >

> > If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

>

> I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

> I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

>

> With full Vipers gear we get:

> Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

> Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

> Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

> Maul dmg: 1559

>

> With full Berserkers gear we get:

> Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

> Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

> Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

> Maul dmg: 1710

>

> **Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

> Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

> Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

>

> Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

>

> _Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

>

> Used tool:

> http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

 

A quick comparison of average crit values using your numbers. (Damage x crit mult) / crit chance

This gives an average crit value per hit, so...

 

Viper

Wintersbite: +517 damage

Maul: +795 damage

 

Berserker

Wintersbite: +1188 damage

Maul: +1830 damage

 

This puts total numbers up at:

Wintersbite: 1530 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg (Viper) vs 2298 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg (Berserker)

Maul: 2354 (Viper) vs 3540 (Berserker)

 

Wintersbite +33% damage Viper's

Maul +50% damage Berserker

 

Overall, with crit factored in they even out, especially when you factor in armor. Dealing slightly less direct damage in exchange for nearly 6x condition damage, is ultimately the preferable option. Especially when you consider the fact that you can stack the condition damage, turning the slight damage bonus of a power build per hit into nothing. Not to mention a condi build can get extra condition stacks from traits and runes with crits.

 

The formulas and damage of Condi is actually quite well balanced, it's only thrown off balance by the fact that hybrid stat sets allow for both to reach high levels. Honestly Rampager's is the only hybrid pure DPS set that is remotely balanced since both Power and Condi are it's minor stats, and it has no Ferocity. The Condi equivalent to Berserker should give Condi, Expertise, Precision. Lower initial damage, but easier to stack due to longer durations allowing it to eventually surpass power. If they remove the hybrid sets and replace them with proper condi sets, we'd actually see a more balanced playing field between the two.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Panda.1967 said:

> > @Adenin.5973 said:

> > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

> > >

> > > This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

> > >

> > > One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> > > However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

> > >

> > > If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

> >

> > I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

> > I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

> >

> > With full Vipers gear we get:

> > Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

> > Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

> > Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

> > Maul dmg: 1559

> >

> > With full Berserkers gear we get:

> > Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

> > Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

> > Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

> > Maul dmg: 1710

> >

> > **Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

> > Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

> > Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

> >

> > Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

> >

> > _Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

> >

> > Used tool:

> > http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

>

> A quick comparison of average crit values using your numbers. (Damage x crit mult) / crit chance

> This gives an average crit value per hit, so...

>

> Viper

> Wintersbite: +517 damage

> Maul: +795 damage

>

> Berserker

> Wintersbite: +1188 damage

> Maul: +1830 damage

>

> This puts total numbers up at:

> Wintersbite: 1530 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg (Viper) vs 2298 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg (Berserker)

> Maul: 2354 (Viper) vs 3540 (Berserker)

>

> Wintersbite +33% damage Viper's

> Maul +50% damage Berserker

>

> Overall, with crit factored in they even out, especially when you factor in armor. Dealing slightly less direct damage in exchange for nearly 6x condition damage, is ultimately the preferable option. Especially when you consider the fact that you can stack the condition damage, turning the slight damage bonus of a power build per hit into nothing. Not to mention a condi build can get extra condition stacks from traits and runes with crits.

>

> The formulas and damage of Condi is actually quite well balanced, it's only thrown off balance by the fact that hybrid stat sets allow for both to reach high levels. Honestly Rampager's is the only hybrid pure DPS set that is remotely balanced since both Power and Condi are it's minor stats, and it has no Ferocity. The Condi equivalent to Berserker should give Condi, Expertise, Precision. Lower initial damage, but easier to stack due to longer durations allowing it to eventually surpass power. If they remove the hybrid sets and replace them with proper condi sets, we'd actually see a more balanced playing field between the two.

 

Yes and no. The formulas and damage of condi are not well balanced at all, which his example plainly demonstrates. What you are describing is a product of the phenomenon that condition damage alone gives condition builds what it takes power, precision, and ferocity combined to give to direct damage builds. So, when you put power, precision, and expertise together with the major of condition damage, you end up with a massively over-tuned offense. Direct damage builds have no comparable option. That _is_ a problem with the underlying formulas and not just what stats happen to be available on gear.

 

Dire may produce damage numbers more in line with the berserker set, but then you have a lot of extra defense. If anything, direct damage builds should get free defensive stats since they require you to stay engaged with your target.

 

This example just exposes how horrendously broken condition damage actually is in the game.

[Panda.1967]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > @Adenin.5973 said:

> > > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > > To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

> > > >

> > > > This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

> > > >

> > > > One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> > > > However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

> > > >

> > > > If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

> > >

> > > I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

> > > I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

> > >

> > > With full Vipers gear we get:

> > > Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

> > > Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

> > > Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

> > > Maul dmg: 1559

> > >

> > > With full Berserkers gear we get:

> > > Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

> > > Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

> > > Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

> > > Maul dmg: 1710

> > >

> > > **Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

> > > Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

> > > Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

> > >

> > > Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

> > >

> > > _Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

> > >

> > > Used tool:

> > > http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

> >

> > A quick comparison of average crit values using your numbers. (Damage x crit mult) / crit chance

> > This gives an average crit value per hit, so...

> >

> > Viper

> > Wintersbite: +517 damage

> > Maul: +795 damage

> >

> > Berserker

> > Wintersbite: +1188 damage

> > Maul: +1830 damage

> >

> > This puts total numbers up at:

> > Wintersbite: 1530 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg (Viper) vs 2298 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg (Berserker)

> > Maul: 2354 (Viper) vs 3540 (Berserker)

> >

> > Wintersbite +33% damage Viper's

> > Maul +50% damage Berserker

> >

> > Overall, with crit factored in they even out, especially when you factor in armor. Dealing slightly less direct damage in exchange for nearly 6x condition damage, is ultimately the preferable option. Especially when you consider the fact that you can stack the condition damage, turning the slight damage bonus of a power build per hit into nothing. Not to mention a condi build can get extra condition stacks from traits and runes with crits.

> >

> > The formulas and damage of Condi is actually quite well balanced, it's only thrown off balance by the fact that hybrid stat sets allow for both to reach high levels. Honestly Rampager's is the only hybrid pure DPS set that is remotely balanced since both Power and Condi are it's minor stats, and it has no Ferocity. The Condi equivalent to Berserker should give Condi, Expertise, Precision. Lower initial damage, but easier to stack due to longer durations allowing it to eventually surpass power. If they remove the hybrid sets and replace them with proper condi sets, we'd actually see a more balanced playing field between the two.

>

> Yes and no. The formulas and damage of condi are not well balanced at all, which his example plainly demonstrates. What you are describing is a product of the phenomenon that condition damage alone gives condition builds what it takes power, precision, and ferocity combined to give to direct damage builds. So, when you put power, precision, and expertise together with the major of condition damage, you end up with a massively over-tuned offense. Direct damage builds have no comparable option.

>

> Dire may produce damage numbers more in line with the berserker set, but then you have a lot of extra defense. If anything, direct damage builds should get free defensive stats since they require you to stay engaged with your target.

>

> This example just exposes how horrendously broken condition damage actually is in the game.

 

The numbers presented are from Berserker (Power, Precision, Ferocity) and Viper (Power, Condi, Precision, Expertise) Both give power. This is a fact of all pure damage Condi stat sets. If you look at the damage values of a condi set that lacks power, you'll find the damage values are actually noticeably lower for condi than power. When factoring in stacking conditions, the lower base damage of conditions would be balanced.

 

If someone would care to post the tooltip values of Ranger MH Axe with full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs utilizing a defensive Condi stat set, (Trailblazer or Rabid would be good examples). Then we can see exactly what sort of damage we would be seeing from Condi without hybrid sets that provide too much strength to both.

 

Also, the new Grieving set will almost certainly provide even more overall damage for Condi builds by sacrificing Expertise for Ferocity. Enough that the small initial edge I outlined for Power builds should be completely non-existent. Berserker vs Grieving should be almost 100% advantage Grieving even with crits. Berserker would still be stronger for pure power attacks, but the margin would be so small even with crits that it's negligible.

 

The issue isn't condition damage, the issue is the stat sets. They didn't consider the impact of hybrid sets enough and gave us multiple sets that provide heavy Power + Condi damage. If both stats are on the same set, both stats absolutely should be minors, never majors when both are present. This is for the same reason that there are no stat sets with Ferocity as a major. Can you imagine how overpowered Power builds would be with a 4 stat set giving Major Power + Ferocity with Minor Precision + Whatever? There would be no competition. This is exactly what we are seeing from Grieving & Vipers both giving Major Power + Condi with Minor Precision + Ferocity/Expertise.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Panda.1967 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > > @Adenin.5973 said:

> > > > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > > > To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

> > > > >

> > > > > This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

> > > > >

> > > > > One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> > > > > However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

> > > > >

> > > > > If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

> > > >

> > > > I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

> > > > I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

> > > >

> > > > With full Vipers gear we get:

> > > > Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

> > > > Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

> > > > Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

> > > > Maul dmg: 1559

> > > >

> > > > With full Berserkers gear we get:

> > > > Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

> > > > Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

> > > > Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

> > > > Maul dmg: 1710

> > > >

> > > > **Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

> > > > Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

> > > > Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

> > > >

> > > > Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

> > > >

> > > > _Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

> > > >

> > > > Used tool:

> > > > http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

> > >

> > > A quick comparison of average crit values using your numbers. (Damage x crit mult) / crit chance

> > > This gives an average crit value per hit, so...

> > >

> > > Viper

> > > Wintersbite: +517 damage

> > > Maul: +795 damage

> > >

> > > Berserker

> > > Wintersbite: +1188 damage

> > > Maul: +1830 damage

> > >

> > > This puts total numbers up at:

> > > Wintersbite: 1530 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg (Viper) vs 2298 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg (Berserker)

> > > Maul: 2354 (Viper) vs 3540 (Berserker)

> > >

> > > Wintersbite +33% damage Viper's

> > > Maul +50% damage Berserker

> > >

> > > Overall, with crit factored in they even out, especially when you factor in armor. Dealing slightly less direct damage in exchange for nearly 6x condition damage, is ultimately the preferable option. Especially when you consider the fact that you can stack the condition damage, turning the slight damage bonus of a power build per hit into nothing. Not to mention a condi build can get extra condition stacks from traits and runes with crits.

> > >

> > > The formulas and damage of Condi is actually quite well balanced, it's only thrown off balance by the fact that hybrid stat sets allow for both to reach high levels. Honestly Rampager's is the only hybrid pure DPS set that is remotely balanced since both Power and Condi are it's minor stats, and it has no Ferocity. The Condi equivalent to Berserker should give Condi, Expertise, Precision. Lower initial damage, but easier to stack due to longer durations allowing it to eventually surpass power. If they remove the hybrid sets and replace them with proper condi sets, we'd actually see a more balanced playing field between the two.

> >

> > Yes and no. The formulas and damage of condi are not well balanced at all, which his example plainly demonstrates. What you are describing is a product of the phenomenon that condition damage alone gives condition builds what it takes power, precision, and ferocity combined to give to direct damage builds. So, when you put power, precision, and expertise together with the major of condition damage, you end up with a massively over-tuned offense. Direct damage builds have no comparable option.

> >

> > Dire may produce damage numbers more in line with the berserker set, but then you have a lot of extra defense. If anything, direct damage builds should get free defensive stats since they require you to stay engaged with your target.

> >

> > This example just exposes how horrendously broken condition damage actually is in the game.

>

> The numbers presented are from Berserker (Power, Precision, Ferocity) and Viper (Power, Condi, Precision, Expertise) Both give power. This is a fact of all pure damage Condi stat sets. If you look at the damage values of a condi set that lacks power, you'll find the damage values are actually noticeably lower for condi than power. When factoring in stacking conditions, the lower base damage of conditions would be balanced.

>

> If someone would care to post the tooltip values of Ranger MH Axe with full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs utilizing a defensive Condi stat set, (Trailblazer or Rabid would be good examples). Then we can see exactly what sort of damage we would be seeing from Condi without hybrid sets that provide too much strength to both.

>

> Also, the new Grieving set will almost certainly provide even more overall damage for Condi builds by sacrificing Expertise for Ferocity. Enough that the small initial edge I outlined for Power builds should be completely non-existent. Berserker vs Grieving should be almost 100% advantage Grieving even with crits. Berserker would still be stronger for pure power attacks, but the margin would be so small even with crits that it's negligible.

>

> The issue isn't condition damage, the issue is the stat sets. They didn't consider the impact of hybrid sets enough and gave us multiple sets that provide heavy Power + Condi damage. If both stats are on the same set, both stats absolutely should be minors, never majors when both are present. This is for the same reason that there are no stat sets with Ferocity as a major. Can you imagine how overpowered Power builds would be with a 4 stat set giving Major Power + Ferocity with Minor Precision + Whatever? There would be no competition. This is exactly what we are seeing from Grieving & Vipers both giving Major Power + Condi with Minor Precision + Ferocity/Expertise.

 

No, the issue is the condition damage. The reason this is obvious is because the economy of stats that allows for ultra-high condition damage does not allow for the equivalent with direct damage builds. If condition damage was not over-tuned, you would expect Grieving to be about as good for hybrid builds that favor direct damage as Viper's is for hybrid builds that favor condi damage, but that just isn't the case. Any time you have equivalent Condition Damage and Power on a stat set, condition builds will benefit more than direct damage builds due to the tuning of Condition damage. That's the problem.

 

It's asinine to place the blame on the attribute combos - the attribute combos are rubber-banded and have the same total points. If one attribute combo is significantly stronger than another, there's an imbalance in the attributes themselves. Anet shouldn't have to not release some combinations of attributes to work around the fact that one of their attributes is overpowered.

 

I disagree that major power + ferocity, minor precision + whatever would be more OP than viper's is for condition builds, and have no clue why you'd make that argument. Power, precision, and ferocity are the only stats tied to direct damage, so nothing will ever be better than Berserker's for direct damage. Any hybridization of those three stats with a four-stat combo will only dilute direct damage builds, not help them. See Marauder's for an example.

[Lilyanna.9361]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @saerni.2584 said:

> > You misunderstand me Einlanzer.

> >

> > Of course armor should change those numbers. Just as more or less cleanse can change those numbers.

> >

> > I’m merely pointing out that in order to reduce the burst nature of conditions you need to eliminate the reason why burst is necessary: that is the abundance of cleanse.

> >

> > I don’t mean my numbers as serious suggestions. A condition user can expect to do more or less damage based on cleanses. Just as a power user can expect differences depending on armor. Ignoring that cleanse/armor adjusts the DPS a condition build should ramp up to higher DPS later. A power build should front load their damage.

> >

> > That said, a low cleanse target may die faster to a condition build (be burst down) than to a power build (assuming it has power damage mitigation). Or, a high cleanse target may take less damage even after a long period of time compared to a power build (assuming low armor).

> >

> > But, assuming equal armor and cleanse the short term game should power focused and the long term game condition focused.

>

> Yes, I more or less agree. However, my argument is that cleanses should be less abundant, and that condition damage should be downtuned. This would create better balance between the two, where the average glass target would be more susceptible to direct damage even over the long term. It is my adamant opinion that the paradigm of "conditions should always do more if you assume x length of time" is folly. Maybe if you assume a mid-high range armor value, but not otherwise.

>

> I also will restate my view here that "condi burst" is a red herring. Condi should be burstable to an extent, it just shouldn't result in the high short term damage it does. But, the problem is not the "burst" (as in the rapid fire succession of condition-landing), it's the tuning on the damage ticks. Immunity and cleansing mechanics are too prolific in the game, and too necessary to counter conditions.

 

Then we have the problem with reverting back to the Core Tyria days. Power will run rampant again, and some classes will be booted out of meta in all terms and purposes. You will literally make half of the class roster useless.

 

Though, I do agree that condi is definitely out of hand. A certain dev (which still grinds my gear) admitted to the fact that they were bias to condi, and did not exactly enjoy the full power meta, which most likely explains the existence of condi buffs and vipers gear. There needs to be a sweet spot.

 

One should not outperform the other, and if you are to build hybrid then you are not better than the one that has dedicated themselves to full power or full condi. You overall have more to work with and a wider optiom choice.

 

Edit: Another thought to my head. You would make a lot of gear useless with your condi suggestions. Markets will crash, prices skyrocket, pvp and wvw meta thrown into absolute chaos. It will cause more harm than good in the long-run. Unfortunately, your suggestions will end up only short-term. In a span of 2-6 months you would have killed s good portion of raiders, fractals, and wvwer because of your changes.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Lilyanna.9361 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > > @saerni.2584 said:

> > > You misunderstand me Einlanzer.

> > >

> > > Of course armor should change those numbers. Just as more or less cleanse can change those numbers.

> > >

> > > I’m merely pointing out that in order to reduce the burst nature of conditions you need to eliminate the reason why burst is necessary: that is the abundance of cleanse.

> > >

> > > I don’t mean my numbers as serious suggestions. A condition user can expect to do more or less damage based on cleanses. Just as a power user can expect differences depending on armor. Ignoring that cleanse/armor adjusts the DPS a condition build should ramp up to higher DPS later. A power build should front load their damage.

> > >

> > > That said, a low cleanse target may die faster to a condition build (be burst down) than to a power build (assuming it has power damage mitigation). Or, a high cleanse target may take less damage even after a long period of time compared to a power build (assuming low armor).

> > >

> > > But, assuming equal armor and cleanse the short term game should power focused and the long term game condition focused.

> >

> > Yes, I more or less agree. However, my argument is that cleanses should be less abundant, and that condition damage should be downtuned. This would create better balance between the two, where the average glass target would be more susceptible to direct damage even over the long term. It is my adamant opinion that the paradigm of "conditions should always do more if you assume x length of time" is folly. Maybe if you assume a mid-high range armor value, but not otherwise.

> >

> > I also will restate my view here that "condi burst" is a red herring. Condi should be burstable to an extent, it just shouldn't result in the high short term damage it does. But, the problem is not the "burst" (as in the rapid fire succession of condition-landing), it's the tuning on the damage ticks. Immunity and cleansing mechanics are too prolific in the game, and too necessary to counter conditions.

>

> Then we have the problem with reverting back to the Core Tyria days. Power will run rampant again, and some classes will be booted out of meta in all terms and purposes. You will literally make half of the class roster useless.

>

> Though, I do agree that condi is definitely out of hand. A certain dev (which still grinds my gear) admitted to the fact that they were bias to condi, and did not exactly enjoy the full power meta, which most likely explains the existence of condi buffs and vipers gear. There needs to be a sweet spot.

>

> One should not outperform the other, and if you are to build hybrid then you are not better than the one that has dedicated themselves to full power or full condi. You overall have more to work with and a wider optiom choice.

>

> Edit: Another thought to my head. You would make a lot of gear useless with your condi suggestions. Markets will crash, prices skyrocket, pvp and wvw meta thrown into absolute chaos. It will cause more harm than good in the long-run. Unfortunately, your suggestions will end up only short-term. In a span of 2-6 months you would have killed s good portion of raiders, fractals, and wvwer because of your changes.

 

No. Because the problem in vanilla was the condition cap, which is rightly gone forever, and I see absolutely no reasoning behind assuming the suggestions I'm making would have the same impact. To the contrary, they would ensure that both power and condi have a place in the meta. Your edit also makes no sense. Where's your evidence of any of that? It's like listening to a doomsday preacher in some Podunk church.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

>

> No, the issue is the condition damage. The reason this is obvious is because the economy of stats that allows for ultra-high condition damage does not allow for the equivalent with direct damage builds. If condition damage was not over-tuned, you would expect Grieving to be about as good for hybrid builds that favor direct damage as Viper's is for hybrid builds that favor condi damage, but that just isn't the case. Any time you have equivalent Condition Damage and Power on a stat set, condition builds will benefit more than direct damage builds due to the tuning of Condition damage. That's the problem.

 

Dire is the equivalent for Soldiers, and Dire wins. Rabid is the equivalent for Knights, and Rabid wins. On the flip side, Rampager was the equivalent for Berserker, bur Berserker wins. To some extent, that was due to the fact that Rampager was not a true equivalent, as Condition Damage was a secondary stat and the Power/Precision it offered was insufficient to make up for that.

 

With HoT, the devs introduced new stat sets, which are in most cases better than the earlier options for a given setup and purpose. The exception is Berserker > Marauder. They also provided more boon duration and more condition duration. The addition of Expertise makes up a significant part of why condition damage builds dominate the perfect-conditions-buffs-and-rotations DPS tests.

 

That said, defining the problem as being solely due to the Condition Damage stat is not cut and dried. Low-end condition builds (the ones an efficiency player would disdain, and only an immersion player might play) are much closer to or in some cases even worse than a low-end power build. Try, for example, a pistol engineer without Flamethrower for Incendiary Ammo. Why is this the case? Because the lower-performing specs cannot apply as many stacks of the damaging conditions they can access, and/or they do not have as many different damaging conditions.

 

The problem with an overall tune-down for the Condition Damage stat is that it would affect both the low performing and the high performing builds. That's why I favor changes by adjusting the number of possible stacks and variety of damaging conditions available. Why do I speak for the immersion player? Well, being a "tweener" myself, I feel some of their pain when changes are made to rein in high-performing builds which also reduce their enjoyment as a side effect. Also, nobody else seems to be speaking for that play-style.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> >

> > No, the issue is the condition damage. The reason this is obvious is because the economy of stats that allows for ultra-high condition damage does not allow for the equivalent with direct damage builds. If condition damage was not over-tuned, you would expect Grieving to be about as good for hybrid builds that favor direct damage as Viper's is for hybrid builds that favor condi damage, but that just isn't the case. Any time you have equivalent Condition Damage and Power on a stat set, condition builds will benefit more than direct damage builds due to the tuning of Condition damage. That's the problem.

>

> Dire is the equivalent for Soldiers, and Dire wins. Rabid is the equivalent for Knights, and Rabid wins. On the flip side, Rampager was the equivalent for Berserker, bur Berserker wins. To some extent, that was due to the fact that Rampager was not a true equivalent, as Condition Damage was a secondary stat and the Power/Precision id offered was insufficient to make up for that.

>

> With HoT, the devs introduced new stat sets, which are in most cases better than the earlier options for a given setup and purpose. The exception is Berserker > Marauder. They also provided more boon duration and more condition duration. The addition of Expertise makes up a significant part of why condition damage builds dominate the perfect-conditions-buffs-and-rotations DPS tests.

>

> That said, defining the problem as being solely due to the Condition Damage stat is not cut and dried. Low-end condition builds (the ones an efficiency player would disdain, and only an immersion player might play) are much closer to or in some cases even worse than a low-end power build. Try, for example, a pistol engineer without Flamethrower for Incendiary Ammo. Why is this the case? Because the lower-performing specs cannot apply as many stacks of the damaging conditions they can access, and/or they do not have as many different damaging conditions.

>

> The problem with an overall tune-down for the Condition Damage stat is that it would affect both the low performing and the high performing builds. That's why I favor changes by adjusting the number of possible stacks and variety of damaging conditions available. Why do I speak for the immersion player? Well, being a "tweener" myself, I feel some of their pain when changes are made to rein in high-performing builds which also reduce their enjoyment as a side effect. Also, nobody else seems to be speaking for that play-style.

 

When I say "nerf condi", I mean it in a nuanced way. Obviously you can find condition weapons and skills that are not overtuned and do not need a nerf - it just isn't the norm at this point, and I think that's mostly due to condi damage scaling. Thief Shortbow is, IMO, and underpowered weapon even though it's condition-focused. However, the solution is not to individually rebalance every single weapon first, it's to bring condi baseline down and then adjust the weapons and skills that need additional tweaks.

 

But, to be fair to your argument - what you're suggesting is basically just an alternate method of dealing with the same problem in the same way, so I'm not trying to be pedantic. My main concern is the fixation on the idea that condition damage should always outdo direct damage given a certain amount of time. I will always think that's a faulty, indefensible balance paradigm. Condition damage should be balanced mostly around short durations and quick stacking, with target armor being the main controller for if and when it overtakes physical damage. There's really only one way to do that - and that's to keep the structure of condition application the same, but reduce the damage scaling. Outliers that are underpowered or still overpowered can then be addressed through balance iteration.

[Panda.1967]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > > > @Adenin.5973 said:

> > > > > > @Panda.1967 said:

> > > > > > To be perfectly honest, i think a lot of the problem with condi truthfully stems from the existence of Vipers, Destroyers, Sinister, and Rampager stat sets... They allow condi builds to get high power damage alongside high condi damage. Other than Celestial, any statset that gives Power should never give Condi damage, and any statset that does Condi damage should never give Power. There isn't a single pure Condi DPS stat set that doesn't give Power, in fact they all give Power & Precision even...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This means that every Condi build either A ) has high direct damage as well or B ) has high defensive or support stats. Usually high Power since it allows them to do heavy direct damage alongside high Condition damage. It creates an imbalance that favors Condi builds. Power builds just can't compete, even though Condi weapons generally have lower base direct damage.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > One of the ANet devs gave an example before to explain why Conditions are as strong as they are... but they didn't really paint an accurate picture of what we actually have. Their example:

> > > > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage over 10 seconds and an attack that does 1000 damage instantly, you will always take the instant damage.

> > > > > > However, in GW2 what we actually have looks more like this:

> > > > > > > Given the choice between an attack that does 1000 damage instantly and an attack that does 500 instantly plus 1000 damage over 3 seconds, you will always take the later.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > If stat sets that gave both Condi damage and Power didn't exist then the choice to build Condi would result in minimal direct damage in exchange for high condition damage, allowing both to actually be balanced. Instead we have pure power and hybrid power/condi DPS stat sets... and the hybrid sets give just as much direct damage as the pure power sets.

> > > > >

> > > > > I've got some numbers about vipers gear vs berserkers gear (On a Ranger). I've used full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs.

> > > > > I then looked at the tooltip dmg of Axe MH, since Anet claims that it's a hybrid weapon and I looked at one skill from Greatsword.

> > > > >

> > > > > With full Vipers gear we get:

> > > > > Power: 2173, Crit-Chance: 34% ,Crit dmg: 150%

> > > > > Condition dmg: 1173, Condition duration: 42%

> > > > > Wintersbite dmg: 1013 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg

> > > > > Maul dmg: 1559

> > > > >

> > > > > With full Berserkers gear we get:

> > > > > Power: 2381, Crit-Chance: 50% ,Crit dmg: 214%

> > > > > Condition dmg: 0, Condition duration: 0%

> > > > > Wintersbite dmg: 1110 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg

> > > > > Maul dmg: 1710

> > > > >

> > > > > **Which means we get with vipers gear on the different skills, compared to berserkers gear following numbers:**

> > > > > Wintersbite: 9% less direct dmg, 596% more bleeding dmg, total of 1543 dmg (207%) more than with berserkers

> > > > > Maul: 9% less direct dmg, total of 151 dmg (9%) less than with berserkers

> > > > >

> > > > > Seeing that, I can't argue that vipers gear seems somewhat overpowered compared with berserkers gear.

> > > > >

> > > > > _Edit: What we of course don't see here is the effect of the increased crit chance and the increased critical damage, which should help berserkers quite a bit._

> > > > >

> > > > > Used tool:

> > > > > http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/

> > > >

> > > > A quick comparison of average crit values using your numbers. (Damage x crit mult) / crit chance

> > > > This gives an average crit value per hit, so...

> > > >

> > > > Viper

> > > > Wintersbite: +517 damage

> > > > Maul: +795 damage

> > > >

> > > > Berserker

> > > > Wintersbite: +1188 damage

> > > > Maul: +1830 damage

> > > >

> > > > This puts total numbers up at:

> > > > Wintersbite: 1530 + 7sec 1970 bleeding dmg (Viper) vs 2298 + 5sec 330 bleeding dmg (Berserker)

> > > > Maul: 2354 (Viper) vs 3540 (Berserker)

> > > >

> > > > Wintersbite +33% damage Viper's

> > > > Maul +50% damage Berserker

> > > >

> > > > Overall, with crit factored in they even out, especially when you factor in armor. Dealing slightly less direct damage in exchange for nearly 6x condition damage, is ultimately the preferable option. Especially when you consider the fact that you can stack the condition damage, turning the slight damage bonus of a power build per hit into nothing. Not to mention a condi build can get extra condition stacks from traits and runes with crits.

> > > >

> > > > The formulas and damage of Condi is actually quite well balanced, it's only thrown off balance by the fact that hybrid stat sets allow for both to reach high levels. Honestly Rampager's is the only hybrid pure DPS set that is remotely balanced since both Power and Condi are it's minor stats, and it has no Ferocity. The Condi equivalent to Berserker should give Condi, Expertise, Precision. Lower initial damage, but easier to stack due to longer durations allowing it to eventually surpass power. If they remove the hybrid sets and replace them with proper condi sets, we'd actually see a more balanced playing field between the two.

> > >

> > > Yes and no. The formulas and damage of condi are not well balanced at all, which his example plainly demonstrates. What you are describing is a product of the phenomenon that condition damage alone gives condition builds what it takes power, precision, and ferocity combined to give to direct damage builds. So, when you put power, precision, and expertise together with the major of condition damage, you end up with a massively over-tuned offense. Direct damage builds have no comparable option.

> > >

> > > Dire may produce damage numbers more in line with the berserker set, but then you have a lot of extra defense. If anything, direct damage builds should get free defensive stats since they require you to stay engaged with your target.

> > >

> > > This example just exposes how horrendously broken condition damage actually is in the game.

> >

> > The numbers presented are from Berserker (Power, Precision, Ferocity) and Viper (Power, Condi, Precision, Expertise) Both give power. This is a fact of all pure damage Condi stat sets. If you look at the damage values of a condi set that lacks power, you'll find the damage values are actually noticeably lower for condi than power. When factoring in stacking conditions, the lower base damage of conditions would be balanced.

> >

> > If someone would care to post the tooltip values of Ranger MH Axe with full ascended gear, no runes, no sigills, no traits, no food or other buffs utilizing a defensive Condi stat set, (Trailblazer or Rabid would be good examples). Then we can see exactly what sort of damage we would be seeing from Condi without hybrid sets that provide too much strength to both.

> >

> > Also, the new Grieving set will almost certainly provide even more overall damage for Condi builds by sacrificing Expertise for Ferocity. Enough that the small initial edge I outlined for Power builds should be completely non-existent. Berserker vs Grieving should be almost 100% advantage Grieving even with crits. Berserker would still be stronger for pure power attacks, but the margin would be so small even with crits that it's negligible.

> >

> > The issue isn't condition damage, the issue is the stat sets. They didn't consider the impact of hybrid sets enough and gave us multiple sets that provide heavy Power + Condi damage. If both stats are on the same set, both stats absolutely should be minors, never majors when both are present. This is for the same reason that there are no stat sets with Ferocity as a major. Can you imagine how overpowered Power builds would be with a 4 stat set giving Major Power + Ferocity with Minor Precision + Whatever? There would be no competition. This is exactly what we are seeing from Grieving & Vipers both giving Major Power + Condi with Minor Precision + Ferocity/Expertise.

>

> No, the issue is the condition damage. The reason this is obvious is because the economy of stats that allows for ultra-high condition damage does not allow for the equivalent with direct damage builds. If condition damage was not over-tuned, you would expect Grieving to be about as good for hybrid builds that favor direct damage as Viper's is for hybrid builds that favor condi damage, but that just isn't the case. Any time you have equivalent Condition Damage and Power on a stat set, condition builds will benefit more than direct damage builds due to the tuning of Condition damage. That's the problem.

>

> It's asinine to place the blame on the attribute combos - the attribute combos are rubber-banded and have the same total points. If one attribute combo is significantly stronger than another, there's an imbalance in the attributes themselves. Anet shouldn't have to not release some combinations of attributes to work around the fact that one of their attributes is overpowered.

>

> I disagree that major power + ferocity, minor precision + whatever would be more OP than viper's is for condition builds, and have no clue why you'd make that argument. Power, precision, and ferocity are the only stats tied to direct damage, so nothing will ever be better than Berserker's for direct damage. Any hybridization of those three stats with a four-stat combo will only dilute direct damage builds, not help them. See Marauder's for an example.

 

You don't seem to be understanding the issue at all. Grieving would **NOT** be as good for hybrid builds that favor direct damage as it is for those that favor condition damage, and it's completely illogical to think that it would. The vast majority of Condi attacks have a direct damage component built into them, as a result they benefit from **BOTH** Power and Condition Damage. Direct damage attacks on the other hand don't benefit from Condi damage. You could argue that conditions don't benefit from Ferocity, but the fact remains that the attacks still do. Drop power from Condi stat sets and you'll see a huge dip in condi build damage.

 

Conditions are **SUPPOSED** to do more damage in the long run than direct damage, but only after you stack them up. But because the stats sets allow condi builds to get their direct damage almost as high as pure direct damage power builds along with their condition damage, you end up with condi builds that do just as much damage as direct damage builds before stacking up their conditions. By making it so you either have Condition Damage or Power on your gear, (or if both, both are minor stats) you cause condi to have a lower starting point and actually have to build up stacks to reach direct damage in strength, but can eventually pass direct damage if they build up their conditions enough.

[otto.5684]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @otto.5684 said:

> > I think that the path of least work is remove resistance, but make condis subject to all damage reduction mechanics like power (toughness, protection, any and all damage reduction class specific skills). Also, make condis deal no damage to distorted targets. I generally, think that HP pools are due for a buff. People may not remember, but we went through two stages of damage power creep, before HoT with becoming able to equip 3 full trait lines. Then with HoT, with the introduction of elites. Slightly larger health pools will reduce condi nuking impact. I think they should increase HP pools for larges pools by 2K, medium pools by 2.5K and small pools by 3K.

> >

> > This will require some work on warrior and rev, but most other classes do not have access to resistance anyway.

>

> I used to advocate something like this, but, I'm not sure. There are a lot of reworks they could potentially go with, but considering how the damage types were originally designed, I'm not sure this is the path of least resistance.

>

> I do support a health buff, though. Even in PvE, one-shotting is way too much of a thing.

 

I do not think any of the paths will not require some major work on the devs end. I think the game will be better off with less all or nothing designs, which condi damage in PvP tends to be.

[Shirlias.8104]

Bring condi removal at thief's lvl.

 

3 condi removed, cd 30 sec.

3 condi removed, cd 50 sec.

 

Then when every class won't be able to spam removals anymore, let's think all together about a Fix.

 

Since different classes with different builds can be more or Less powerful against conditions, if you work on conditions you will eventually work on specific classes.

 

Better solve class balance first.

Or altogether.