Please remove Vindicators from fractals.

[Cyninja.2954]

Love the vindicators. The fix actually made them scary and not just a "luls, I spawned a vindicator, gimme a sec I'll rally on my own" mechanic.

 

Now they're more like:"%#$^&%#& get my up now, vindicator spawned already!!!"

 

Vindicators do exactly what they are supposed to do: punish risky game play and high damage low survivability builds played by people who haven't mastered them.

[TwilightSoul.9048]

I think I have been misunderstood I couldn't care less about Vindicators, make them baseline for all T4 Fractals for all I care. They change absolutely nothing about how you play the game except for those rare situations where you almost wipe and would have a small chance of making a miraculous comeback (Vindicators make that chance a lot smaller). They are a terrible instability though because they don't CHANGE anything. Let's compare them to social awkwardness, a instability that many people dislike because it actually does something - it changes the way we play and introduces us to a problem to which we actually have to adapt. On the other hand, the Vindicators don't change anything, we're already trying to avoid getting downed.

 

> @"reikken.4961" said:

> It has nothing to do with being "meta", and everything to do with playing well. and/or adapting. You don't have to have anything even remotely close to meta, but you do have to assess what your group needs and bring that. and play well. [...]

> And while I do agree that "'win more' or 'loose harder'" is less than ideal, punishing players for playing poorly _is_ ideal. If you mess up badly enough, you should lose.

 

I said it *promotes* meta-comps in pugs because most people assume you are a *good* player if you're running a meta build and most likely a *bad* player if you don't, which in my opinion is ridiculous, the worst players I have ever seen (outside of new ones) have been running "top dps" builds.

And unfortunatly the Vindicators don't punish you for playing badly, getting downed does, and getting downed is already a punishment, not just for you but for your entire group and Vindicators just make it worse - but as I said, we already avoid getting downed anyway so Vindicators shouldn't ever be an issue for any T4 Fractal group and if they ever do something then it's most likely because your group already messed up beyond repair anyway.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't mind them beeing baseline in all T4 Fractals if we can get a better Instability instead, Instabilities should change the way we play, not punish reinforce what we already do. Good examples for *good* instabilities (in my opinion) are:

* The already mentioned Social Awkwardness

* Afflicted (Although I'd prefer a little fewer conditions but we get them constantly through a poison cloud or something that fills the entire fractal)

* Hamstrung

* Flux Bomb

* Adrenaline Rush (The effect should slowly build up, starting at 75% HP)

 

Those actually change the way we play, some only slightly, some a lot more, and forcing us to adapt is what makes fractals feel less repetitive (at least a little) and having to adapt more often and in different ways would make fractals a lot more enjoyable to me.

I know there are people who don't like to adapt and for that reason hate the Social Awkwardness but I honestly don't know why they play a game like this, wouldn't those clicker games be a better fit for people who don't like to adapt?

 

As for my "idea" for a mistlock, it was just a suggestion, I'm fully aware that it wouldn't be fun in GW2 which I have hinted at by mentioning a group of 4 Druids and a Ventari. What I wanted to point at is, a instability like that would drastically change the way we play, at least for that fractal with that instability and would enforce a new meta just for that one fractal, it would be a change we HAVE to adapt to unlike most other mechanics we have. We already have so many *new* mechanics that didn't change anything because we can just cc them so they don't happen, some can be ignored altogether and others only happen when we've already lost either way (Vindicators). Give us mechanics that actually matter, adapting to change is what keeps me playing games, if I just wanted to do the same over and over and over again I'd play Clicker games or get a job in Account Management (Been there, never had so little fun in my entire life including that time when I got run over by a car).

 

Oh and I honestly would like to have a Boss in a open World area that has to be healed to death, maybe a new World Boss, we barely ever use our Healers for open world content so that would be funny :)

[Leo Schrodingers Cat.2497]

I personally enjoy the vindicators. Much more terrifying than the avengers, and it enforces the idea that you can't risk going down a lot - and makes you second guess going in glass if you can't survive in it. They also encourage players to actually revive downed players rather than leave them to pick themselves up because "it hurts dps".

[Jackk.8104]

Vindicators are super fun, if you just think about dps and enrage him he gonna 100-blade your party to death, but if you turn off you dps bob and cc the boy, all should be ok. Also you can kite them around if you'r alone. Many times my party had laught at them cuz someone got 100-bladed to death, or enraged vindicator used his warrior F1 skill and killed everyone in the most unexpected situation.

[ReaverKane.7598]

> @"Benjamin Arnold.3457" said:

> Vindicators are working exactly as we hoped! I do wonder what would happen if the downed player could rally off them. We want to avoid instabilities that make it easier, but a little give and take might be cool.

 

Ohh, that would make them so awesome! Almost too awesome, but if you're willing to try it out...

> @"TwilightSoul.9048" said:

> Vindicators seem incredibly boring to me, they do nothing if you're playing well, they only matter in those desperate situations where you've already lost pretty much and everyones just hoping to somehow rally.

> So in essence: They punish suboptimal groups and promote "meta" groups which ultimatly leads to less build diversity because people with "non-meta" builds have an even harder time finding a group. Doesn't really affect me much since I'm running with a premade group almost all the time and none of us care that we have a power reaper and a FA S/W Tempest for main dps - it works fine and we're having fun. But Things like the Vindicators make me feel bad for everyone that doesn't have a premade group.

>

Actually. Meta or not, it actually doesn't matter. I'd say it actually punishes meta groups the most. Because most meta builds are incredibly specialized. They focus on either pure damage or pure support for the most part. So if you have a group where, especially the pure dps, people copy a meta build, but aren't that great with it, they'll end up on the ground facing a vindicator. Same thing if you have a crappy healer/support.

I find this often happening with Elementalists, which are the epitome of "BIS but only if you're really, but really good with it", the problem is that most people look at benchmarks, see Eles with almost 10k over the next class, and think it'll always be like that. The problem is, that a ton of that comes out of the best case situation on RNG skills like Meteor Shower, and the rest comes from an intricate rotation.

So what happens is that people that are just starting go ele, but don't know how to avoid damage, don't know how to do the rotation, so they end up on the bottom of the dps pile, and spawning vindicators like crazy, even with a meta build.

 

> Why not introduce instabilities that punish boring meta groups? Introduce more complex mechanics that have to be dealt with and can't be ignored and I'm not talking about those "break the breakbar to avoid getting one-shot" shenanigans. I'm sure you can think of something better. You could introduce a instability that changes bosses into Allies that can still damage you but you can't damage them except by healing them, that would atleast make for a interesting group with 4 Druids 1 Ventari or so.

>

Actually, one thing i dislike break bars for is that they removed a lot of game play options. Like in AC, the Lovers used to be done by having one guy knock one back, keeping him away while the rest would burn down the other. You can't do that with champions any more. I mean break bars are nice in places where they make sense, but not in ALL champions.

Your last example would be the exact opposite of what you're proposing. That would actually force a comp. Wouldn't encourage one, it would straight out FORCE you to take healers, which would make the encounters prior to that boss just agonizing because you would take days to kill stuff.

 

One thing your post reminds me was a discussion i was having with my brother yesterday about the Molten Boss Fractal. The new changes are there only to make the fractal longer, but they could have been made to make the fractal more fun...

They didn't add any interesting mechanics, they just added a bunch of mostly unskippable junk mobs. I mean for example the Nightmare Tower rework was made interesting and different from the original dungeon. These new encounters are pretty much just modernized versions of the old ones, and they even removed the traps on the way.

Also it would have been much better (more fun at least) if they'd just started 1-2 groups before the old farmable fractal, but instead added the end-event where we'd bomb the place and then escape on a timer.

 

> Anyway, mechanics that result in "win more" or "loose harder" scenarios are bad and boring. And saying they work as intended makes me wonder, do you @"Benjamin Arnold.3457" actually think punishing a loosing group while beeing no threat to a winning group at all is a good mechanic in an endgame scenario?

Actually, those are the least boring mechanics in games. Feast of Famine scenarios are usually the most rewarding ones (just look at actually good elementalists). The problem with this argument is that actually Vindicators aren't that. They're just "you screwed up, here's your punishment". Why would you punish people that play well?

 

 

[TwilightSoul.9048]

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> Actually. Meta or not, it actually doesn't matter. I'd say it actually punishes meta groups the most. Because most meta builds are incredibly specialized. They focus on either pure damage or pure support for the most part. So if you have a group where, especially the pure dps, people copy a meta build, but aren't that great with it, they'll end up on the ground facing a vindicator. Same thing if you have a crappy healer/support.

 

It doesn't punish Meta groups in general, it doesn't punish anything at all, the only thing they do is make you loose harder where you were already just waiting for a miracle, those are the only situations where they matter. It doesn't matter if you're top dps or bottom dps, it doesn't matter if you're running a meta build or not, if you loose, you loose harder (no change since you were loosing anyway already). The reason why I mentioned "meta" is because most people assume that you're automatically a better player if you're running a meta build and that promotes the meta instead of build diversity. If you have the choice between two players (who's experience you're unaware of) and one of them is running Staff Weaver and the other is Power Reaper, I guarantee you that at least 80% of players would choose the Staff Weaver to join them in their fractal run - no matter if there are Vindicators involved in the fractal or not and they can't see weather the staff weaver actually knows what he's doing or not. A bad staff weaver will *easily* be out dps'd by any good, experienced power reaper but the Staff Weaver will find many many more groups. And Vindicators promote that kind of behaviour since most people assume that players with "non-meta" builds are worse than those with meta builds. (I know not everyone thinks like that, but the average does)

 

> > Why not introduce instabilities that punish boring meta groups? Introduce more complex mechanics that have to be dealt with and can't be ignored and I'm not talking about those "break the breakbar to avoid getting one-shot" shenanigans. I'm sure you can think of something better. You could introduce a instability that changes bosses into Allies that can still damage you but you can't damage them except by healing them, that would atleast make for a interesting group with 4 Druids 1 Ventari or so.

> Your last example would be the exact opposite of what you're proposing. That would actually force a comp. Wouldn't encourage one, it would straight out FORCE you to take healers, which would make the encounters prior to that boss just agonizing because you would take days to kill stuff.

 

My example was just to show how easy it is to change the way a fractal plays out, it wasn't meant to be a good example as I've hinted at with my recommended comp of 4 Druid +1 Ventari, it's obvious that that would be broing as a fractal. The point is that my example would FORCE us to adapt where the Vindicators don't do anything until you've already lost anyway (in a good group). The only people who would struggle with Vindicators are bad groups but endgame content shouldn't be designed to punish bad groups.

 

>Why would you punish people that play well?

 

Here we get to the point, I don't want to punish people that play well, I want people that play well to adapt instead of just playing the way they already did. Vindicators don't change anything, you don't want to get downed anyway and good players barely ever get downed and if they do they will quickly rez each other and get rid of Vindicators as if they were just one more add, they don't change the way a good player performs, they don't make us adapt or anything. I want instabilites that force us to adapt to a new threat. Social Awkwardness forces us to pay a lot more attention to our positioning relative to others than we are used to, that is probably the best example of a well designed instability.

 

> Actually, those are the least boring mechanics in games. Feast of Famine scenarios are usually the most rewarding ones (just look at actually good elementalists).

 

You're talking about High Risk - High Reward Scenarios, those are entirely different from "win more" / "loose harder" scenarios (which are two different scenarios to begin with). High Risk - High Reward Scenarios are great and they will encourage you to take a risk in order to gain an advantage and will punish you even if you make a small mistake. Vindicators don't do that, you gain nothing *more* because of them if you play well and they only matter when you've already lost ("loose harder" scenario).

[ReaverKane.7598]

> @"TwilightSoul.9048" said:

> > @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> > Actually. Meta or not, it actually doesn't matter. I'd say it actually punishes meta groups the most. Because most meta builds are incredibly specialized. They focus on either pure damage or pure support for the most part. So if you have a group where, especially the pure dps, people copy a meta build, but aren't that great with it, they'll end up on the ground facing a vindicator. Same thing if you have a crappy healer/support.

>

> It doesn't punish Meta groups in general, it doesn't punish anything at all, the only thing they do is make you loose harder where you were already just waiting for a miracle, those are the only situations where they matter. It doesn't matter if you're top dps or bottom dps, it doesn't matter if you're running a meta build or not, if you loose, you loose harder (no change since you were loosing anyway already). The reason why I mentioned "meta" is because most people assume that you're automatically a better player if you're running a meta build and that promotes the meta instead of build diversity. If you have the choice between two players (who's experience you're unaware of) and one of them is running Staff Weaver and the other is Power Reaper, I guarantee you that at least 80% of players would choose the Staff Weaver to join them in their fractal run - no matter if there are Vindicators involved in the fractal or not and they can't see weather the staff weaver actually knows what he's doing or not. A bad staff weaver will *easily* be out dps'd by any good, experienced power reaper but the Staff Weaver will find many many more groups. And Vindicators promote that kind of behaviour since most people assume that players with "non-meta" builds are worse than those with meta builds. (I know not everyone thinks like that, but the average does)

 

That's what i said?

>

> > > Why not introduce instabilities that punish boring meta groups? Introduce more complex mechanics that have to be dealt with and can't be ignored and I'm not talking about those "break the breakbar to avoid getting one-shot" shenanigans. I'm sure you can think of something better. You could introduce a instability that changes bosses into Allies that can still damage you but you can't damage them except by healing them, that would atleast make for a interesting group with 4 Druids 1 Ventari or so.

> > Your last example would be the exact opposite of what you're proposing. That would actually force a comp. Wouldn't encourage one, it would straight out FORCE you to take healers, which would make the encounters prior to that boss just agonizing because you would take days to kill stuff.

>

> My example was just to show how easy it is to change the way a fractal plays out, it wasn't meant to be a good example as I've hinted at with my recommended comp of 4 Druid +1 Ventari, it's obvious that that would be broing as a fractal. The point is that my example would FORCE us to adapt where the Vindicators don't do anything until you've already lost anyway (in a good group). The only people who would struggle with Vindicators are bad groups but endgame content shouldn't be designed to punish bad groups.

Of course it should. You shouldn't be encouraged to play badly! You should feel bad for under-performing. Vindicators just make that more noticeable.

>

> >Why would you punish people that play well?

>

> Here we get to the point, I don't want to punish people that play well, I want people that play well to adapt instead of just playing the way they already did. Vindicators don't change anything, you don't want to get downed anyway and good players barely ever get downed and if they do they will quickly rez each other and get rid of Vindicators as if they were just one more add, they don't change the way a good player performs, they don't make us adapt or anything. I want instabilites that force us to adapt to a new threat. Social Awkwardness forces us to pay a lot more attention to our positioning relative to others than we are used to, that is probably the best example of a well designed instability.

Not really! There are situations where you don't get a choice but to be within Social Awkwardness range. (like Thaumanova, Shattered Obs, Chaos, etc).

Also if you're a good player you HAVE to adapt. Getting 40k DPS on the golem is easy. Doing that on your average boss, isn't. You need to move, dodge and not break the chain. It's not easy. And for anyone to do that, they have to adapt.

>

> > Actually, those are the least boring mechanics in games. Feast of Famine scenarios are usually the most rewarding ones (just look at actually good elementalists).

>

> You're talking about High Risk - High Reward Scenarios, those are entirely different from "win more" / "loose harder" scenarios (which are two different scenarios to begin with). High Risk - High Reward Scenarios are great and they will encourage you to take a risk in order to gain an advantage and will punish you even if you make a small mistake. Vindicators don't do that, you gain nothing *more* because of them if you play well and they only matter when you've already lost ("loose harder" scenario).

Actually i'm talking about "Feast or famine", not "High Risk, high reward". Feast or famine is a more extreme version of high risk/high reward and is used a lot in MOBAS to describe situations where you either get ahead and can't be stopped, or you get behind and have no way of coming back, ever. To me that's an exciting scenario, and a fun one. Sure that's on an individual basis, and in terms of balancing they sometimes get tuned down to "high risk, high reward" scenarios, where the situation is similar, but doesn't punish you that completely.

I believed that was the case you were describing. Anyway i said it myself, vindicators aren't anywhere close to that. They just punish bad play a bit harder.

It's like those "team building punishments" where because Timmy misbehaved, the whole class gets extra homework.

 

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> Actually, those are the least boring mechanics in games. Feast of Famine scenarios are usually the most rewarding ones (just look at actually good elementalists). The problem with this argument is that actually Vindicators aren't that. They're just "you screwed up, here's your punishment". Why would you punish people that play well?

Exactly. This instability doesn't affect people playing well at all. It's simply an additional punishment for those that got punished already.

In short, it doesn't actually add anything fun to the encounter.

 

[zoomborg.9462]

Props to the fractal team as the vindicators properly add to the games difficulty by adding risk for getting downed. B4 this instability getting downed, even non-stop, didnt mean anything as the team could just rez at their comfort. Now u actually get punished for it as vindicators can destroy players with their dmg unless they are killed fast and it can snowball into a wipe.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> This instability doesn't affect people playing well at all.

Yes, that's the idea. It encourages people to learn the mechanics better rather than blindly following a build because it's been declared "meta."

 

That does end up being a bigger benefit to static groups and it creates more issues for PUGs, so I wouldn't want every instability to work like this. (On the other hand, it does provide interesting opportunities for PUGgers who want to play support roles.)

 

 

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > This instability doesn't affect people playing well at all.

> Yes, that's the idea. It encourages people to learn the mechanics better rather than blindly following a build because it's been declared "meta."

Generally "not dying" is good enough benefit to that end.

 

Comebacks are already something that is hard to do. Making them even harder to pull off does not encourage people - quite the opposite.

 

[IseeU.4519]

> @"Benjamin Arnold.3457" said:

> Vindicators are working exactly as we hoped! I do wonder what would happen if the downed player could rally off them. We want to avoid instabilities that make it easier, but a little give and take might be cool.

 

What was that? To cause arguments in groups and get people kicked? Because that's what is happening across pugs. It's got to the point where I now avoid a fractal which vindicators are in; not because of me, but because of other players. I don't want to spend my time chasing other players vindicators. Not only that, the level of unfairness is off the scale. For example, you could be doing uncat fractal and Mai trins bombs appear on the floating platforms and you have no where to go; thus meaning you get downed, which then spawns a vindicator. How is this fair? It has also resulted in pugs specifically asking for healers, namely druids thus already taking up a spot. Even in years old fractals? Is this also working as intended?

 

I'm sick and tired of people coming up with the non reason that "oh its an incentive to not go down". Like we didn't have that before? You just liked going in and wiping randomly? Really? People do not want to spend ages in fractals fighting trash mobs, especially the much older ones. The other one is dodge. Wow imagine that? We can only dodge so much unless we all go in as daredevils or take endurance food. Was that working as intended?

 

At the end of the day, as much as I respect Ben and his work, please think about the fun aspect. Apart from vindicators, Hamstring adds literally nothing to the game at all. Having both that AND vindicator in fractal 87 is just cancer. Personally I have done all fractals hundreds of times. I have my omnipots and my titles, so fractals were a nice source of daily income for me. But, if this is the direction we are going to keep heading, I simply won't bother with them anymore. I play this game to be entertained and relax; not to be pissed off.

[Belorn.2659]

To take a term from other games, snowballs effects can be dangerous to game design. A very successful team won't see the vindicators, and a very unsuccessful team will just get further demoralized. The one team that get any meaningful interaction with the vindicators is those on the edge that just barely manage to complete the fractal.

 

I would not call them bad per say. It adds an additional risk-reward to staying alive and healthy, pushing the player towards more defensive stance. Further development would naturally be interesting. They could lower the impact a bit by limit the number of vindicators that can be alive at the same time, change the rally aspect or change the charge attack to more damage over time. Instead of a black and white issue, view them as a snowball card in a collectable card game.

[Vinceman.4572]

> @"IseeU.4519" said:

 

>For example, you could be doing uncat fractal and Mai trins bombs appear on the floating platforms and you have no where to go; thus meaning you get downed, which then spawns a vindicator. How is this fair? It has also resulted in pugs specifically asking for healers, namely druids thus already taking up a spot. Even in years old fractals? Is this also working as intended?

 

You can jump back and forth on these platforms. There is plenty of time to react after seeing the traces and always avoid to get hit by an attack from Horrik. Sounds more like a cheap excuse to me.

Also, there are enough groups without asking for a druid - really many ! And if such a group is out of stock you can easily open an own lfg. Yeah, I know that's a GW2 disease, most of the people just sitting there waiting for the right lfg to pop up. :innocent:

 

> Personally I have done all fractals hundreds of times. I have my omnipots and my titles, so fractals were a nice source of daily income for me. But, if this is the direction we are going to keep heading, I simply won't bother with them anymore. I play this game to be entertained and relax; not to be pissed off.

 

And I see constantly players (also some with 150 KP+ from 100 CM) not playing the mechanics correctly in this fractal and either run several times to death during the first part of the fractal or fail to position at Amala. It's not hard if you get the mechanics right but the average GW2 player - even a lot of the T4 crowd - just smashes buttons or actually 11111 and hope that the next encounter will be deleted in that way.

[CptAurellian.9537]

If vindicators/not going down continuously are too hard, there's always the possibility to go back a tier. Oh wait, of course no one will even consider this due to phat loot ...

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"IseeU.4519" said:

> > @"Benjamin Arnold.3457" said:

> > Vindicators are working exactly as we hoped! I do wonder what would happen if the downed player could rally off them. We want to avoid instabilities that make it easier, but a little give and take might be cool.

>

> What was that? To cause arguments in groups and get people kicked? Because that's what is happening across pugs. It's got to the point where I now avoid a fractal which vindicators are in; not because of me, but because of other players. I don't want to spend my time chasing other players vindicators. Not only that, the level of unfairness is off the scale. For example, you could be doing uncat fractal and Mai trins bombs appear on the floating platforms and you have no where to go; thus meaning you get downed, which then spawns a vindicator. How is this fair? It has also resulted in pugs specifically asking for healers, namely druids thus already taking up a spot. Even in years old fractals? Is this also working as intended?

 

Learn to play issue or git gud. Uncategorized is one of the easiest fractals available atm. If your group is not skilled enough to pass the platforms and unwilling to adapt via short term changes to utilities and/or traits, that's on you.

 

> @"IseeU.4519" said:

>

> I'm sick and tired of people coming up with the non reason that "oh its an incentive to not go down". Like we didn't have that before? You just liked going in and wiping randomly? Really? People do not want to spend ages in fractals fighting trash mobs, especially the much older ones. The other one is dodge. Wow imagine that? We can only dodge so much unless we all go in as daredevils or take endurance food. Was that working as intended?

 

As a matter of fact yes, people did and do rush content with as squishy as possible builds to maximize loot per hour or minimize time spent fighting risking going down and getting constantly rallied by groups members. Vindicators now add more incentive to not go down in the first place. Also please note 1 thing, Fractal Avengers and their concept were in game for a very long time (and bugged for almost all this time). The concept of punishing players in high tier fractals for playing to risky and almost voluntarily going down has been in game for a long time. Vindicators merely up the stakes at the very top end.

 

What players want in regards to fractal completion time and what makes sense game balance wise in regard to loot will always be contradictory. Why? Because if left up to the players, you'd have 0 difficulty for maximum amount of loot.

 

> @"IseeU.4519" said:

>

> At the end of the day, as much as I respect Ben and his work, please think about the fun aspect. Apart from vindicators, Hamstring adds literally nothing to the game at all. Having both that AND vindicator in fractal 87 is just cancer. Personally I have done all fractals hundreds of times. I have my omnipots and my titles, so fractals were a nice source of daily income for me. But, if this is the direction we are going to keep heading, I simply won't bother with them anymore. I play this game to be entertained and relax; not to be pissed off.

 

The only valid complaint is that you had a very long period of time of easy free loot from top tier fractals which now progressively gets more difficult. In this case you are not the harmed party though, it's the new player who did not get a free easy loot ride for such a long time. I'm not sure what exactly you are complaining about.

 

If players playing fractals drops sufficiently, arenanet will lower the difficulty again. Until then, expect the changes to work as intended.

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

I kinda like the whole idea behind the Vindicator, but there's a bit duality as well ... You get punished for playing recklessly or going toooo glass cannony, but at the same time: you fix the problem (the spawning of the vindicator) with DAMAGEEEEEEE ... which probably got you in this situation in the first place ... A bit dual to me.

What about making the Vindicator exceptionally vulnerable to CC and obviously defensive mechanics (like healing/blocking/dodging/etc.) as well, but make it stronger the more damage it receives. E.g. the vindicator dissing out more damage itself and gaining more toughness making it even harder to kill the more damage it receives. Obviously it should then have some sort of a timer on it or killing it can only be done by CC'ing it or something ...

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Also please note 1 thing, Fractal Avengers and their concept were in game for a very long time (and bugged for almost all this time). The concept of punishing players in high tier fractals for playing to risky and almost voluntarily going down has been in game for a long time. Vindicators merely up the stakes at the very top end.

There's a difference. Avengers in their design punish the players that get downed, and push other group members to help that downed player (cc or faster res). Vindicators punish everyone, and _discourage_ ressing (because ressing a downed player while the vindicator is around is asking to be downed as well). They also cause a chain reaction, where the vindicators down other players, which in turn spawn more vindicators, and so on, and so on until everyone is dead.

 

Besides, the game already punishes players for playing too risky by making it hard to ress you in the encounters where it would matter.

 

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Also please note 1 thing, Fractal Avengers and their concept were in game for a very long time (and bugged for almost all this time). The concept of punishing players in high tier fractals for playing to risky and almost voluntarily going down has been in game for a long time. Vindicators merely up the stakes at the very top end.

> There's a difference. Avengers in their design punish the players that get downed, and push other group members to help that downed player (cc or faster res). Vindicators punish everyone, and _discourage_ ressing (because ressing a downed player while the vindicator is around is asking to be downed as well). They also cause a chain reaction, where the vindicators down other players, which in turn spawn more vindicators, and so on, and so on until everyone is dead.

>

> Besides, the game already punishes players for playing too risky by making it hard to ress you in the encounters where it would matter.

>

 

Correct, but that's just what I was saying: it pushed the difficulty.

 

You are not supposed to resurrect a downed player mid fight while enemys are beating on him, that only encourages risky game play which benefits from being able to get downed players up with little punishment.

 

Vindicators turn this around, they force you to deal with them first, then support the downed player thus preventing constant downed resurrecting as approach (even more so if you are a glass build). An absolutely viable anti glass and anti fail approach if you want to force people to play safer or better.

[Bugabuga.9721]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > Also please note 1 thing, Fractal Avengers and their concept were in game for a very long time (and bugged for almost all this time). The concept of punishing players in high tier fractals for playing to risky and almost voluntarily going down has been in game for a long time. Vindicators merely up the stakes at the very top end.

> > There's a difference. Avengers in their design punish the players that get downed, and push other group members to help that downed player (cc or faster res). Vindicators punish everyone, and _discourage_ ressing (because ressing a downed player while the vindicator is around is asking to be downed as well). They also cause a chain reaction, where the vindicators down other players, which in turn spawn more vindicators, and so on, and so on until everyone is dead.

> >

> > Besides, the game already punishes players for playing too risky by making it hard to ress you in the encounters where it would matter.

> >

>

> Correct, but that's just what I was saying: it pushed the difficulty.

>

> You are not supposed to resurrect a downed player mid fight while enemys are beating on him, that only encourages risky game play which benefits from being able to get downed players up with little punishment.

>

> Vindicators turn this around, they force you to deal with them first, then support the downed player thus preventing constant downed resurrecting as approach (even more so if you are a glass build). An absolutely viable anti glass and anti fail approach if you want to force people to play safer or better.

 

Sure. Practicality speaking vindicators are zerker warriors with greatsword. They insta-kill downed player if it happens to be on their greatsword whirl path, or if it decides to do a rush skill, so "support downed player" is, ha-ha, irrevelant. Let him die, don't even try it. Just hope that there won't be second player that gets downed by the whirl, then it's gg for most light armor class if you happened to use your "whoops" skill already. Which means, yes, slower play. You have to clear every trashmob. You have to do less risky attack. And then people say "there's no way it will take 40+ minutes to clear new fractal" but if you play safe with random pugs it will. Especially if not in prime time and not willing to wait gods know how long for a healing support class.

 

Less margin of error, slower clearing, more annoying and tedious runs for not top-of-the-mill groups outside of prime-time. Same rewards, of course.

 

I guess the only recourse is to wait for pro population to drop enough to make developers think about average casual groups again :smile:

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

I've had some experience with vindicators, and currently the biggest problem is that PUGs completely ignore vindicators.

 

Vinds are not tough. They don't have much health, and they have no special immunities. They are glass cannons, and as such they are priority 1 enemies. If a player goes down, what everyone _should_ do is quickly focus down the Vind then rez the player. What everybody does is ignore the Vind and continue on as normal. This causes the vind to quickly kill the downed player, then systematically hunt down and kill every other player one by one, until there's an army of Vinds chasing one guy.

 

Why do pugs ignore them? I don't know. Necromancers won't even slot Epidemic on fractals with vindicators. Many players won't even run away. I've seen plenty of players stand there and take 100 blades to the back, because they simply do not acknowledge that vindicators are a thing.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> I've had some experience with vindicators, and currently the biggest problem is that PUGs completely ignore vindicators.

>

> Vinds are not tough. They don't have much health, and they have no special immunities. They are glass cannons, and as such they are priority 1 enemies. If a player goes down, what everyone _should_ do is quickly focus down the Vind then rez the player. What everybody does is ignore the Vind and continue on as normal. This causes the vind to quickly kill the downed player, then systematically hunt down and kill every other player one by one, until there's an army of Vinds chasing one guy.

>

> Why do pugs ignore them? I don't know.

You're expecting of those pugs a level of skill and organization they obviously don't have - because if they had it, they wouldn't be getting downed in the first place.

 

[Sublimatio.6981]

I like Vindicators, except their resistance to lifesteal! Grrr.

[boolah.1325]

I think they are a great addition to fotm

[FrostDraco.8306]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> > I've had some experience with vindicators, and currently the biggest problem is that PUGs completely ignore vindicators.

> >

> > Vinds are not tough. They don't have much health, and they have no special immunities. They are glass cannons, and as such they are priority 1 enemies. If a player goes down, what everyone _should_ do is quickly focus down the Vind then rez the player. What everybody does is ignore the Vind and continue on as normal. This causes the vind to quickly kill the downed player, then systematically hunt down and kill every other player one by one, until there's an army of Vinds chasing one guy.

> >

> > Why do pugs ignore them? I don't know.

> You're expecting of those pugs a level of skill and organization they obviously don't have - because if they had it, they wouldn't be getting downed in the first place.

>

 

Which is precisely why vindicators are a good thing. It punishes those players, as it should.