Zoltar MacRoth.7146 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Has anyone else here ever sat back on their springer on the edge of that Godlost-something plateau in Desert Highlands, gazing in admiration at the floating ghostly castle in the sky and pondered for a moment... what if this confusion debacle is really just a distraction to keep us from noticing something else? A misdirection, so to speak? A big messy, attention-grabbing bruhaha designed to draw our attention from elsewhere? Pfft. I'm just kidding....... or am I? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenith.7301 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said: > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > @"Carighan.6758" said: > > > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > > Having a single damaging condition would be awful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For lore-purposes, yes. But functionally there's no issue with them all working the exact same way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I really think the blinds-on test is good for finding out whether having an extra design element makes sense: Taking away all indicators of the special nature of something, would a player still be able to infer it? If no, there's **probably** no reason to have it. Cut as many aspects away as possible, see when core gameplay falters, then take one step back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, having 4+ conditions which all provide "just" damage over time **is** a bit pointless, even though this "fix" (I feel dirty calling it that) is doing anything but fixing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But yes, I feel without numbers or tooltips, there would for example be no way to tell whether you are causing Burning or Bleeding -> There's no non-lore reason to have both. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not at all true. Different conditions are not put in place for lore reasons, but for gameplay mechanics. If done well, it works amazingly. You have burning doing very high damage per second, but doesn't last very long, allowing for a "bursty" DoT condition. Bleed is a lower damage per second, being the general DoT. Confusion is obviously geared at denying the enemy the chance to use skills, by punishing them quite heavily when they do use skills. Its an entirely different gameplay mechanic to a simple DoT. Similarly, torment was put in game to punish players for trying to outmaneuver you (there's a reason it was originally given to Necros). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > These conditions are different for a reason. Simplifying them to a single condition would be disastrous mechanics wise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but confusion completely loses its identity in PvE. PvE enemies behave the same regardless of whether confusion is in play. It loses its control function and becomes only damage - and poor damage at that! > > > > > > > > > > That's a different problem, one that Anet had solved by raising confusions passive tick damage in PvE. It was probably too high yes, confusion, and torment to some extent, are clearly conditions that are aimed at a PvP context, not a PvE one, so having confusion deal at least as much damage as bleed each tick was probably too high. But that doesn't change the fact that confusion functioned differently from a pure DoT for a reason, and homogenizing all damaging conditions to be the same would be awful. > > > > > > > > WTH? It wasn't too high. Mirage pre-feb patch was not even the top DPS spec. How would confusion or torment be too high in PvE when the top DPS specs in raiding used neither? > > > > > > Maybe because those classes don't even have access to confusion? Come on now man..... > > > > > > Having the same base damage as bleed, and then able to spike higher when enemies used skills was _probably_ too high for confusion. > > > > ......Renegade uses torment, which is basically a better form of confusion since it does the same damage as bleed (even more, due to the revenant trait that increases its efefctiveness), and it triggers all the time since the vast majority of bosses move on top for bonus damage. > > > > Firebrand and soulbeast both use burning damage, which is basically a bleed on steroids. > > > > So, no, a condition being stronger than bleed is no excuse to nerf it. > > > > If you bother to check, the only bleed centric condition spec is necromancer and that's why they suck so much. > > You asked me why those builds don't use confusion, and I answered your question. Now you act as if I was saying something different. They virtually use a superior analog to confusion and you're purposely acting obtuse here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OriOri.8724 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said: > > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Carighan.6758" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > > > Having a single damaging condition would be awful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For lore-purposes, yes. But functionally there's no issue with them all working the exact same way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I really think the blinds-on test is good for finding out whether having an extra design element makes sense: Taking away all indicators of the special nature of something, would a player still be able to infer it? If no, there's **probably** no reason to have it. Cut as many aspects away as possible, see when core gameplay falters, then take one step back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, having 4+ conditions which all provide "just" damage over time **is** a bit pointless, even though this "fix" (I feel dirty calling it that) is doing anything but fixing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But yes, I feel without numbers or tooltips, there would for example be no way to tell whether you are causing Burning or Bleeding -> There's no non-lore reason to have both. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not at all true. Different conditions are not put in place for lore reasons, but for gameplay mechanics. If done well, it works amazingly. You have burning doing very high damage per second, but doesn't last very long, allowing for a "bursty" DoT condition. Bleed is a lower damage per second, being the general DoT. Confusion is obviously geared at denying the enemy the chance to use skills, by punishing them quite heavily when they do use skills. Its an entirely different gameplay mechanic to a simple DoT. Similarly, torment was put in game to punish players for trying to outmaneuver you (there's a reason it was originally given to Necros). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > These conditions are different for a reason. Simplifying them to a single condition would be disastrous mechanics wise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but confusion completely loses its identity in PvE. PvE enemies behave the same regardless of whether confusion is in play. It loses its control function and becomes only damage - and poor damage at that! > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a different problem, one that Anet had solved by raising confusions passive tick damage in PvE. It was probably too high yes, confusion, and torment to some extent, are clearly conditions that are aimed at a PvP context, not a PvE one, so having confusion deal at least as much damage as bleed each tick was probably too high. But that doesn't change the fact that confusion functioned differently from a pure DoT for a reason, and homogenizing all damaging conditions to be the same would be awful. > > > > > > > > > > WTH? It wasn't too high. Mirage pre-feb patch was not even the top DPS spec. How would confusion or torment be too high in PvE when the top DPS specs in raiding used neither? > > > > > > > > Maybe because those classes don't even have access to confusion? Come on now man..... > > > > > > > > Having the same base damage as bleed, and then able to spike higher when enemies used skills was _probably_ too high for confusion. > > > > > > ......Renegade uses torment, which is basically a better form of confusion since it does the same damage as bleed (even more, due to the revenant trait that increases its efefctiveness), and it triggers all the time since the vast majority of bosses move on top for bonus damage. > > > > > > Firebrand and soulbeast both use burning damage, which is basically a bleed on steroids. > > > > > > So, no, a condition being stronger than bleed is no excuse to nerf it. > > > > > > If you bother to check, the only bleed centric condition spec is necromancer and that's why they suck so much. > > > > You asked me why those builds don't use confusion, and I answered your question. Now you act as if I was saying something different. > > They virtually use a superior analog to confusion and you're purposely acting obtuse here. You are the only one being obtuse here. Those builds literally **_cannot_** use confusion. Even if confusion did 3x as much damage as it used to, they literally cannot use it. So asking why they don't use it is nothing but an attempt to deflect the entire conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenith.7301 Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > @"Zenith.7301" said: > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said: > > > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Carighan.6758" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"OriOri.8724" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Having a single damaging condition would be awful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For lore-purposes, yes. But functionally there's no issue with them all working the exact same way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I really think the blinds-on test is good for finding out whether having an extra design element makes sense: Taking away all indicators of the special nature of something, would a player still be able to infer it? If no, there's **probably** no reason to have it. Cut as many aspects away as possible, see when core gameplay falters, then take one step back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, having 4+ conditions which all provide "just" damage over time **is** a bit pointless, even though this "fix" (I feel dirty calling it that) is doing anything but fixing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But yes, I feel without numbers or tooltips, there would for example be no way to tell whether you are causing Burning or Bleeding -> There's no non-lore reason to have both. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not at all true. Different conditions are not put in place for lore reasons, but for gameplay mechanics. If done well, it works amazingly. You have burning doing very high damage per second, but doesn't last very long, allowing for a "bursty" DoT condition. Bleed is a lower damage per second, being the general DoT. Confusion is obviously geared at denying the enemy the chance to use skills, by punishing them quite heavily when they do use skills. Its an entirely different gameplay mechanic to a simple DoT. Similarly, torment was put in game to punish players for trying to outmaneuver you (there's a reason it was originally given to Necros). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > These conditions are different for a reason. Simplifying them to a single condition would be disastrous mechanics wise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but confusion completely loses its identity in PvE. PvE enemies behave the same regardless of whether confusion is in play. It loses its control function and becomes only damage - and poor damage at that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a different problem, one that Anet had solved by raising confusions passive tick damage in PvE. It was probably too high yes, confusion, and torment to some extent, are clearly conditions that are aimed at a PvP context, not a PvE one, so having confusion deal at least as much damage as bleed each tick was probably too high. But that doesn't change the fact that confusion functioned differently from a pure DoT for a reason, and homogenizing all damaging conditions to be the same would be awful. > > > > > > > > > > > > WTH? It wasn't too high. Mirage pre-feb patch was not even the top DPS spec. How would confusion or torment be too high in PvE when the top DPS specs in raiding used neither? > > > > > > > > > > Maybe because those classes don't even have access to confusion? Come on now man..... > > > > > > > > > > Having the same base damage as bleed, and then able to spike higher when enemies used skills was _probably_ too high for confusion. > > > > > > > > ......Renegade uses torment, which is basically a better form of confusion since it does the same damage as bleed (even more, due to the revenant trait that increases its efefctiveness), and it triggers all the time since the vast majority of bosses move on top for bonus damage. > > > > > > > > Firebrand and soulbeast both use burning damage, which is basically a bleed on steroids. > > > > > > > > So, no, a condition being stronger than bleed is no excuse to nerf it. > > > > > > > > If you bother to check, the only bleed centric condition spec is necromancer and that's why they suck so much. > > > > > > You asked me why those builds don't use confusion, and I answered your question. Now you act as if I was saying something different. > > > > They virtually use a superior analog to confusion and you're purposely acting obtuse here. > > You are the only one being obtuse here. Those builds literally **_cannot_** use confusion. Even if confusion did 3x as much damage as it used to, they literally cannot use it. So asking why they don't use it is nothing but an attempt to deflect the entire conversation. lol, now you're just blatantly strawmanning. Bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now