Epidemic in raids needs to be nerfed

[Sublimatio.6981]

can some of you guys please stop quoting the entire thread page when answering to one person's message, it's bad ethics and i also get notifications that someone quoted me, but not really.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > I disagree. You can't restrict every single boss encounter in the game just because of one single skill. Which is used in a way that is exactly opposite to what is intuitively "correct" for it. To me, it is very clearly an issue with the skill, not the encounters.

>

> Why can't they again ?

> It's not like it hasn't been done before and won't be done again. Heck core mechanics are ultimately invalidated in Raids by design looking at Stealth (as most arena's give revealed).

>

> It is very much down to encounter design, a skill cannot be both OP and Fine at the same time as you would have it. The skill is fine except when extraordinary conditions are met, in this case Ads with large health pools, small arenas and class stacking.

>

> Several of those things can be addressed through encounter design. A boss could have a cleanse happen at X stacks of conditions, It could return conditions back to senders, it could reflect projectiles, it could have phases of condition damage immunity(not limited to just condition damage). All of these are tools the developers have at their disposal when creating encounters.

 

It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

 

Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

 

If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

[Feanor.2358]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

>

> Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

>

> If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

 

The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

[yann.1946]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"steki.1478" said:

> > > @"Raizel.8175" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > > I would also argue that 50th percentile on gw2efficiency is not even the real 50th percentile since low skilled squads are less likely to even use gw2raidar.

> > > > >

> > > > > I think this screenshot I saw on reddit recently is more accurate

> > > > > 

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > On Gorseval, no less... Quite sad.

> > >

> > > That screenshot tells us nothing at all. Could very well be that the Scourge cleared all the adds/orbs with Epi and the Weavers just focused on the Boss. Had the problem quite often that Ele's just want to focus the boss instead of doing what their AoE's are supposed to do: clearing adds fast. So if only the Scourge did that, of course he has superior dps.

> >

> > Even the boss dps was higher on scourge, it has nothing to do with cleave.

> On the other hand, 12k dps boss damage on gorse for a weaver is not that stellar either. On weaver the 50th percentile is above 15k, if you haven't noticed. Perhaps just the scourge was a better player than the rest of the group. The soulbeast seems to have a better boss damage than both weavers as well, should we nerf rangers due to that?

 

Their is also to add that condi gains dps if the other dpsses underperform while power loses dps

[DutchRiders.2871]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

>

> Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

>

> If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

 

Tbh I think you would stack less weavers than you stack scourges now. Hence the result would be more class diversity in those fights. Altough overall you would have more weavers.

 

Epi and scourge are so broken that you replace a druid and 10 man spirits in a record run with yet another scourge. CMs where you need to do more mechanics actually boost scourges. At this point epi is the outlier.

 

I will continue to enjoy epi though.

 

 

 

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

> >

> > Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> > It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

> >

> > If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

>

> The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

 

I agree. It would be silly to stop having bosses without adds just because of epi

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

> >

> > Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> > It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

> >

> > If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

>

> The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

 

It's not revolved around a single skill though, that's the point that you're missing.

 

Encounter design is done based on all skills, not a single one. If you're properly designing content you take into account every tool that can be used and come up with the best case scenario (or worst case) and build. This is something that should be fairly clear to you by now if you raid. A good boss fight can do many things and doesn't have to be the black and white scenario you lay out where there's just No ads. I've already pointed out that they can entirely nullify the presence of Epi and other things by using already existing gameplay mechanics like projectile destruction/reflects and immunity.

 

That's that. It's not a simple nerf Epi solution or as i've noticed the weaver in this thread unironically suggest putting an ICD on it cause that went over so well for them right ?

[Mini Crinny.6190]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

> > >

> > > Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> > > It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

> > >

> > > If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

> >

> > The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

>

> It's not revolved around a single skill though, that's the point that you're missing.

>

> Encounter design is done based on all skills, not a single one. If you're properly designing content you take into account every tool that can be used and come up with the best case scenario (or worst case) and build. This is something that should be fairly clear to you by now if you raid. A good boss fight can do many things and doesn't have to be the black and white scenario you lay out where there's just No ads. I've already pointed out that they can entirely nullify the presence of Epi and other things by using already existing gameplay mechanics like projectile destruction/reflects and immunity.

>

> That's that. It's not a simple nerf Epi solution or as i've noticed the weaver in this thread unironically suggest putting an ICD on it cause that went over so well for them right ?

 

If i'm not mistaken Wings 1-4 were already around when epidemic got reworked?

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Mini Crinny.6190" said:

> If i'm not mistaken Wings 1-4 were already around when epidemic got reworked?

 

They were. Oddly enough Epi wasn't cry out loud broken back then, sure there was a phase with jagged horrors where people started using it. However, it was far from the watershed of complaints we see now. Which begs the question why ? From what i can tell we have a bunch of upset ele mains that dislike the "ease of play" factor that necro has and generally haven't said much of anything else outside of "Our rotation is harder, therefore we deserve more damage" and they do have more damage. So these complaints are really off base from that crowd. The other complaints are about general balance in which they don't want to acknowledge that the encounters themselves effect balance far more significantly than any other thing outside over the top skill ratios.

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

> > >

> > > Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> > > It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

> > >

> > > If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

> >

> > The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

>

> It's not revolved around a single skill though, that's the point that you're missing.

>

> Encounter design is done based on all skills, not a single one. If you're properly designing content you take into account every tool that can be used and come up with the best case scenario (or worst case) and build. This is something that should be fairly clear to you by now if you raid. A good boss fight can do many things and doesn't have to be the black and white scenario you lay out where there's just No ads. I've already pointed out that they can entirely nullify the presence of Epi and other things by using already existing gameplay mechanics like projectile destruction/reflects and immunity.

>

> That's that. It's not a simple nerf Epi solution or as i've noticed the weaver in this thread unironically suggest putting an ICD on it cause that went over so well for them right ?

 

The thing is, projectile destruction and reflects hurt everything else, not just epi. It is still the outlier, and it is still *the* problem.

 

I never suggested a particular nerf by the way. I only ever said that in the new balance epi bounce is completely broken. If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does. Must be fixed, period.

[Nimon.7840]

We'll almost all people here saying that epi has to be nerfed have a fancy ele picture.

 

And Eles aren't mandatory right now for good DPS on boss, and a bad played ele is worse than other not so good played classes. So Eles aren't taken that often anymore.

 

FINALLY! Feel the despair that necro players had to feel for a long, long, long,long time now.

[Belorn.2659]

It > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Mini Crinny.6190" said:

> > If i'm not mistaken Wings 1-4 were already around when epidemic got reworked?

>

> They were. Oddly enough Epi wasn't cry out loud broken back then, sure there was a phase with jagged horrors where people started using it. However, it was far from the watershed of complaints we see now. Which begs the question why ? From what i can tell we have a bunch of upset ele mains that dislike the "ease of play" factor that necro has and generally haven't said much of anything else outside of "Our rotation is harder, therefore we deserve more damage" and they do have more damage. So these complaints are really of base from that crowd. The other complaints are about general balance in which they don't want to acknowledge that the encounters themselves effect balance far more significantly than any other thing outside over the top skill ratios.

 

It took years before anyone cried about ice bow, and then suddenly everyone talked about how broken it was. This is normal. It takes time for the single best dps skill to establish itself and to become mainstream to the point where the novelty of it start to drop. Once epi get nerfed the next top dps skill on the block will bubble up, be experimented on, become mainstream and then finally complained about and nerfed.

 

I think this is the 6th iteration of "single highest dps skill" getting nerfed that I can name. Those that do a lot of benchmarks can likely create a list of which skill is next after epi.

[Voltekka.2375]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > It's not that they can't, it's that they shouldn't. It would be bad design.

> > > >

> > > > Again, that's only your position based on some extremely faulty logic. You think Epi in it's current form isn't being used as intended.

> > > > It's intent as you can see on the tip is to copy all conditions to target, there's no limit on copying them back which is by design. Therefore it's not bad design for them to build around this as they have showcased they can and will do in previous fights.

> > > >

> > > > If you're arguing for removing Epi in it's current form your net result will be clear as day, More ele's and more of the same encounter design which is just homogenizing it because that's what you're comfortable with instead of having actual variety brought about not only by balance (numbers) but also by the aspect many people (yourself included) ignore and that's Encounter Design which is arguably the biggest factor in what's "Meta vs Not".

> > >

> > > The premise that the design of your encounters has to be limited by the existence of a single skill - which may, or may not be used there by your players - is the indication of bad design. If a skill is that powerful, then it should clearly be nerfed. Simple. It doesn't matter if it is used as intended or not, the end result is unacceptable on a design level. You *shouldn't* revolve your whole game around a single skill. Ever. And that's it.

> >

> > It's not revolved around a single skill though, that's the point that you're missing.

> >

> > Encounter design is done based on all skills, not a single one. If you're properly designing content you take into account every tool that can be used and come up with the best case scenario (or worst case) and build. This is something that should be fairly clear to you by now if you raid. A good boss fight can do many things and doesn't have to be the black and white scenario you lay out where there's just No ads. I've already pointed out that they can entirely nullify the presence of Epi and other things by using already existing gameplay mechanics like projectile destruction/reflects and immunity.

> >

> > That's that. It's not a simple nerf Epi solution or as i've noticed the weaver in this thread unironically suggest putting an ICD on it cause that went over so well for them right ?

>

> The thing is, projectile destruction and reflects hurt everything else, not just epi. It is still the outlier, and it is still *the* problem.

>

> I never suggested a particular nerf by the way. I only ever said that in the new balance epi bounce is completely broken. If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does. Must be fixed, period.

 

Epidemic is unblockable. As such, i think it cant be reflected.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does.

Fun fact: epi is not working better now than then. In tre semi-recent history it has been reworked exactly once, and that was the nerf meant for WvW (that definitely didn't improve anything in pve). It's not overperforming any more than it did when you made those previous comments. The only difference is that eles got dialed back from their previous unreasonable levels.

 

 

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Belorn.2659" said:

> I think this is the 6th iteration of "single highest dps skill" getting nerfed that I can name. Those that do a lot of benchmarks can likely create a list of which skill is next after epi.

 

Irony abound here but those iterations were brought about via WvW complaints.

 

> @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> Epidemic is unblockable. As such, i think it cant be reflected.

 

Normally you'd be right. However, there are exceptions to every rule. Several bosses have blocks that stop otherwise unblockable skills. Alternatively unblockable can just be removed from the skill not a huge issue.

[Grogba.6204]

Meanwhile Warrior:

- Same HP as Necro

- Heavy Armor

- Access to more boons

- Access to unique buffs (EA, Banners)

- Stronger and more reliable CC for both core and Berzerker

- Powerful boon removal/boon prevention as Spellbreaker

- #1 Power DPS as Spellbreaker (Small hitbox, https://snowcrows.com/benchmarks/)

- #1 Condi DPS as Berzerker (Big hitbox, https://snowcrows.com/benchmarks/)

- Mandatory in every encounter

- **Has excellent weapon coverage**

 

The last point in particular _hurts_ Necromancer. There are zero weapons besides Scepter/Torch that can be used for competitive DPS. Melee weapons on core Necro and Reaper are in a ridiculous sad state. If you want to argue that Warriors have to attack the foe in melee range then take a look at the terrible melee options Necromancer have.

[steki.1478]

> @"Grogba.6204" said:

> Meanwhile Warrior:

> - Same HP as Necro

> - Heavy Armor

> - Access to more boons

> - Access to unique buffs (EA, Banners)

> - Stronger and more reliable CC for both core and Berzerker

> - Powerful boon removal/boon prevention as Spellbreaker

> - #1 Power DPS as Spellbreaker (Small hitbox, https://snowcrows.com/benchmarks/)

> - #1 Condi DPS as Berzerker (Big hitbox, https://snowcrows.com/benchmarks/)

> - Mandatory in every encounter

> - **Has excellent weapon coverage**

>

> The last point in particular _hurts_ Necromancer. There are zero weapons besides Scepter/Torch that can be used for competitive DPS. Melee weapons on core Necro and Reaper are in a ridiculous sad state. If you want to argue that Warriors have to attack the foe in melee range then take a look at the terrible melee options Necromancer have.

 

Finally someone got it.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does.

> Fun fact: epi is not working better now than then. In tre semi-recent history it has been reworked exactly once, and that was the nerf meant for WvW (that definitely didn't improve anything in pve). It's not overperforming any more than it did when you made those previous comments. The only difference is that eles got dialed back from their previous unreasonable levels.

>

>

 

Which made epi blatantly overperforming. It's the relative strength that matters, not the raw numbers.

[apharma.3741]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does.

> > Fun fact: epi is not working better now than then. In tre semi-recent history it has been reworked exactly once, and that was the nerf meant for WvW (that definitely didn't improve anything in pve). It's not overperforming any more than it did when you made those previous comments. The only difference is that eles got dialed back from their previous unreasonable levels.

> >

> >

>

> Which made epi blatantly overperforming. It's the relative strength that matters, not the raw numbers.

 

Not entirely. What's made epi blatantly over performing is also the availability of conditions that scourge brought. Now with 6 scourges you can have 25 burning, torment, poison (especially if you have condi druid) and bleed which is bounced along with the other control conditions thrown out. Before PoF you would have needed a warrior to get that many burns and you wouldn't have any extra torment which adds extra damage, even with 2 condition warriors there were times where burning would fall off below 25.

 

This means not only do you have additional damaging conditions purely from having torment more readily applied from the scourges it's also more readily stacked by the epi bounce.

 

Would be nice to see how much that torment added onto each necro from the VG world record DnT did.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does.

> > Fun fact: epi is not working better now than then. In tre semi-recent history it has been reworked exactly once, and that was the nerf meant for WvW (that definitely didn't improve anything in pve). It's not overperforming any more than it did when you made those previous comments. The only difference is that eles got dialed back from their previous unreasonable levels.

> >

> >

>

> Which made epi blatantly overperforming. It's the relative strength that matters, not the raw numbers.

If we follow that train of thoughts, then there will _always_ be something "blatantly overperforming"

Besides, if something is overperforming now, it's definitely not the scourge.

 

[Henry.5713]

It at least takes some coordination and a decent level of execution to perform proper Epibouncing compared to other things we have seen over the years.

Still, I won't blame them if this gets changed but neither do I mind if they leave things the way they are.

[MithranArkanere.8957]

As I see it, Epidemic is fine as it is, and what needs to change is the transfer, copy and conversion mechanics for boons and conditions, to have the same limitation Reflect has:

* It should be possible to transfer, copy or convert each individual stack of a condition or boon only twice.

 

You send bleed to an enemy, they send it back, you can't send that stack of bleeding back again.

 

You get weakness, you turn it into might, enemy turns it back into weakness, you can't turn it back into might again.

 

You copy bleed to an enemy, then copy that bleed again in an enemy that got the first copy, can't copy that bleed a third time.

 

You take poison from an ally with Plague signet passive, you send that poison to an enemy with Plague signet active, they can't send that poison back.

 

I am positive that will work.

[apharma.3741]

> @"MithranArkanere.8957" said:

> As I see it, Epidemic is fine as it is, and what needs to change is the transfer, copy and conversion mechanics for boons and conditions, to have the same limitation Reflect has:

> * It should be possible to transfer, copy or convert each individual stack of a condition or boon only twice.

>

> You send bleed to an enemy, they send it back, you can't send that stack of bleeding back again.

>

> You get weakness, you turn it into might, enemy turns it back into weakness, you can't turn it back into might again.

>

> You copy bleed to an enemy, then copy that bleed again in an enemy that got the first copy, can't copy that bleed a third time.

>

> You take poison from an ally with Plague signet passive, you send that poison to an enemy with Plague signet active, they can't send that poison back.

>

> I am positive that will work.

 

That would be really really bad. For a start it wouldn't really affect epi at all as there's about 12s between bounces which means 6 scourges would only need to apply about 4 of each condition that can then be bounced again.

 

It would also mean that there would be times when your cleanse, convert or transfer simply wouldn't work for no reason other than you transferred it originally.

 

Here's another thing most people here haven't thought about.

 

What if we get another damaging condition? Epi scales off the number of damaging conditions, the more damaging conditions, the more damage it does, plain and simple. Add more and epi bounce increases in power, if we get a new damaging condition and it can be stacked to a certain extent (especially if given to scourge or a class "required" already) then epi gets even stronger.

 

If confusion was really strong in PvE and there was a class that could easily maintain over 25 stacks alone it could be worth replacing a scourge for especially if it did as much or more damage. Fortunately this isn't really the case.

 

[Sephylon.4938]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > If you go and dig my older posts, you'll see that my position back then was "epi is mostly fine, because it's niche and doesn't overperform that much". Well, now it does.

> > > Fun fact: epi is not working better now than then. In tre semi-recent history it has been reworked exactly once, and that was the nerf meant for WvW (that definitely didn't improve anything in pve). It's not overperforming any more than it did when you made those previous comments. The only difference is that eles got dialed back from their previous unreasonable levels.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Which made epi blatantly overperforming. It's the relative strength that matters, not the raw numbers.

>

> Not entirely. What's made epi blatantly over performing is also the availability of conditions that scourge brought. Now with 6 scourges you can have 25 burning, torment, poison (especially if you have condi druid) and bleed which is bounced along with the other control conditions thrown out. Before PoF you would have needed a warrior to get that many burns and you wouldn't have any extra torment which adds extra damage, even with 2 condition warriors there were times where burning would fall off below 25.

>

> This means not only do you have additional damaging conditions purely from having torment more readily applied from the scourges it's also more readily stacked by the epi bounce.

>

> Would be nice to see how much that torment added onto each necro from the VG world record DnT did.

 

I agree. Epi was fine when it was used by condi reapers as they had limited access to condis other than bleeding and small amounts of poison+torment, and even smaller burns, having to rely of zerks for their burn stacks. Scourge ramped up the access necros have to burning and torment. Moreso when stacked.