DREAD.... What is this garb?

[Anchoku.8142]

With Fear being Necro's pseudo-control effect available in all builds, can anyone describe their specific Fear-based builds?

 

I would expect to see spectral or stab corruption-based builds and a discussion on the trades of extra proc's from Fear of Death, Reaper's Protection, and runes and stab corruptions. There are also many modifiers like Terror, and, of course, Dread.

 

A Fear-build is not just about bursting. It is also about control; timing interrupts, forcing players to move where you want, that sort of thing.

 

Again, I wish Reaper's Protection and Fear of Death were combined and access to short Fears be increased using the empty trait slot, if building for control effects, but Dread is a good concept. Maybe if no one uses it, then the balance team will look into why Fear is not so much a thing as it was in the past. Another source of Fear would be welcome.

 

Maybe Dread foreshadows a new elite in development that will make better use of Fear or serves as a reminder that the developers have not forgotten about our primary pseudo-control effect.

 

[Brujeria.7536]

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > You honestly defend a trait because of that measely vuln application? Necromancer has a total of 3 "reliable" fear applications, one is bound to shroud, one is bound to a single weapon skill, one is bound to a niche utility skill. The fear window is too low for PvP to land any reliable big hits. The vuln.. well its a MASTER TIER TRAIT IN THE POWER DAMAGE LINE. Nobody cares about 10 vuln for 5 seconds. Just look at what similar classes get at this tier. Unrestricted buffs and damage increases, traits that synergize with the class as a whole. Fear at this point isnt any defining trait a necromancer has, hell even the thief fear on steal has a bigger impact. The trait is useless as its a waste of a slot, fear is way too weak to justify its existence. If it would be ANY CC from ANY source, this would be far more interesting.

>

> Vuln on master trait:

> - Warrior: _sundering burst_ (vuln on burst skill use, a bit stronger than _dread_)

Yes, its not primarely about the strength of application, its about the interval, and the counterplay. Warrior has a burst skill on EVERY weapon, EVERY weapon is capable of using the trait. It further gets increased by crits, again EVERY burst skill can crit. The 20% damage increase of dread only applies to physical damage, thus it further limits the number of builds and weapons that could fully utilize it.

 

> - Guardian: _binding jeopardy_ (vuln when you bind or immobilize as a guardian. Yeah super niche and the trait is definitely weaker in all aspect vs _dread_.)

 

Yes i agree its super niche, and the vuln is not the greatest, but it works with 6 skills (weapon and utility) in total for base guardian. Again: its not so much about the pure "power" of the skill, numbers can easily be tweaked, its about the missing application of fear and the integration into the kit. I fully agree that this is not a superb trait, but its effect, its potential use is well integrated for the core class (even further for the especs at hand)

 

> - Thief: _Deadly trapper_ (trap apply vuln, clearly not stronger than _dread_), _sundering shade_ (stealth attack apply vuln)

Trapper is a cooldown reduction trait for all traps and gives also might - i wouldnt compare it to dread. If dread would reduce all fear skill cooldowns we could talk.

Sundering Shade - yeah again, the vuln is not good at all. But thief can proc this trait way more often than a necro can proc fear, or even a guardian can proc binding jeopary.

 

> - Engineer: _lock on_ (very niche trait), _expert extermination_ (vuln on hard CC, can be seen as slightly stronger than _dread_)

>

Well lock on is bad application wise, especially with the icd. But i think the main selling point here is the reveal, so i would judge the vuln only as added bonus

 

> This should be enough to prove that in this trait tier, such traits exist for a lot of professions and they are not excessively "better" than _dread_. Should all those professions riot because they own such trait? No.

 

Of course not, its for most of the above just a numbers thing. The integration into the class is good, the effects (number of stacks, duration of stacks) could use buffs, for sure - but thats a different matterb esides on how it works with the class.

 

If dread added an effect like "Dread - targets takes 20% increased damage from you for 2/3 seconds" a lot of its issues would be resolved.

[Brujeria.7536]

> @"Nimon.7840" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > > > > @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > Yet nobody does it. Who does it? Nobody, because its not worth the trouble and it's not going to go the way you think it will 80% of the time.

> > > > > The best it will get is shroud 3 into 4. I don't really see this being a thing ever.

> > > > >

> > > > > But I really dont care. You're not going to use it. I'm not going to use it.

> > > > >

> > > > > You have 1 second to make use of that damage. 1 second. I'm not even surprised people are defending this trait. People who are defending it don't even use it. I find it funny at this point.

> > > > >

> > > > > Go use it. You got this bro.

> > > >

> > > > You look at this trait the wrong way and this is what lead you to such extrem way of thinking. Your very mistake on this trait is that you focus your mind on those 20% extra power damage on feared foes while you should focus on the vulnerabilities which is an aspect which is part of the spite traitline since launch.

> > > >

> > > > This trait have plenty of different use and objectively broaden the build diversity of the spite traitline. This trait can be exploit for both condi bombing and power burst. And while traits that focus on condi bombing is not something that I particularly support on the necromancer, nobody can deny that it's especially effective in PvP and WvW. Scourge, for example, excel at condi bombing and that's the main reason he hurt so much other players.

> > > >

> > > > And before you protest about spite not being a condi traitline, remember that all soft conditions help as much power builds as they help condi builds. Even in curse, one of the minor traits grant you critical chance based on how many conditions are on your foes. And while critical chance marginally help condi build, it's something highly thought out by power builds.

> > > >

> > > > You need to broaden your point of view. In PvP, players have "low" HP and fight can be pretty quick. In a lot of fights, you neither have the time to build might as a necromancer nor do you have the possibility to strike your target while it's health linger below 50% health point. This trait is here to give you an another option that can benefit you in these kind of situations. And want it or not, it benefit both power builds option and condi builds options. Even if you feel taht the 20% damage increase window is frustratingly low, never ever forget that you still put 8 vuln on your foe at the same time which is 8% damage increase that last a lot more than your fear. You may not benefit from the fear dps increase due to unforseen event but at the very least you will benefit from those vuln stack on your foe.

> > >

> > > You honestly defend a trait because of that measely vuln application? Necromancer has a total of 3 "reliable" fear applications, one is bound to shroud, one is bound to a single weapon skill, one is bound to a niche utility skill. The fear window is too low for PvP to land any reliable big hits. The vuln.. well its a MASTER TIER TRAIT IN THE POWER DAMAGE LINE. Nobody cares about 10 vuln for 5 seconds. Just look at what similar classes get at this tier. Unrestricted buffs and damage increases, traits that synergize with the class as a whole. Fear at this point isnt any defining trait a necromancer has, hell even the thief fear on steal has a bigger impact. The trait is useless as its a waste of a slot, fear is way too weak to justify its existence. If it would be ANY CC from ANY source, this would be far more interesting.

> >

> > I think that is an honest defense, because his description is exactly what the trait does and what I'm convinced it was meant to do; give **good** players a high burst capability in a short duration of time.

> >

> > If the trait is useless, then don't use it for the game mode it's useless in. I'm continually shocked to see the mentality from players that EVERY trait needs to have use for every game mode they want to use it for. That's NOT why we are given choice.

> >

> > > @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> > > Seems like it's there for Scourge. You lay up conditions, you hit Garish Pillar, they get tons of Vuln to boost your condition damage. You can sneak in a Scepter 3 with +20% damage.

> >

> > That's how a good player thinks "What is the **best** way to use this trait?" ... "Is that good value for my build?" We need to see more of **that** kind of thinking.

>

> Gosh. Are you really that blind? This trait is useless for all gamemode except for some special builds in special situations. It's a niche trait for niche situation. Double niche: pretty useless.

>

> The fear uptime you can get is way too low to make use of this trait. It's uptime is only good for condi players, where it's not taken for the extra dmg rather than the vulnerability.

>

> Here I used it on my core condi necro:

>

>

>

> Traits:

>

> http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vRAQB4oWoovxdctxwOD6XYXHANAA-w

>

> Because core doesn't have enough dmg to kill anyone fast enough and it doesn't do proper vulnerability.

>

 

Well yes. to be fair here in that scenario it wouldnt really matter much if you pick dread or chill of death - you will win anyway. But yes, for condi builds that pick spite and dont need the free condi hate on 50% life it might be of some use.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > You honestly defend a trait because of that measely vuln application? Necromancer has a total of 3 "reliable" fear applications, one is bound to shroud, one is bound to a single weapon skill, one is bound to a niche utility skill. The fear window is too low for PvP to land any reliable big hits. The vuln.. well its a MASTER TIER TRAIT IN THE POWER DAMAGE LINE. Nobody cares about 10 vuln for 5 seconds. Just look at what similar classes get at this tier. Unrestricted buffs and damage increases, traits that synergize with the class as a whole. Fear at this point isnt any defining trait a necromancer has, hell even the thief fear on steal has a bigger impact. The trait is useless as its a waste of a slot, fear is way too weak to justify its existence. If it would be ANY CC from ANY source, this would be far more interesting.

>

> Vuln on master trait:

> - Warrior: _sundering burst_ (vuln on burst skill use, a bit stronger than _dread_)

> - Guardian: _binding jeopardy_ (vuln when you bind or immobilize as a guardian. Yeah super niche and the trait is definitely weaker in all aspect vs _dread_.)

> - Thief: _Deadly trapper_ (trap apply vuln, clearly not stronger than _dread_), _sundering shade_ (stealth attack apply vuln)

> - Engineer: _lock on_ (very niche trait), _expert extermination_ (vuln on hard CC, can be seen as slightly stronger than _dread_)

>

> This should be enough to prove that in this trait tier, such traits exist for a lot of professions and they are not excessively "better" than _dread_. Should all those professions riot because they own such trait? No.

 

Only nobody is rioting. We're saying its bad. You say its okay that its bad because other traits are bad. How is that helping?

 

People would like some variety in viable traits. I just think people who defend bad stuff just to defend the game doesn't help the game; only hurts it.

[TheDevice.2751]

 

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Even if it's as bad as you say, then surely the other two traits you can choose are more suited for the scenarios; in otherwords, it's not a big deal Dread is a bad trait.

 

And, again, your "solution" is: the trait is fine because you can choose a different one. What?

 

But basically what you're saying about the quantity over quality is the illusion of choice. That is the issue. People want actual choice, not the illusion of choice.

 

Half the time I don't know if you're arguing with me or agreeing with me. We both said its bad. We also have both stated that some traits are meant for other modes (which is why I said they may as well make them separate).

 

The point is, the trait sucks. Its not very good. Thats the point. It's also more of a condition trait than anything although it could potentially work in a hyrid build. Maybe. If it were meant as a hybrid trait I might understand it a bit more. Hybrid builds don't really work that well on necro's though since you need so many defensive stats already.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Nimon.7840" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > > > > @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > Yet nobody does it. Who does it? Nobody, because its not worth the trouble and it's not going to go the way you think it will 80% of the time.

> > > > > The best it will get is shroud 3 into 4. I don't really see this being a thing ever.

> > > > >

> > > > > But I really dont care. You're not going to use it. I'm not going to use it.

> > > > >

> > > > > You have 1 second to make use of that damage. 1 second. I'm not even surprised people are defending this trait. People who are defending it don't even use it. I find it funny at this point.

> > > > >

> > > > > Go use it. You got this bro.

> > > >

> > > > You look at this trait the wrong way and this is what lead you to such extrem way of thinking. Your very mistake on this trait is that you focus your mind on those 20% extra power damage on feared foes while you should focus on the vulnerabilities which is an aspect which is part of the spite traitline since launch.

> > > >

> > > > This trait have plenty of different use and objectively broaden the build diversity of the spite traitline. This trait can be exploit for both condi bombing and power burst. And while traits that focus on condi bombing is not something that I particularly support on the necromancer, nobody can deny that it's especially effective in PvP and WvW. Scourge, for example, excel at condi bombing and that's the main reason he hurt so much other players.

> > > >

> > > > And before you protest about spite not being a condi traitline, remember that all soft conditions help as much power builds as they help condi builds. Even in curse, one of the minor traits grant you critical chance based on how many conditions are on your foes. And while critical chance marginally help condi build, it's something highly thought out by power builds.

> > > >

> > > > You need to broaden your point of view. In PvP, players have "low" HP and fight can be pretty quick. In a lot of fights, you neither have the time to build might as a necromancer nor do you have the possibility to strike your target while it's health linger below 50% health point. This trait is here to give you an another option that can benefit you in these kind of situations. And want it or not, it benefit both power builds option and condi builds options. Even if you feel taht the 20% damage increase window is frustratingly low, never ever forget that you still put 8 vuln on your foe at the same time which is 8% damage increase that last a lot more than your fear. You may not benefit from the fear dps increase due to unforseen event but at the very least you will benefit from those vuln stack on your foe.

> > >

> > > You honestly defend a trait because of that measely vuln application? Necromancer has a total of 3 "reliable" fear applications, one is bound to shroud, one is bound to a single weapon skill, one is bound to a niche utility skill. The fear window is too low for PvP to land any reliable big hits. The vuln.. well its a MASTER TIER TRAIT IN THE POWER DAMAGE LINE. Nobody cares about 10 vuln for 5 seconds. Just look at what similar classes get at this tier. Unrestricted buffs and damage increases, traits that synergize with the class as a whole. Fear at this point isnt any defining trait a necromancer has, hell even the thief fear on steal has a bigger impact. The trait is useless as its a waste of a slot, fear is way too weak to justify its existence. If it would be ANY CC from ANY source, this would be far more interesting.

> >

> > I think that is an honest defense, because his description is exactly what the trait does and what I'm convinced it was meant to do; give **good** players a high burst capability in a short duration of time.

> >

> > If the trait is useless, then don't use it for the game mode it's useless in. I'm continually shocked to see the mentality from players that EVERY trait needs to have use for every game mode they want to use it for. That's NOT why we are given choice.

> >

> > > @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> > > Seems like it's there for Scourge. You lay up conditions, you hit Garish Pillar, they get tons of Vuln to boost your condition damage. You can sneak in a Scepter 3 with +20% damage.

> >

> > That's how a good player thinks "What is the **best** way to use this trait?" ... "Is that good value for my build?" We need to see more of **that** kind of thinking.

>

> Gosh. Are you really that blind?

 

No, you really just want to ignore any value the trait has to push your agenda.

 

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

>

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Even if it's as bad as you say, then surely the other two traits you can choose are more suited for the scenarios; in otherwords, it's not a big deal Dread is a bad trait.

>

> And, again, your "solution" is: the trait is fine because you can choose a different one. What?

>

> But basically what you're saying about the quantity over quality is the illusion of choice. That is the issue. People want actual choice, not the illusion of choice.

>

> Half the time I don't know if you're arguing with me or agreeing with me. We both said its bad. We also have both stated that some traits are meant for other modes (which is why I said they may as well make them separate).

>

> The point is, the trait sucks. Its not very good. Thats the point. It's also more of a condition trait than anything although it could potentially work in a hyrid build. Maybe. If it were meant as a hybrid trait I might understand it a bit more. Hybrid builds don't really work that well on necro's though since you need so many defensive stats already.

 

Yes actually it is ... and why do you feel that such an unreasonable answer? Do you think Anet just gives us lots of choice so that we complain about the WORST of the choices we have? The trait sucks and it's not very good? OK, I'm not going to dispute that but that's not very relevant to be honest. If there was NO choice, then yeah, scream from the top of a mountain about how bad it is. Like I said, it's readily apparent that Anet is primarily balancing this game with choice, not numbers, so using numbers to justify balancing is a very weak reason to act if Anet's strategy is to allow players to exercise choice.

[TheDevice.2751]

> Yes actually it is ... and why do you feel that such an unreasonable answer? Do you think Anet just gives us lots of choice so that we complain about the WORST of the choices we have? The trait sucks and it's not very good? OK, I'm not going to dispute that but that's not very relevant to be honest. If there was NO choice, then yeah, scream from the top of a mountain about how bad it is.

 

That's not really a choice. It's the illusion of choice. People are always going to pick the better one because they want to win. It's almost like there is no choice. The choice has already been made. If they were equally as good, then there's actual choice.

 

If you had a choice to choose between five dollars and five thousand dollars.. which would you choose? Which would everyone choose? There's no _real_ choice. You're basically saying: "here's five thousand dollars".

 

>Like I said, it's readily apparent that Anet is primarily balancing this game with choice, not numbers, so using numbers to justify balancing is a very weak reason to act if Anet's strategy is to allow players to exercise choice.

 

That's contradicting. That doesn't make any sense at all. First of all, balance isn't choice; balance is balance. Second, that "strategy" is a self-defeating one. It's contradictory. If one is just better than the other, there is no choice. I actually wouldn't even doubt that that's how anet works because of how ridiculous that sounds.

[Obtena.7952]

No, it's actually choice. We have three; you can chose the one that best suits your situation, no strings attached. don't make up BS just to argue now.

 

Let's try a different tact; you say this is just illusionary choice, yet we can't assume Anet doesn't put things in the game without purpose. Therefore it's not hard to conclude Anet is purposefully putting in bad traits to reduce our choice:

 

So question for you: If Anet is intentionally reducing our choice because of bad trait introductions, what makes anything about this thread relevant? If the way Anet develops this game is intended, what makes you think that you are going to make a compelling case to change Dread because it's bad? You aren't.

 

So we have two scenarios here:

 

1. You're wrong: Anet intended for this trait to have value to people and you're just ignoring that value to try to convince Anet (and other players) into thinking otherwise

OR

2. You're misunderstanding the design intentions of the devs: They intend to direct a style of play away from certain skills by making them purposefully bad and nothing you can say is going to affect that.

 

I'm betting it's #1 ... because Anet runs GW2 as a business and I find it hard to believe Anet purposefully does work that adds no value to the players of this game. Players want value and Dread has SOME value to it, even if you want to deny it to make a super sensational argument for changing it.

 

i'm going to give you the same advice I gave someone else; if you can't accept and have a discussion around the value the trait has (even if you loathe it and think denying it makes a strong case for changing it), then what makes you think Anet is just going to accept what you say, contrary to the work they actually put into the trait to design it and implement it? You're not being realistic when you do this kind of thread.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> No, it's actually choice. We have three; you can chose the one that best suits your situation, no strings attached. don't make up BS just to argue now.

>

> Let's try a different tact; you say this is just illusionary choice, yet we can't assume Anet doesn't put things in the game without purpose. Therefore it's not hard to conclude Anet is purposefully putting in bad traits to reduce our choice:

>

> So question for you: If Anet is intentionally reducing our choice because of bad trait introductions, what makes anything about this thread relevant? If the way Anet develops this game is intended, what makes you think that you are going to make a compelling case to change Dread because it's bad? You aren't.

 

Where did I say they meant for it to be bad? What are you going on about man? Are you suggesting that anything bad anet makes is intentionally bad?

 

> 1. You're wrong: Anet intended for this trait to have value to people and you're just ignoring that value to try to convince Anet (and other players) into thinking otherwise

 

I never said they made a bad trait on purpose. You're just putting words in my mouth and saying im wrong. As a player, by default, I already give Anet the benefit of the doubt that anything they make is an attempt to be viable and usable to players. That doesn't mean it will always happen that way. The only way I could think they don't don't is if they outright told the community that hey purposefully make bad content.

 

> I'm betting it's #1 ... because Anet runs GW2 as a business and I find it hard to believe Anet purposefully does work that adds no value to the players of this game. Players want value and Dread has SOME value to it, even if you want to deny it to make a super sensational argument for changing it.

 

You don't need to bet. I never said any of what you're saying I said. It may hold some, but I doubt it will be enough to be considered. I could be wrong.

 

> i'm going to give you the same advice I gave someone else; if you can't accept and have a discussion around the value the trait has (even if you loathe it and think denying it makes a strong case for changing it), then what makes you think Anet is just going to accept what you say, contrary to the work they actually put into the trait to design it and implement it? You're not being realistic when you do this kind of thread.

 

I'm the only one being realistic. What I, personally, as one individual has to say means very little, that's why there are forums. You can post your criticism and see what others also believe. ANET can take that free information and decide from there. I've used and have reviewed the skill as a player. Other are free to do the same and comment about their experience with it here. If you think its fine just because anet made it and its there, that's your thing.

 

You say contrary to the work. If you make something that isn't good, it doesn't matter how much work you put into it. If you worked on electrical wiring in a house and at the end of the day nothing worked.. you don't just say "whelp, he did a lot of work. So I guess this is how its supposed to be". Your logic doesn't make sense to me. At all.

 

The worst thing ANET can do is blindfold themselves, put earplugs on, and sit in a box whilst smelling their own farts all day long. This is why most games try to have as best communication with their players as they can.

 

One great example was when League of Legends decided to remove solo queue. The backlash was tremendous. I, as I've done here, went on their forums and expressed my opinion on what a terrible decision that was. Again, my personal opinion doesn't matter. It matters when there is a majority who share the same opinion. Eventually, even after publically saying it will never return, they re-implemented it. This is because **developers make mistakes**.

 

Sometimes, they don't even know how bad it is until people tell them. This is how many people find out many things that they didn't know. People tell them.

 

[Obtena.7952]

Developers make mistakes ... ah my favourite argument. Yes, Anet doesn't know about their game ... they need players to tell them how bad it is. They just implement random stuff that we can only assume rarely works based on how much people 'assist' them with their in depth insights they post on the forums. Players are more knowledgable about the game concepts and design than the actual people that create those concepts and designs. That's your compelling argument. :astonished:

 

I'm going to stick with what we have seen happen in the game for the last 6 years and how the game works because after all, there is one thing Anet is consistent.

 

Dread has value. Arguing it doesn't is not compelling reason to change it. If you don't like it, you can choose another trait. That's how the game has worked since day 1, it's how it will continue to work until the servers get shut down. You have seem to foregone this obvious process based on some emotional need for Dread to get a buff. That doesn't change these facts. If you argue for change outside the process, it's hard to take you seriously.

 

If you want to make a compelling argument to change Dread, you need to recognize what Dread does and why, not just continually dismiss it as terrible for all game modes.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Developers make mistakes ... ah my favourite argument. Yes, Anet doesn't know about their game ... they need players to tell them how bad it is. They just implement random stuff that we can only assume rarely works based on how much people 'assist' them with their in depth insights they post on the forums. Players are more knowledgable about the game concepts and design than the actual people that create those concepts and designs. That's your compelling argument. :astonished:

>

> I'm going to stick with what we have seen happen in the game for the last 6 years and how the game works because after all, there is one thing Anet is consistent.

>

> Dread has value. Arguing it doesn't is not compelling reason to change it. If you don't like it, you can choose another trait. That's how the game has worked since day 1, it's how it will continue to work until the servers get shut down.

>

> If you want to make a compelling argument to change Dread, you need to recognize what Dread does and why, not just continually dismiss it as terrible for all game modes.

 

Again, putting words in my mouth. I never said it didn't have value. In fact, I specifically said it is more useful as a condition trait. I said that in my original post. How can you just ignore that?

 

And yes, they do make mistakes. If they were as perfect as you say, they'd still have an esport, they'd make way more money than they do now, and it would be played in more countries. Its a perfectly valid argument. And, in my example with League of Legends, devs do respond to player feedback. It is healthy for a game to take into consideration the players. That's why they hire **playtesters**. Thats why many games send out surveys. These are actual things. It is because as a developer, they might not foresee things or may not look at it from a player point of view.

[Obtena.7952]

Let's be clear here. We don't need examples from other games how devs interact with players; we have 6 years of game history HERE. with ANET. Assuming devs are just making mistakes all over the place to justify how correct your ideas are about the game is a non-starter, so back up and rethink. When you do that, check your game environment while you are at it and put some effort into understanding the consequence of how the game is designed.

 

Granted, Dread is new, but it's not all that hard to see how to use it and what it's for. Pretending it's just bad everywhere and in the wrong trait line makes little sense. It's exactly as I said it; For people that know how to take advantage of a burst during fear. It's in a trait line whose theme is related to increased damage. If you can't see how that can be done, it's not the trait that doesn't work, but the player. If you can imagine why it's in that trait line, you aren't listening to people telling you why. If you think it's insufficient in it's effect and has low value to you, you can choose something else and not use it.

 

Somehow these answers are inappropriate to you, even though they are true and pretty standard. I'm not sure what your motivation to hate on dread is to be honest. As I've already said, having choice results in traits being unequal in effect. That's just not a reason to change them. Since you can only pick one trait in that position, I simply can't see the need to address your concerns, valid or not.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Let's be clear here. We don't need examples; we have 6 years of game history here. Assuming devs are just making mistakes all over the place because you don't like a trait is a non-starter, so back up and rethink. when you do that, check your game environment while you are at it and put some effort into understanding the consequence of how the game is designed.

 

"We" don't have to assume. They've made plenty of mistakes. To even suggest otherwise is borderline psychotic. Why do you think they change the game at all? Why did that same trait change four times over these past six years? Originally it was an axe trait that gave bonus to axe damage and cdr. They changed it. Why? Did people ask for it to be changed? I don't even think anyone on forums did. They changed it because they made a mistake. The damage output was too much and even worse on Lich Form.

 

And I get it, the environment is fragile and little changes can be a big deal. That shouldn't prevent change or pursuit of a better game overall.

[Obtena.7952]

Again, the fact we get choice for traits here is a mitigation of this 'mistake'. Like I said (which you decided to dismiss because of illusions :frown: ) the choices we get is a mechanism for Anet to develop the game the way they see fit while giving players the control they desire to no be locked into something they don't like. You're continual insistence this is a 'mistake' that needs to be addressed is ignoring this fundamental fact; we get choice. In fact, we get LOTS of choices, so Anet has set themselves up to be able to make LOTS of mistakes and not have to be too concerned about how it affects how players want to play.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Again, the fact we get choice for traits here is a mitigation of this 'mistake'. Like I said (which you decided to dismiss) the choices we get is a mechanism for Anet to develop the game the way they see fit while giving players the control they desire to no be locked into something they don't like. You're continual insistence this is a 'mistake' that needs to be addressed is ignoring this fundamental fact; we get choice. In fact, we get LOTS of choices, so Anet has set themselves up to be able to make LOTS of mistakes and not have to be too concerned about how it affects how players want to play.

 

I haven't dismissed anything. You dismiss the fact we've already covered this. If one trait clearly outclasses the rest, there is hardly a choice. Its just the illusion of choice. Players do not have "control" if the choices they would like to make are worse than the more popular choices.

 

The devs won't know how good/bad the "choice" is until the players use them (or don't use them).

[Obtena.7952]

Traits being outclassed in their line isn't a reason to buff them, just like I already explained that anything being underperforming isn't a reason to buff either, since there are choices that allow players to decide for themselves what value the traits have for the builds they use.

 

Traits aren't there to give some sense of equivalent performance within their rank; they provide different effects players can take advantage of. Again, you don't see to appreciate the fact that the choice here means traits being outclassed in their rank isn't really relevant. Your understanding of how this game is structured is incorrect. The disturbing part is that with 6 years of history, it should be EASY to see that structure and understand that equivalence for traits in a rank isn't necessarily a target Anet works hard to achieve. The effects are typically too different to objectively measure that. Dread and it's neighbours are no exception there.

 

Besides, if you think that dread is outclassed by the other two traits in that line, why is it a foregone conclusion it gets buffed? Maybe the other two traits need to be nerfed? Furthermore, you are implying Anet doesn't how much players use Dread? That's just a laugh. I think they know better than anyone how much and where Dread gets used ... or is this just another 'mistake' you're helping them with?

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Traits being outclassed in their line isn't a reason to buff them, just like I already explained that anything being underperforming isn't a reason to buff either, since there are choices you can take that allow players to decide for themselves what value the traits have for the builds they use.

 

Only it is the only reason to buff them or nerf others. If (hypothetically speaking) they made warrior vastly superior to necromancers in every way, by your logic, this would be fine since you have a choice to play war or necromancer. They don't need to be equal, one is just a different way to fit a players playstyle.

 

When we're discussing this, you seem to not value the idea that it can be both. You can have equal value or viability and still provide the player a true sense of choice. We can go back to the 5 dollars and 5 thousand dollars. It's not really much of a choice. People are going to choose the better one.

 

> Traits aren't there to give some sense of equivalent performance within their rank; they provide different effects players can take advantage of. Again, you don't see to appreciate the fact that the choice here means traits being outclassed in their rank isn't really relevant. Your understanding of how this game is structured is incorrect.

 

The way the games intended structure and the fundamental idea behind choice and balance are separate. If a game developer intended dread's effect to be "you gain 1 power", that would still go against the fundamental ideas of choice in games. Perhaps you're saying they don't agree with giving players real choice. If a game dev just wanted to make their game bad because they wanted to, that doesn't mean I have to agree with their choices to make it bad just because it was their intention. Of course, this is all riding on _your_ belief that they intended it this way. Unless you are an ANET dev, you are no closer to knowing than anyone else.

 

> Besides, if you think that dread is outclassed by the other two traits in that line, why is it a foregone conclusion it gets buffed? Maybe the other two traits need to be nerfed?

 

Even if that were true, it would still prove my point. Everything is comparative.

[dceptaconroy.7928]

I just wanted to comment and break the chain here. Ps i use dread on a hybrid scourge. Other than that choose 1 of the other 2.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Traits being outclassed in their line isn't a reason to buff them, just like I already explained that anything being underperforming isn't a reason to buff either, since there are choices you can take that allow players to decide for themselves what value the traits have for the builds they use.

>

> Only it is the only reason to buff them or nerf others.

 

NO, that's not true at all. There are lots of things changed in this game that have nothing to do with how they compare in performance to something else. Underperforance is NOT the primary reason Anet changes things in this game ... and that's obvious, otherwise we wouldn't have a large variance in performance between classes, builds, skills, etc... 6 years since it's been released. Again, the history is there and you are ignoring it. You so adamantly believe if you ignore the approach Anet has had for 6 years developing this game, it makes you correct. I guess you can convince yourself whatever you want.

 

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> If (hypothetically speaking) they made warrior vastly superior to necromancers in every way, by your logic, this would be fine since you have a choice to play war or necromancer. They don't need to be equal, one is just a different way to fit a players playstyle.

 

That's exactly how this game has worked since day 1. Classes haven't been equal and people DO make those choices and we don't have Anet intentionally developing things with equivalent performance.

 

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

>If a game dev just wanted to make their game bad because they wanted to, that doesn't mean I have to agree with their choices to make it bad just because it was their intention.

 

Correct, but we are NOT talking about if it's OK to agree or not, this is more about HOW to make good feedback and suggestions. You aren't being realistic within the framework this game is developed if you think that Dread will get a buff or move trait lines because any group of players simply thinks it's not right or isn't strong enough. Those are not compelling reasons in a game where you are given lots of choice and where equivalent performance is not a primary factor for development.

 

I guess I will just keep repeating here: If you want to make a compelling argument about changing Dread, you have to understand what it does and what value it has. Probably helps to not assume that it's just a 'mistake' in the first place as well, considering it's not a stupid enough development to be a mistake in the first place. Frankly, I'm not even sure you identified the problem correctly or provided a solution; it's just a complaint. The only possible thing to discuss here is if your complaint is valid or not.

 

I mean, right of the bat you started slamming Devs for not playing necro because Dread isn't any good for PVP ... how narrowminded are you? What makes you think every trait is supposed to be valuable in every game mode? You can't expect to not be treated like the hostile witness here. You're whole approach to communicating to Anet in this thread has been terrible. I'm going to borrow this statement because it was so well put:

 

**Yeah, I always figure that any description of the world predicate on the idea that a successful group of people are all idiots, completely unable to achieve anything they target, then ... it probably isn't a very sound line of reasoning that supports it.**

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > snip

 

TL;DR You don't think anet tries to balance the game at all. That's all you had to say.

 

If this _is_ their game philosophy, that's a bad one. Since (this is the important part which we've also already covered) you have just as much a clue as to anyone else in terms of what their _actual_ intent is, it's up to the players to interpret what that philosophy is. You just think they mean to suck at balance. I think its actually unintentional and they are not very good at balancing their own game - which btw is quite common for a lot of games. You think that just because it's so blatant, it _has_ to be intentional, yet they've never publically stated (also a very important part) that they **_do not attempt to balance their game_**. They've never said it, they've yet to say it, I also believe they will _never_ publically say they don't try to balance the game. No game developer for a competitive pvp game has ever said it.

 

If people expect balance and the devs have clearly not said that they don't balance the game which means players will default to believing they are, the game just defeats itself. Again, *that* is why they failed as an esport, *that* is why they don't bring it good numbers in other countries besides some parts of eu, and its why people flock to pvp forums verbally demolishing their balance team, spreading the hate to their friends and playing other games. This is called shooting themselves in the foot.

 

Again, I say even though they may or may not intend on making their game suck more, I don't have to agree with it. If they came out and said, "we don't try to balance this game at all" I'd have have much less reason to criticize, yet they haven't. I am then left to assume they are just not very good at balancing the game. Game devs alter their games all the time to rebalance and restructure. They do hotfixes, they remove things they added the previous loadout, they fuck-up all the time. I'm not saying all they do is fuck up but just because you've shown success in a field, doesn't make you infallible. You sound insane saying otherwise and I can't revisit this point any longer.

 

"Yeah, I always figure that any description of the world predicate on the idea that a successful group of people are all idiots, completely unable to achieve anything they target, then ... it probably isn't a very sound line of reasoning that supports it."

 

Again, esports. They failed. Again, popularity in Korea, China, Japan.. failure. Companies fail and go bankrupt. You and your quote doesn't change facts.

 

You say narrowminded, yet I'm the one who pushes for a greater sense of balance, who pushes for a larger spectrum of viable variety in their game. These things they actually *promoted* since before the game was released. These are things players and many devs work to achieve in plenty of games. Perhaps the word you were looking for was "naivety". It's not naive to believe something can be achieved that somebody just can't seem to be able to. Just because ANET can't balance their own game, doesn't mean I have to believe it's intentional, or impossible.

 

Your argument, to me, is the epitome of somebody tripping over themselves and saying "I meant to do that".

 

The fact is, they are _incapable_ of balancing the game. If they were capable, they'd do it. There'd be _*ZERO*_ drawbacks of having a balanced game across traits and professions. It would only make the players happier. So yes, I still believe that, by your own perception of their intent, making the game imbalanced is a bad decision. That doesn't mean it is their intent btw. It means that's what _you_ think their intent is. _I_ think they don't know how to balance a profession they don't play enough.

[Dadnir.5038]

> @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> With Fear being Necro's pseudo-control effect available in all builds, can anyone describe their specific Fear-based builds?

>

> I would expect to see spectral or stab corruption-based builds and a discussion on the trades of extra proc's from Fear of Death, Reaper's Protection, and runes and stab corruptions. There are also many modifiers like Terror, and, of course, Dread.

>

> A Fear-build is not just about bursting. It is also about control; timing interrupts, forcing players to move where you want, that sort of thing.

>

> Again, I wish Reaper's Protection and Fear of Death were combined and access to short Fears be increased using the empty trait slot, if building for control effects, but Dread is a good concept. Maybe if no one uses it, then the balance team will look into why Fear is not so much a thing as it was in the past. Another source of Fear would be welcome.

>

> Maybe Dread foreshadows a new elite in development that will make better use of Fear or serves as a reminder that the developers have not forgotten about our primary pseudo-control effect.

>

 

I think an e-spec focused on fear might be a bit unrealistic since the base fear effect is already quite overbearing in how it work.

 

In my opinion, the most realistic "solution"/way that anet might end up with to make fear build work with power is by introducing new stats sets. Either Power/ferocity/expertise or Power/precision/ferocity/expertise. I believe that such set benefit all professions and would give more "depth" to power builds. That is beside the fact that producing new stat set isn't something that seem really taxing on anet's devs. For all I care they can start to test these set by adding a PvP amulet and then spread it to PvE/WvW. History prove that they can quickly add and remove amulets anyway.

 

Add to that new runesets, similar in concept, introduced in the same way and _dread_ as well as power reaper as a whole may gain some interesting options.

[ZDragon.3046]

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> > With Fear being Necro's pseudo-control effect available in all builds, can anyone describe their specific Fear-based builds?

> >

> > I would expect to see spectral or stab corruption-based builds and a discussion on the trades of extra proc's from Fear of Death, Reaper's Protection, and runes and stab corruptions. There are also many modifiers like Terror, and, of course, Dread.

> >

> > A Fear-build is not just about bursting. It is also about control; timing interrupts, forcing players to move where you want, that sort of thing.

> >

> > Again, I wish Reaper's Protection and Fear of Death were combined and access to short Fears be increased using the empty trait slot, if building for control effects, but Dread is a good concept. Maybe if no one uses it, then the balance team will look into why Fear is not so much a thing as it was in the past. Another source of Fear would be welcome.

> >

> > Maybe Dread foreshadows a new elite in development that will make better use of Fear or serves as a reminder that the developers have not forgotten about our primary pseudo-control effect.

> >

>

> I think an e-spec focused on fear might be a bit unrealistic since the base fear effect is already quite overbearing in how it work.

>

> In my opinion, the most realistic "solution"/way that anet might end up with to make fear build work with power is by introducing new stats sets. Either Power/ferocity/expertise or Power/precision/ferocity/expertise. I believe that such set benefit all professions and would give more "depth" to power builds. That is beside the fact that producing new stat set isn't something that seem really taxing on anet's devs. For all I care they can start to test these set by adding a PvP amulet and then spread it to PvE/WvW. History prove that they can quickly add and remove amulets anyway.

>

> Add to that new runesets, similar in concept, introduced in the same way and _dread_ as well as power reaper as a whole may gain some interesting options.

 

True or make this trait simply do something else that benefits power in some way. I think it would be easier to give the necro a buff like warriors peek performance does for a warrrior (regardless of if you hit the skill or not) you get an effect that increases your power damage by 10% for a few seconds.

 

This would let them skip adding new stat combinations. Builds that could use them would be few in number as alot of non damaging conditions that you would want to extend are not widely available across all professions , slow, taunt, fear, etc.

 

Not to mention this requires more balance across the board which means more time, more money, and more importantly less likely that it is to happen.

 

Side note

People are over looking the fact that this trait gave axe another 10-13% damage buff across all its skills for free.

I personally dont think dread is garbage just like alot of other necro traits its executed and implemented too poorly which makes it too limited.

[DuckDuckBOOM.4097]

> @"Anchoku.8142" said:

> With Fear being Necro's pseudo-control effect available in all builds, can anyone describe their specific Fear-based builds?

>

> I would expect to see spectral or stab corruption-based builds and a discussion on the trades of extra proc's from Fear of Death, Reaper's Protection, and runes and stab corruptions. There are also many modifiers like Terror, and, of course, Dread.

>

To answer your first question: I used to play two variants of corrupt/fear builds. However, both of the reaper builds I used to play were nerfed before Dread became a trait: Signet of Suffering doesn't corrupt anymore and Chill --> Bleed is only 1 stack now. Pulsing stability spam also isn't as common as it used to be when HoT came out. Despite being outdated, I think the builds can still add to the discussion.

http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vRAQNArY2m0ICd2gl3gFcBD6qFAWARbtJwHI+K2FHjA-jpwgABYWGAg9HAA

That was the signet build that could really spam fear because of how common pulsing stability was. Warriors hitting balanced stance or the trait that pulsed stability in F2 berserker mode was a death sentence to the warrior because I could spike corrupts then basically scepter auto attack to repeatedly apply a 1.5 second fear every 3 seconds. Terror, with the 25 might and 25 vuln was 1.7k per tick. If the old SoS still existed, I would swap vuln on chill to spiteful renewal and use Dread with this build for the vuln. *This is of course not using Dread to its fullest potential/doesn't work anymore but I bring it up because Spite has been used for PvP condi builds in the past and this is a decent choice for condi builds going spite.*

 

http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vRAQNArYRnMbCVbilbCubC0bilaBLKE8vKBxbxxYaEqrFAaAA-jVyFQBH4IAIv9Hik6P86EAkgDBAAeAA2RXwCV+FSlgCCYRA-w

The other build I used to run was a celestial/viper hybrid damage WvW reaper. I would use Sc or Axe/Wh+GS for roaming. A/D+Staff for zerging. Rune of the reaper + shouts. Path of corruption instead of terror. Dread would have been awesome with this build.

 

1) F1 is 3-5 corrupts aoe. RS#2 to corrupt stab into fear if the first 3-5 didn't corrupt stab already. Double tap 3 to extend the duration on the target that doesn't have stab anymore. Dreaded RS5 on a low health 25 vuln target --> death. You don't need the 20% bonus damage for that long here.

 

2) Spiteful spirit also does decent damage itself and is *instant cast*. If you managed to corrupt a stab into fear with weapon skills and then instantly hit F1, Dread would be a nice 30% bonus damage to SS. Suffer and you are all weaklings are also instant cast that do some power damage on top of the reaper rune procs. Sigil of hydro and geo also *instant cast* that do some power damage and can trigger with SS on F1. While these might not seem like that much individually, a bunch of instant cast pockets of damage when your enemies are feared makes great use of Dread. Of course, spinal shiver proc is great for spiking 1 person but Dread doesn't have an ICD. The instant cast SS/Sigil/Shout combo is all aoe. If I'm solo roaming around on my reaper and instagibbing newbs that try to outnumber me, Dread would be my preferred choice.

 

TLDR: While neither of my builds are that strong now... well reaper isn't that strong in general compared to scourge, that doesn't mean that Dread is inherently terrible and irredeemable. If anything, I think scourge is too OP compared to base necro/reaper. Spite can be used for hybrid/condi builds and dread has a place in those builds. You can make fear happen if you properly time corrupts. Chaining those corrupts + fear applying skills in hybrid builds with condi duration would actually give decent fear up time on a Dread burst. You also don't need that long of a fear duration if your build has enough instant cast procs that can be spiked when the enemy is feared.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > snip

>

> TL;DR You don't think anet tries to balance the game at all. That's all you had to say.

 

Um, no, but thank's for coming out. I said Anet has an atypical approach to balancing. Meaning, they don't balance primarily by performance. If you can't even bring yourself to see that, you're just being difficult on purpose.

 

> @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> The fact is, they are _incapable_ of balancing the game.

 

yet here you are ... demanding that they specifically balance the littlest elements of the game against each other, to satisfy the most insignificant kinds of issues that are already solved by exercising choice.

[TheDevice.2751]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Um, no, but thank's for coming out. I said Anet has an atypical approach to balancing. Meaning, they don't balance primarily by performance. If you can't even bring yourself to see that, you're just being difficult on purpose.

 

That's not called balance then. Call it something else.

 

> > @"TheDevice.2751" said:

> > The fact is, they are _incapable_ of balancing the game.

>

> yet here you are ... demanding that they specifically balance the littlest elements of the game against each other, to satisfy the most insignificant kinds of issues that are already solved by exercising choice.

 

Thats not balance. Balance is balance. Why don't you understand the difference between balance and choice? You are replacing balance with choice. They are not the same. And if one thing is better than the other, there isn't much choice. It is an illusion of choice. 5 dollars versus 5 thousand dollars. Again, you keep going in circles when I've already addressed all of this.

 

Answer this: Why do they alter their game at all? Why are there patches that change numbers around in each profession? Why do they try to "FIX" the game? If none of it matters, why are they doing it at all?