[PvE] Quickbrand

[Tormod.5018]

Yes, I am watching the video. First minute in; he is using Viper's... You do realize vipers has condi right?

[Tormod.5018]

6.5 minutes in. He says, this build is mostly condi. Seems like you are proving me right and yourself wrong.

[Tormod.5018]

The build actually is not support. It's damage in the form of support elements. It is the opposite of what we would call 'personal dps' or selfish dps like that of reaper necro which gives no buffs to party. The damage is coming from him and being transmitted through party...

[Obtena.7952]

Fun facts: You opened the garden path to argue that FB condi Axe support build isn't viable .... and it's meta. It's cute you are going to argue that's not a support build now ... if team-wide perma Fury and quickness doesn't count as support, I don't know what does. It's not like that build lost access to F2 or F3 either ....

 

[Tormod.5018]

Watched the full video now, and I did not hear him touch F2 or 3 which probably means he does not use them at all... seems like you gave me proof for all of my points. Hey, thanks for that.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> Watched the full video now, and I did not hear him touch F2 or 3 which probably means he does not use them at all... seems like you gave me proof for all of my points. Hey, thanks for that.

 

So now we established you are just speculating he wouldn't use his F2/F3 skills if he needed them, I guess I will say ...

 

No problem ... Him not talking about F2 or F3 doesn't mean that build isn't an Axe support build. Ah those meta people ... they are so clever. All about context and intent. You still don't get it.

[Tormod.5018]

So keeping quickness on others while doing dps makes him support? I like how you proved my point, and you are still willing to believe in a fallacy. It's quite funny actually.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> So keeping quickness on others while doing dps makes him support?

 

Among other things the build can do that you want to ignore ...

 

I guess you don't think it's support, sort of like how you don't think meta builds are viable.

[Tormod.5018]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> 6.5 minutes in. He says, this build is mostly condi. Seems like you are proving me right and yourself wrong.

 

"This is mostly a condi build". Look the guy said it. You can do what you want with that info... You proved me right, and you are still trying to argue. That is even more sad than a knave 6+ year old vet which you tried to accuse me of being. You're now trying to blame me for things that I have never said like, "how you don't think meta builds are viable."

 

 

 

[Tormod.5018]

You have shown me how these forums are just as bad as Reddit. Thank you. Oh and you can keep editting your old messages. It does not look cute.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > 6.5 minutes in. He says, this build is mostly condi. Seems like you are proving me right and yourself wrong.

>

> "This is mostly a condi build". Look the guy said it. You can do what you want with that info... You proved me right, and you are still trying to argue. That is even more sad than a knave 6+ year old vet which you tried to accuse me of being. You're now trying to blame me for things that I have never said like, "how you don't think meta builds are viable."

>

>

I don't understand your confusion; you want to argue semantics now. The fact is that the I'm showing you a build that uses Axe, buffs condition and direct damage and supports the team with highly desirable offensive buffs, in addition to the regular access it has to F2/F3. That's not only a viable build ... it's meta in raids and it's one of the best builds you can use in OW. How does that NOT meet the requirements for at a minimum, an effective/viable, hybrid Axe support build? You have a hang up over the term hybrid? No problem. Call it whatever you want then. It's still the same build we are talking about, no matter what you want to call it.

 

The fact is that whatever argument that you are trying to make about the effectiveness of some build or skills on FB by establishing the separation between 'condi axe' and 'support' isn't supported by what can be done in the game. Your original claim you couldn't take Axe as a viable support build was wrong, and that video not only shows it, it demonstrates just how exceptionally GOOD an Axe support build is.

 

 

[Tormod.5018]

Keep editing those forum posts. It makes you look right and smart.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> Keep editing those forum posts. It makes you look right and smart.

 

The video shows that Axe Support builds are more than viable, they are meta ... contrary to your claim they weren't. I'm glad you watched it and learned something. Even at 6+ years, we don't all know everything about the game.

[Tormod.5018]

I like how you said Axe can be support. His support _elements_ are coming from runes, two traits, one utility, and an elite. Nothing from his axe is support. You are putting a lot of effort into a lost argument. How odd.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> I like how you said Axe can be support. His support _elements_ are coming from runes, two traits, one utility, and an elite. Nothing from his axe is support. You are putting a lot of effort into a lost argument. How odd.

 

I didn't say axe was a support weapon once. I said it can be used it in a support build, which is exactly what his video demonstrates. Nothing odd about the obvious. The argument was lost by you when you claimed an Axe Support build wasn't viable because I knew going into this it was meta.

[otto.5684]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > Furthermore everyone keeps changing the subject

> > No, that's really all you.

> >

> > Please, go ahead and create a thread about clunky tomes on burn FB.

>

> This thread was about pwr-quick brand. Everyone and their mother agrees this is pretty bad build choice. The conversation went towards burn FB because power is useless. I am not off topic.

>

 

There is no question the power FB is weak, but condi FB is strong in PvE. The issues with condi FB are from PvP presepctive.

 

While this thread is surely off topic, Tomes have issues. Major issues stemming from design and resulting in major gameplay limitations. Yet all Anet seems to be focused on is support effectiveness in PvP.

[Tormod.5018]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > I like how you said Axe can be support. His support _elements_ are coming from runes, two traits, one utility, and an elite. Nothing from his axe is support. You are putting a lot of effort into a lost argument. How odd.

>

> I didn't say axe was a support weapon once. I said it can be used it in a support build, which is exactly what his video demonstrates. Nothing odd about the obvious. The argument was lost by you when you claimed an Axe Support build wasn't viable because I knew going into this it was meta.

 

You keep a lost argument running. I do not know why. No one knows why. I never said 'build' we were talking purely about axe at the time. The axe in that build is used for damage not support. Stop calling it a support build. It is a dps build. It is quite obvious.

[Tormod.5018]

> @"otto.5684" said:

> > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > > Furthermore everyone keeps changing the subject

> > > No, that's really all you.

> > >

> > > Please, go ahead and create a thread about clunky tomes on burn FB.

> >

> > This thread was about pwr-quick brand. Everyone and their mother agrees this is pretty bad build choice. The conversation went towards burn FB because power is useless. I am not off topic.

> >

>

> There is no question the power FB is weak, but condi FB is strong in PvE. The issues with condi FB are from PvP presepctive.

>

> While this thread is surely off topic, Tomes have issues. Major issues stemming from design and resulting in major gameplay limitations. Yet all Anet seems to be focused on is support effectiveness in PvP.

 

I agree, but I believe the same reason burning guard has issues in pvp is the same logic that I was trying to show. The cast time and CD time is just too much to be useful or effective. Sure, I wish Anet would give me a grandmaster trait to let me have just ToJ instead of all three tomes. I have already explained why I do not want all 3 tomes. It is clunky design. I do not think that they will take suggestions seriously though. Just my thoughts as a veteran.

[otto.5684]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > @"otto.5684" said:

> > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > > > Furthermore everyone keeps changing the subject

> > > > No, that's really all you.

> > > >

> > > > Please, go ahead and create a thread about clunky tomes on burn FB.

> > >

> > > This thread was about pwr-quick brand. Everyone and their mother agrees this is pretty bad build choice. The conversation went towards burn FB because power is useless. I am not off topic.

> > >

> >

> > There is no question the power FB is weak, but condi FB is strong in PvE. The issues with condi FB are from PvP presepctive.

> >

> > While this thread is surely off topic, Tomes have issues. Major issues stemming from design and resulting in major gameplay limitations. Yet all Anet seems to be focused on is support effectiveness in PvP.

>

> I agree, but I believe the same reason burning guard has issues in pvp is the same logic that I was trying to show. The cast time and CD time is just too much to be useful or effective. Sure, I wish Anet would give me a grandmaster trait to let me have just ToJ instead of all three tomes. I have already explained why I do not want all 3 tomes. It is clunky design. I do not think that they will take suggestions seriously though. Just my thoughts as a veteran.

 

My experience is sustainability is an issue for condi FB. You do need the other two tomes for sustain, but ToR tend to border on disadvantageous. And Anet continuously nerfs FB heal skills effectiveness instead of their heal scaling, which hit dps builds (already weak) the hardest. On top of this, condi damage as a whole has major issues that prevent it from being viable.

 

I gave up on condi FB being effective in sPvP. At least I would like to see alternatives that FB can provide beside condi damage in PvE.

[Tormod.5018]

> @"otto.5684" said:

> > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > @"otto.5684" said:

> > > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > > > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > > > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > > > > Furthermore everyone keeps changing the subject

> > > > > No, that's really all you.

> > > > >

> > > > > Please, go ahead and create a thread about clunky tomes on burn FB.

> > > >

> > > > This thread was about pwr-quick brand. Everyone and their mother agrees this is pretty bad build choice. The conversation went towards burn FB because power is useless. I am not off topic.

> > > >

> > >

> > > There is no question the power FB is weak, but condi FB is strong in PvE. The issues with condi FB are from PvP presepctive.

> > >

> > > While this thread is surely off topic, Tomes have issues. Major issues stemming from design and resulting in major gameplay limitations. Yet all Anet seems to be focused on is support effectiveness in PvP.

> >

> > I agree, but I believe the same reason burning guard has issues in pvp is the same logic that I was trying to show. The cast time and CD time is just too much to be useful or effective. Sure, I wish Anet would give me a grandmaster trait to let me have just ToJ instead of all three tomes. I have already explained why I do not want all 3 tomes. It is clunky design. I do not think that they will take suggestions seriously though. Just my thoughts as a veteran.

>

> My experience is sustainability is an issue for condi FB. You do need the other two tomes for sustain, but ToR tend to border on disadvantageous. And Anet continuously nerfs FB heal skills effectiveness instead of their heal scaling, which hit dps builds (already weak) the hardest. On top of this, condi damage as a whole has major issues that prevent it from being viable.

>

> I gave up on condi FB being effective in sPvP. At least I would like to see alternatives that FB can provide beside condi damage in PvE.

Yet, in pvp, base Guard burning builds are still strong. So you see, when I compared all of the Resolve skills, **it shows** how Vanilla-Guard is strong versus burning FB. Thank you for being honest Otto. I do believe you are correct.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> If you think a 6+year veteran does not know what he is talking about, then you must have had poor experiences with others. I know I have, and it's pretty sad about the game and it's community.

>

> You can play Berserker mesmer with scepter. It doesn't mean it's effective.

 

Considering you don't seem to care about other people's veteran status, why should we care about yours?

 

Pre launch, 3 beta weekend, close to 1k hours on guardian, 1k+ LI, 1/3rd to Fractal God player here.

 

Does this veteran status make my opinion in any way more or less valid than yours?

 

People are disagreeing with you on the basis of what you write, which is both heavily pvp biased and often factually incorrect (see your poor first page comparison).

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Tormod.5018" said:

> > > I like how you said Axe can be support. His support _elements_ are coming from runes, two traits, one utility, and an elite. Nothing from his axe is support. You are putting a lot of effort into a lost argument. How odd.

> >

> > I didn't say axe was a support weapon once. I said it can be used it in a support build, which is exactly what his video demonstrates. Nothing odd about the obvious. The argument was lost by you when you claimed an Axe Support build wasn't viable because I knew going into this it was meta.

>

> You keep a lost argument running. I do not know why. No one knows why. I never said 'build' we were talking purely about axe at the time. The axe in that build is used for damage not support. Stop calling it a support build. It is a dps build. It is quite obvious.

 

Let's be clear here ... YOU opened this line of discussion about the relationship between axe and support builds ... and have yet to provide any compelling evidence that shows your claim that you can't have an effective axe support build is true.

 

I'm not discussing the aceademic correctness of applying labels here. What I know is that there are highly effective support builds using an axe with significant impact to performance and success, in both Raids and OW for the whole team; the video I posted shows that to be accurate.

 

I also know that having lots of DPS doesn't EXCLUDE any build from providing significant levels of support and being known as such. You can call that build BOTH DPS and SUPPORT; those things are not exclusive. It's a matter of how a person plays it. Again, things here are not so black and white as you wish to portray them. Hey, you show a significant ability to simply make up whatever terms you want ... I suggest you expand vocabulary to to capture this idea of a DPS support build with whatever word you're comfortable with ... because they exist and aren't exceptional cases.

 

There is no question as to why it's worth the effort to ensure the discussion makes clear what people are meaning and why they do so. If you don't find value in it, then it's strange you don't ask yourself why you participate in it.