Discipline (more specifically, "Fast Hands")

[Obtena.7952]

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

> **For discussing why this change should/shouldn't be implemented, check the other thread.**

> I expected more replies as people claimed that FH baseline would increase powercreep to the sky.

 

I'm not sure what would lead you think you would get more replies ... you think people want to argue their points with you all over again in a different thread? How much power is creeped is not really relevant and it can't be measured anyways, so it's just a subjective assessment that has already been covered in the other thread.

 

I think we all get the idea you have here; if people can't prove FH baseline would be 'massive' powercreep, then your argument is that it should be implemented. That's not the main problem with the idea; there lots that bring this idea into question, not even related to balance or power because frankly, the power creep issue is the easiest one to dismiss because it's so subjective and undefined.

 

The biggest problem with this idea is that it's a change looking for a problem to fix, because so far the issues that people claim it would address don't make much sense.

[Dadnir.5038]

So:

- Any build with discipline become automatically stronger even if the trait that replace _Fast hand_ is "insignificant".

- Any CC heavy build that didn't previously use discipline become automatically stronger and players hate facing CC heavy builds (def/stren/SB for example see it's ability to CC shot throught the roof and this mean it also see it's ability to "break" boon increase as much)

- Any build that capitalize heavily on "on burst" effects can potentially run out of balance due to Fast hand becoming baseline.

 

NB.: The simple fact that you feel that it would be better if it was baseline mean that it will "increase powercreep to the sky". "Powercreep" doesn't necessarily mean that it does deal higher damage. Powercreep mean that the profession enjoy a "free" increase on various good (included: utility, CC, sustain or damage). Fast hand being baseline automatically make weapon CC and utility skills more accessible which result in this powercreep that you enjoy to deny with all your might. The point is that FH baseline result in a global overhaul of the core warrior's access to it's weapon skills which in itself is a case of powercreep.

[melandru.3876]

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

> **For discussing why this change should/shouldn't be implemented, check the other thread.**

> I expected more replies as people claimed that FH baseline would increase powercreep to the sky.

 

you mean the other thread that got removed allready?

[cryorion.9532]

Great... I hoped to have some proper discussion with people that actually know warrior class,

without arguing with ignorant people.

It seems that official forums is just bad for such conversation.

People claim that FH would cause powercreep, but suddenly they don't mention exact examples, which exact thing would be too strong, etc.

If there will be new competetive builds, that is good, that is what we want by making FH baseline. Build variety.

 

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> So:

> - Any build with discipline become automatically stronger even if the trait that replace _Fast hand_ is "insignificant".

> - Any CC heavy build that didn't previously use discipline become automatically stronger and players hate facing CC heavy builds (def/stren/SB for example see it's ability to CC shot throught the roof and this mean it also see it's ability to "break" boon increase as much)

> - Any build that capitalize heavily on "on burst" effects can potentially run out of balance due to Fast hand becoming baseline.

>

> NB.: The simple fact that you feel that it would be better if it was baseline mean that it will "increase powercreep to the sky". "Powercreep" doesn't necessarily mean that it does deal higher damage. Powercreep mean that the profession enjoy a "free" increase on various good (included: utility, CC, sustain or damage). Fast hand being baseline automatically make weapon CC and utility skills more accessible which result in this powercreep that you enjoy to deny with all your might. The point is that FH baseline result in a global overhaul of the core warrior's access to it's weapon skills which in itself is a case of powercreep.

 

Another ignorant player that doesn't realize that heavy cc builds that warrior has are countered heavily by high stability uptime, low cooldown stunbreaks and even passive stunbreaks from traits nowadays in game. Try your amazing heavy cc build against competent players/zerg with 35908353 firebrands, etc.

This is exactly the outcome, how all non-Discipline builds would be improved. Because warrior would be able to utilitze weapons much better, instead of direct traitline buffs. This is an alternative. What do you think, how else is going FH baseline improve all non-Discipline builds? That traits in other traitlines are suddenly not going to suck without even touching them?

If there will be new competetive builds, that is good, that is what we want by making FH baseline. Build variety. If this is powercreep to you, then literally everything buffed from now on (and that has ever been buffed) was powercreep, thus nothing should be buffed from now on.

Try to also read between the lines a bit.

 

@"Obtena.7952"

"FH is super strong but also insignificant is just dishonest claim", if you put everything out of context, then of course it is convenient to use as an argument. I backed it up with detailed explanations unlike you.

You don't understand the impact and outcome of FH baseline on warrior class. You only discuss why it shoudn't be like that (without even looking properly at it from warrior point of view). We already told you XYZ times that it is an alternative to improve non-Discipline builds, but no matter what anyone says, it will not be enough just because you don't want to lose an argument. You already lost it with your ignorant statements and also for being hyprocrate. You shouldn't discuss on this issue because you are unable to provide specific examples when asked even though you said it youself that the change would cause powercreep. Same for few other people in this thread.

 

That was the reason I made the other thread. You even came there and commented there with off-topic posts, I bet you didn't even read it fully. I stated there that the thread was not to discuss why it should/shouldn't be implemented (and redirected to this thread).

Calling others being dishonest while being dishonest.

 

Here I am again, typing walls of texts, which will most likely not be fully read by recipient at all.

 

But so be it. If I cannot have thread where proper dicussion can be made, knowledgeable people discussing the real outcome of FH baseline, backed up by examples, etc, then I will just repeat everything here and again and again.

 

Funny, how you still avoid discussing detailed outcomes. You just conviniently call it "speculation". It is speculation TO YOU because you are lacking knowledge about the exact issue and are unable to think about it precisely.

 

"the power creep issue is the easiest one to dismiss because it's so subjective and undefined"

If it is easiest to dismiss, then feel free to provide detailed examples :) Not generalized, exaggerated, speculation based statements. If you can so easily dismiss this, then it should not be an issue for you at all. Can you?

"subjective and undefined" - you cannot buff anything without causing any powercreep, by this mentality, Anet should never buff anything, NEVER, because even slightest buff is powercreep and why not use it to scare people why something shouldn't be done, right?

 

Your argumenting is not backed up by anything specific, detailed. Only on "because I said so" and "because I don't want this change".

We told you many times why FH should be baseline, so again: It is an alternative way to improve non-Discipline builds without breaking what is already very strong, competetive, thus not increasing powercreep.

Sometimes you say that FH baseline would cause powercreep, in other replies you said that it wouldn't change that much anyway. But then you call me dishonest because you put out of context what I say (FH is significant enough to improve non-Discipline builds and potentially even make some of them competetive, but not that singificant to make them too strong/overpowered against competetive builds of other classes/builds).

Then you even start to use nonsensical arguments that FH baseline would make people use Discipline builds even more...

 

I can't wait for reply based on not reading this all, picking things out of context so it suits your flawed arguments :) as usual.

 

If there cannot be proper thread as I created to discuss things in detail, then so be it. Walls of text from now on again.

 

@"Dadnir.5038" @"melandru.3876" @"Sobx.1758" Have fun reading :)

 

I even tried to consolidate the thread to simplify it before, but it didn't work.

People don't want that it seems. They avoid it because it could prove their arguments are flawed.

If I would ask everyone in this thread to state as simple as possible why FH should be baseline and why it shouldn't, people would avoid it (and said something like "I don't want to, I already said it and I am not going to make it easier so everyone understands" just like Obtena did :) ).

[Obtena.7952]

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

> Great... I hoped to have some proper discussion with people that actually know warrior class,

> without arguing with ignorant people.

 

You can write all the text walls you like and I'm not going to pick apart anything you wrote. The reasons against the FH baseline idea haven't changed with anything you wrote and you continually fail to address them while having some idea that focusing on mind games with build comparisons is the answer. (NOTE: I'm just repeating them again, I've already stated them multiple times)

 

1. No one has a non-trivial, sensible reason make FH baseline. The burden to show FH baseline is a needed change is on the people proposing the idea. Calling people that disagree with you ignorant, scared or whatever does not help your cause ... or keep those people from continually pointing out what is flawed with the ideas being presented for baseline FH.

2. You yourself have created a paradox where you indicate FH baseline is not strong enough to break non-Discipline builds but is good enough to fix them all. That of course make no sense whatsoever.

3. Handing out FH as baseline for the trivial or nonsensical reasons that have been presented are a slight to the concept of the trait system.

 

Basically, you're searching for any reason to make FH baseline and instead of pointing out a (real) problem it (actually) solves, trying to show it should be implemented because it doesn't create one (at least in your opinion).

 

Anyone want to add to that?

[Sobx.1758]

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

>@"Sobx.1758" Have fun reading :)

 

 

I'll read when you actually start responding to what I write. :)

You responded with a wall of text to other users and then '@' me for... what reason exactly? And you dare to complain about "people avoiding giving answers"? Not to mention that last time I've used your quotes in this thread you just bailed to **make a new thread.** And that's not even the only time when you completely avoided answering to half **or even whole** posts directed at you.

Great joke, but slightly worn out already. :sleeping:

[melandru.3876]

i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

 

why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

do you want to change the meta? nerf the fock out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

 

do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

no, because it gets boring fast

does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

no, still trash in pve

no, still trash in pvp

no, still trash in wvw

 

the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

profit

[Zexanima.7851]

> @"melandru.3876" said:

> i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

>

> why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

> is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

> the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

> do you want to change the meta? nerf the kitten out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

> which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

>

> do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

> no, because it gets boring fast

> does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

> no, still trash in pve

> no, still trash in pvp

> no, still trash in wvw

>

> the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

> newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

> profit

 

Yeah, but what if we made fast hands baseline.

[melandru.3876]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

> >

> > why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

> > is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

> > the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

> > do you want to change the meta? nerf the kitten out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

> > which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

> >

> > do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

> > no, because it gets boring fast

> > does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

> > no, still trash in pve

> > no, still trash in pvp

> > no, still trash in wvw

> >

> > the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

> > newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

> > profit

>

> Yeah, but what if we made fast hands baseline.

 

then you will have to read my post again

discipline will still be meta so you get fast hands (which you would get anyway) + 1 free trait

a.k.a powercreep

[melandru.3876]

let's make a new meme.

 

"warrior needs 3 dodge rolls like daredevil because warrior has alot of endurance-focuses traits/skills"

 

strenght traitline.

1) might on heal skill = endurance from might makes right

2) landing burst skill = +15 endurance

3) forceful greatword= crits is more might is more endurance

4) dodging does unblockable damage (counter argument was block spam right??), more might for more endurance

5) signet of stamina= more endurance

 

and i could go on and on

 

this is my proof that warrior is what daredevil is, and we need 3 dodge rolls

all your arguments are allready declared garbage and invalid and there is absolsulty zero way that you can change my mind

 

 

 

i have stated the above, and it should be seen as the only truth, any other thoughts will be considered irrelevant

[Zexanima.7851]

> @"melandru.3876" said:

> > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

> > >

> > > why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

> > > is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

> > > the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

> > > do you want to change the meta? nerf the kitten out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

> > > which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

> > >

> > > do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

> > > no, because it gets boring fast

> > > does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

> > > no, still trash in pve

> > > no, still trash in pvp

> > > no, still trash in wvw

> > >

> > > the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

> > > newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

> > > profit

> >

> > Yeah, but what if we made fast hands baseline.

>

> then you will have to read my post again

> discipline will still be meta so you get fast hands (which you would get anyway) + 1 free trait

> a.k.a powercreep

 

Reading all the posts in this thread is bad for my health, too much salt.

 

How I would have liked this thread to go:

 

Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

Person 2: "I disagree, because of reason B. How about we do suggestion B instead?"

Person 1: "Ah, that's a good point. Maybe if you modify suggestion B to C?"

Person 2: "That's some good input!"

 

Instead we got:

Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

Person 2: "No you stupid dink, why would you think that?"

Person 1: "Because reason A...."

Person 2: "LOLOLOL Thats not a reason! Git gud, learn the game. You're 'suggestion' isn't valid"

Person 1: "What about some alternatives then? Why isn't A good?"

Person 2: "Git rid of A completely, cause your idea is bad"

 

I was totally open to suggestions to alternatives until people started to get rude and belligerent almost immediately with this "I'm better than you" attitude.

[melandru.3876]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > > i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

> > > >

> > > > why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

> > > > is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

> > > > the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

> > > > do you want to change the meta? nerf the kitten out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

> > > > which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

> > > >

> > > > do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

> > > > no, because it gets boring fast

> > > > does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

> > > > no, still trash in pve

> > > > no, still trash in pvp

> > > > no, still trash in wvw

> > > >

> > > > the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

> > > > newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

> > > > profit

> > >

> > > Yeah, but what if we made fast hands baseline.

> >

> > then you will have to read my post again

> > discipline will still be meta so you get fast hands (which you would get anyway) + 1 free trait

> > a.k.a powercreep

>

> Reading all the posts in this thread is bad for my health, too much salt.

>

> How I would have liked this thread to go:

>

> Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> Person 2: "I disagree, because of reason B. How about we do suggestion B instead?"

> Person 1: "Ah, that's a good point. Maybe if you modify suggestion B to C?"

> Person 2: "That's some good input!"

>

> Instead we got:

> Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> Person 2: "No you stupid dink, why would you think that?"

> Person 1: "Because reason A...."

> Person 2: "LOLOLOL Thats not a reason! Git gud, learn the game. You're 'suggestion' isn't valid"

> Person 1: "What about some alternatives then? Why isn't A good?"

> Person 2: "Git rid of A completely, cause your idea is bad"

>

> I was totally open to suggestions to alternatives until people started to get rude and belligerent almost immediately with this "I'm better than you" attitude.

 

your last line was the best line

now do take th time to re-read the thread and you will see those that are pro-baseline regard everyone else opinion as "garbage" (in that exact word)

so either agree with me, or i won't agree with you

 

ironic, right? because you just accused the contra-baseline of doing that

[melandru.3876]

> @"melandru.3876" said:

> > @"cryorion.9532" said:

> > > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > imo fast hands baseline or not won't change much. discipline on it's whole is just to good not to take

> >

> > It would change things. That is why we want it. It wouldn't cause huge balance outbreak as some people think (because as you posted, non-Discipline builds will still miss all other Discipline traits). It is just that one of the biggest reasons why non-Discipline builds are not very used/prefered/enjoyed (overall in all game modes) is because warrior just functions much better with 5 sec instead of 10 sec weapon CD.

> > Arguments that some weapon skills have longer cooldown than 10 seconds are flawed because you don't spam all skills off cooldown. At least not as competent warrior (or in some PvE builds).

>

> ok, say fast hands got baseline and you are now free to take another traitline.

>

> 1) will you run defense instead of discipline in raids/fracs now? offcourse you won't

> 2) will you run arms now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? offcourse you won't

> 3) will you run berserker now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? offcourse you won't

>

> 4) will you run spellbreaker now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? ONLY in no pain no gain intsbas. as is allready the case.

>

> this is purely from a pve point of view, and i doubt it's any different from pvp.

>

> -arms? still kitten for pvp

> -berserker? still kitten for pvp

> -tactics? still kitten for pvp

>

> only valid build that i would see myself using is strenght-defense-spellbreaker which is probably the build you play hence you want fast hands so bad.

>

> is a nerf to something that becomes baseline (nothing comes for free) worth it, to improve YOUR one build, without discipline?

 

quoting myself; because i got bored of the "you give no counter aguments/examples of why this or that"

 

^ i clearly did

[cryorion.9532]

@"Obtena.7952"

"Basically, you're searching for any reason to make FH baseline and instead of pointing out a (real) problem it (actually) solves, trying to show it should be implemented because it doesn't create one (at least in your opinion)."

 

So, what real problem it actually solves?

What is so hard to understand about "alternative way to improve non-Discipline builds"? Is this not enough reason for you? Or you just don't want build variety?

If you want it, then why is FH not a good way to improve non-Discipline builds? Why do you think it doesn't solve this issue? Or is it just that "I don't think it would solve anything at all"?

Or is it powercreep? :)

 

Please don't ignore this part:

"the power creep issue is the easiest one to dismiss because it's so subjective and undefined"

If it is easiest to dismiss, then feel free to provide detailed examples :) Not generalized, exaggerated, speculation based statements. If you can so easily dismiss this, then it should not be an issue for you at all. Can you?

It is not irrelevant as you stated before.

 

Another thing:

"you continually fail to address them while having some idea that focusing on mind games with build comparisons is the answer"

Those "mind games" are meant to show and provide answer to what many people here use as generaly accepted truth based on pure ignorance :) And that includes you.

 

You say that I argue that FH baseline is ok to implement because it wouldn't break anything. That is only partially true (and pulled out of context again).

The argument also contains reason why to make FH baseline = to improve non-Discipline builds by giving warrior better control over weapon skills (smoother, more fluid and more flexible rotations, similar to Discipline builds). Discipline traitline would enhance this weapon swapping even more, but that doesn't mean people will prefer Discipline builds even more... as you stated. That just contradicts to what this change is supposed to achieve. "Let's buff something else, but people will play non-buffed thing even more because I think so".

Discipline traitline would still remain as useful as it is now. People who want to play Discipline builds are free to do so. The incentive to use non-discipline builds would increase because of better weapon skill usage flexibility. If you are unable to imagine how exactly FH baseline would be beneficial to non-Discipline builds (and even claim that FH baseline would promote Discipline builds even more) then you shouldn't discuss on this issue.

 

Another thing:

"You yourself have created a paradox where you indicate FH baseline is not strong enough to break non-Discipline builds but is good enough to fix them all. That of course make no sense whatsoever."

It is not paradox, you just made it to sound like one just to support your flawed arguments :)

I will try to explain to you one more time as I care about this issue: "Fast Hands minor trait is strong enough to improve non-Discipline builds to the point of possibly creating competetive builds (build variety = which we want), but it is not strong enough to make them broken, overpowered, overperforming for nowadays standards."

If you think this is not true, feel free to give examples in detail as I asked you since page 1. **That was main point of the different thread**, but some people use it against me now, without realizing that the thread was meant for people who know about the class well enough to discuss in detail :) You are not one of them. Nor @"Sobx.1758" or @"melandru.3876" and few others. **I made that thread specificaly in hope to avoid you and others as you don't contribue with anything specific, precise (and to make things more clear/compact).** Funny how Melandru immediately commented on that ("you mean the other thread that got removed allready?") with highly satirical tone. And it was not removal, but merge @"melandru.3876" ;) At this point I think you are just trolling.

 

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> I'll read when you actually start responding to what I write. :)

> You responded with a wall of text to other users and then '@' me for... what reason exactly? And you dare to complain about "people avoiding giving answers"? Not to mention that last time I've used your quotes in this thread you just bailed to **make a new thread.** And that's not even the only time when you completely avoided answering to half **or even whole** posts directed at you.

> Great joke, but slightly worn out already. :sleeping:

 

OK, note to myself not to take someone who doesn't care sersiously, and ignore them. This is what happens, when people who barely (if at all) touch the class and know nothing/very little about it come here and argue about the future of the profession :) The reason I say this because if you could answer many of those things, you already would. But you avoid it the same way as Obtena and then call it "irrelevant", when knowledge of warrior class is crucial to advance this discussion.

The other thread supposed to serve different purpose which you don't understand. That thread was exactly what you, Obtena and few others cannot do, EVEN IF I ASKED YOU/THEM SINCE PAGE 1. I cannot answer to everyone, that was one of the reasons why I didn't want to engage in this thread anymore, it was just overwhelming. But since you/others ignored what I asked since page 1, I will ignore whatever I want now. At least when it comes to people who I asked multiple times and they avoided answering every time. Simple as that :)

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

 

Still waiting for this first step to be honest because reasons **build diversity** and **fluidity** don't make much sense.

 

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

> So, what real problem it actually solves?

> What is so hard to understand about "alternative way to improve non-Discipline builds"?

 

Why is that problem? Why are non-Discpline builds need improvement? The burden of proof to show FH baselines is the way to do this AND that it needs to be done is on you. It's not a universal truth that non-Discipline builds are in need of improvement and that THE way to do that is with baseline FH.

 

Again, if Discpline is such a good go-to traitline that all good builds use it ... should not lead you to conclude that the answer is to buff all the non-Discpline traitlines with flavours from Discipline. The way you present this, it could EASILY justify a nerf in Discipline.

[Zexanima.7851]

> @"melandru.3876" said:

> > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > > > @"melandru.3876" said:

> > > > > i don't even bother to read it all, because i know what's been said by now

> > > > >

> > > > > why is baseline fast hands bad? because it pushes the builds, without fast hands (discipine) towards discipline to make full use of the new improved weapon swapping.

> > > > > is is human nature to settle for the best, and only the best.

> > > > > the best is discipline. the meta will still be discipline

> > > > > do you want to change the meta? nerf the kitten out of discipline, or buff all other traitlines

> > > > > which scenario is most likely to happen you think?

> > > > >

> > > > > do i want to sacrifice, a legit build for a gunflame-meme build that is fun to play in wvw once in three weeks when you are as drunk as possible?

> > > > > no, because it gets boring fast

> > > > > does that gunflame meme build have a place in any serious gaming mode?

> > > > > no, still trash in pve

> > > > > no, still trash in pvp

> > > > > no, still trash in wvw

> > > > >

> > > > > the counter-argument that they keep pushing down (y) our throat is "fake-out potential"

> > > > > newsflash: stow weapon key is exactly what you are looking for, now enjoy. your "burst" skill that you faked out is now on a 3 sec cd instead of 5 seconds

> > > > > profit

> > > >

> > > > Yeah, but what if we made fast hands baseline.

> > >

> > > then you will have to read my post again

> > > discipline will still be meta so you get fast hands (which you would get anyway) + 1 free trait

> > > a.k.a powercreep

> >

> > Reading all the posts in this thread is bad for my health, too much salt.

> >

> > How I would have liked this thread to go:

> >

> > Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> > Person 2: "I disagree, because of reason B. How about we do suggestion B instead?"

> > Person 1: "Ah, that's a good point. Maybe if you modify suggestion B to C?"

> > Person 2: "That's some good input!"

> >

> > Instead we got:

> > Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> > Person 2: "No you stupid dink, why would you think that?"

> > Person 1: "Because reason A...."

> > Person 2: "LOLOLOL Thats not a reason! Git gud, learn the game. You're 'suggestion' isn't valid"

> > Person 1: "What about some alternatives then? Why isn't A good?"

> > Person 2: "Git rid of A completely, cause your idea is bad"

> >

> > I was totally open to suggestions to alternatives until people started to get rude and belligerent almost immediately with this "I'm better than you" attitude.

>

> your last line was the best line

> now do take th time to re-read the thread and you will see those that are pro-baseline regard everyone else opinion as "garbage" (in that exact word)

> so either agree with me, or i won't agree with you

>

> ironic, right? because you just accused the contra-baseline of doing that

 

Please take the time to quote me the thread where _I_ call someone's idea garbage. I'm speaking for myself, no one else. Go read the first page of posts and if you think they are trying to provide constructive conversation on the topic, then you would be wrong. Other people can choose to over look the tone of how people talk to them but I'm not going to.

[melandru.3876]

@Obtena.7952

 

by now i think the best thing to do is we both stop replying, let the thread die and be forgotten, a new one will come up in two months anyway

[Zexanima.7851]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

>

> Still waiting for this first step to be honest because reasons **build diversity** and **fluidity** don't make much sense.

>

>

 

Please see the "Instead we got" portion. You're one of those people saying "Why would you think that". I've explained why, but instead of providing constructive alternatives in return you just disregard without reason's to why with this "I know better than you, don't question me" attitude. How can you expect people to respond positively to that?

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> >

> > Still waiting for this first step to be honest because reasons **build diversity** and **fluidity** don't make much sense.

> >

> >

>

> Please see the "Instead we got" portion. You're one of those people saying "Why would you think that". I've explained why, but instead of providing constructive alternatives in return you just disregard without reason's to why with this "I know better than you, don't question me" attitude. How can you expect people to respond positively to that?

 

If you want constructive alternatives to build diversity, the answer is to stop thinking about how to make everything equivalent to the best or your favourite builds. This game is not designed so that there is a large pick of best builds to choose from. If you want diversity, you can have it, but you are going to settle for something that isn't ideal. That's simply how the game is designed.

 

If you want fluidity, then stick with Discipline, because that's the point of Anet giving players meaningful choices with a trait system. You can't expect all builds to play like those that have Discipline; that's why Discipline is a good traitline ... it feels different than other traitlines. That's the whole damn point.

[Zexanima.7851]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Zexanima.7851" said:

> > > > Person 1: "I think change A would be good for reason A"

> > >

> > > Still waiting for this first step to be honest because reasons **build diversity** and **fluidity** don't make much sense.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Please see the "Instead we got" portion. You're one of those people saying "Why would you think that". I've explained why, but instead of providing constructive alternatives in return you just disregard without reason's to why with this "I know better than you, don't question me" attitude. How can you expect people to respond positively to that?

>

> If you want constructive alternatives to build diversity, the answer is to stop thinking about how to make everything equivalent to the best or your favourite builds. This game is not designed so that there is a large pick of best builds to choose from. If you want diversity, you can have it, but you are going to settle for something that isn't ideal. That's simply how the game is designed.

 

I can see why you would think that, specially with how limited some professions are. I have to disagree that it's their intention for it to be that way. I think they are trying to make a large of a pool of builds as possible. Unlike other games you're able to easily swap traits and skills which to me would suggest they want lots of variety. Now, they may not be doing the best at it but I would like for them to and that's why I make suggestions (both good and bad ones).

>

> If you want fluidity, then stick with Discipline, because that's the point of Anet giving players meaningful choices with a trait system. You can't expect all builds to play like those that have Discipline; that's why you have choice.

 

I get what you're saying, there are defiantly certain aspects of a profession that should be bound to specific trait lines. I completely agree with that part. I don't think fluidity is one of them though as it an integral part of the games combat. How fluid the combat feels is one of the main reasons I play the game. It doesn't seem right to have to choose between having fluid combat or having a different build. For instance, with Revenant and Elemenalist combat feels really fluid to me no matter the build because I have a lot of skills to cycle through. With warriors though they have significantly less to manage and not having that ability to swap between weapon skills as soon as possible really breaks what fluidity that Discipline gives, mainly due to fast hands.

 

 

[Sobx.1758]

> @"cryorion.9532" said:

>This is what happens, when people who barely (if at all) touch the class and know nothing/very little about it come here and argue about the future of the profession :)

 

It's funny, because -as usual- you have no idea what you're talking about. But nice try. :)

 

>The reason I say this because if you could answer many of those things, you already would. But you avoid it the same way as Obtena and then call it "irrelevant", when knowledge of warrior class is crucial to advance this discussion.

 

I already did, but you simply ignored the whole posts or parts of them just to avoid answering to anything. Why am I supposed to repeat myself for 5th time, when you'll just ignore it again and then claim that I said nothing? It's funny how you used some idiotic excuse like "I won't answer to the rest because I'm tired/it took me too long already!" and for the past page you show your frustration with humongous wall of texts with personal attacks directed at other people while using "@" me for some reason. Stop embarrassing yourself.

If you're interested in what I have to say, then go reread this thread and answer to what you previously omitted. Otherwise, stop playing a victim and claiming that I'M the one that avoids answering to anything.

 

>The other thread supposed to serve different purpose which you don't understand. That thread was exactly what you, Obtena and few others cannot do, EVEN IF I ASKED YOU/THEM SINCE PAGE 1. I cannot answer to everyone, that was one of the reasons why I didn't want to engage in this thread anymore, it was just overwhelming. But since you/others ignored what I asked since page 1,

 

The other thread was exactly the same, just because you tried wording it slightly differently doesn't change its main purpose and dividing it into 20 little threads serves no purpose other than you running away one last time. Again, stop embarrassing yourself, that's just getting sad. You're not interested in discussing anything or even seeing and understanding what other people have to say and you already showed that multiple times, might as well stop pretending.

 

 

>I will ignore whatever I want now. At least when it comes to people who I asked multiple times and they avoided answering every time. Simple as that :)

 

You already did that since at least page... 3, probably. Stop playing a victim. :)

[cryorion.9532]

> @"melandru.3876" said:

> > ok, say fast hands got baseline and you are now free to take another traitline.

> >

> > 1) will you run defense instead of discipline in raids/fracs now? offcourse you won't

> > 2) will you run arms now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? offcourse you won't

> > 3) will you run berserker now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? offcourse you won't

> >

> > 4) will you run spellbreaker now instead of discipline in raids/fracs? ONLY in no pain no gain intsbas. as is allready the case.

> >

> > this is purely from a pve point of view, and i doubt it's any different from pvp.

> >

> > -arms? still kitten for pvp

> > -berserker? still kitten for pvp

> > -tactics? still kitten for pvp

> >

> > only valid build that i would see myself using is strenght-defense-spellbreaker which is probably the build you play hence you want fast hands so bad.

> >

> > is a nerf to something that becomes baseline (nothing comes for free) worth it, to improve YOUR one build, without discipline?

 

1) defense traitline in PvE is only required if you are not very confident with warrior class, after all those years, I haven't been using defense traitline in end-game content (except certain situations, where e.g. longer stances are required to do some dungeon mechanics, etc). When it comes to combat, I rely on knowledge of encouner more than using defense traitline to stay alive, in PvE :)

What do you expect from this traitline to enhance warrior in endgame PvE? Tanking?

 

2) arms actually can help DPS spellbreaker quite a lot - DPS gain from 500 ferocity, easy and fast vulnerability application from Sudnering Burst trait improves solo builds quite a lot. I don't think it will make Strength/Arms/Spellbreaker meta DPS, but it will surely improve it to the point to consider as an alternative.

Arms would be good for situations where lack of vulnerability is an issue.

 

3) FH baseline will not magically make all builds improved, I stated before (but probably in reply to different person), that making FH baseline will not miraculously make all builds great, and further adjusting will most likely be required.

Also, Berserker has issue directly with weapon bursts (long cast times of Arc Divider, Decapitate + they count as level 1 adrenaline damage). So you can achieve more by adjusting those + buffing/reworking rage skills. Traitline is not bad at all. Some traits could get some love though.

 

4) I care little about Strength, Defense, Spellbreaker. If you imply that I want this whole change just to buff something that you think I play and want stronger, then you are wrong. I tried e.g. full sentinel tactics, strength/defense, spellbreaker, with focus on boon removal and warhorn condi removal, but the main reason it didn't work that well was that I couldn't adjust to situations fast enough (when need of condi removal/mobility with sword/dagger+warhorn, and being stuck on hammer and vice versa, when need to cc and boon removal, being stuck on warhorn).

 

Strength, Defense, Spellbreaker has potential to become competetive build but even then, I would consider playing more supportive builds, like the one mentioned above. That is of course, personal preference.

 

Another build that could become competetive is rifle berserker but even then, it benefits discipline traits quite a lot.

Strength/Defense, Arms, Berserker with signet mastery trait could be interesting.

[cryorion.9532]

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> You already did that since at least page... 3, probably. Stop playing a victim. :)

You should also include this sentence right before "I cannot answer to everyone, that was one of the reasons why I didn't want to engage in this thread anymore, it was just overwhelming."

Stop pulling things out of context please. I am not supercomputer capable of everything. I really try to explain things, believe or not but I think when typing all those walls of text, it is exhausting and overwhelming sometimes.

[BlackTruth.6813]

And the thread got merged, do you know why? EVEN ANET KNOWS pointing out builds that might be aids is RELEVANT TO THE THREAD THAT SUGGESTS BASELINE FASTHANDS CAN BE A VIABLE SUGGESTION.

 

Cut it out with your pathetic "burden of proof" crap, just admit that you cannot find real arguments. If you can't point out a build, or have to make a 1/10 fail meme thread because you can't find real arguments, then talking to you is pointless.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"BlackTruth.6813" said:

> And the thread got merged, do you know why? EVEN ANET KNOWS pointing out builds that might be aids is RELEVANT TO THE THREAD.

>

> Cut it out with your pathetic "burden of proof" kitten, just admit that you cannot find real arguments.

 

Might want to check that mirror you were just talking into. What you just said applies beautifully to both sides. Unfortunately burden of proof always lies with the side which demands change. I'm fine with settling on ignoring this issue since I know Arenanet is not going to roll out baseline Fast Hands.

 

I've tried to explain to people why, I don't care if anyone listens. Smart warrior players will give useful feedback, not so smart players will stick to their pipe dreams and complain years in when the change they want hasn't been implemented or leave the game. I'm fine with any of the outcomes.