Some Reasonable Balance Changes to Address Scourge and Spellbreaker

[Ogmios.9473]

> @Bish.8627 said:

> My Suggestion

>

> Stop asking for nerfs and instead ask how other classes can be tweaked to be more useful.

 

With all due respect, I disagree on that. I feel like a lot of the elite specs are already a little bloated.

The Spellbreaker is the perfect exemple (But it's true for most classes IMO). They can have all this at the same time:

- Excellent defensive skills: multiple Endure Pain, Shield 5, FC and more depending on their weapon choices

- A good uptime on Stability, Vigor and Resistance. Which as you know are very powerful in PvP

- Good gap closers and overall mobility

- Access to numerous CC / interupts / impairing conditions

- Access to boonstrip

- Access to condi cleanse

- Unblockable attacks

- Moderate access to other very useful boons such as: Quickness, Protection, Might

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't say that out of bitterness aigainst spellbreaker. But I think it is objectively too much. Especially when you account that some of these utilities are passive, and therefore you sometimes get counterplayed by the warrior's build rather than the warrior himself.

 

Personally, I would much rather see specs like these tuned down, and everyone "nerfed" to a balanced playing ground, rather than everyone "buffed' to a balanced playing ground. I would like each build to have pros but also lacks and cons. You shouldn't be able to be a good bunker, brawler, and team fighter at the same time. But that's just my opinion.

 

[R E F L H E X.8413]

> @Zuko.7132 said:

> > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > @Zuko.7132 said:

> > > > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > > > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > > > > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

> > > >

> > > > dude, you know thats only because warrior has high base health right? because if they had the same base hp as guardian they would run marauders too, & vice versa. all of the other classes would be able to drop vitality on amulets if they had high base hp. it’s not because warrior has extra sustain at base, so many other classes (guardian engi etc) have high sustain without healing power too, they just lack high base hp.

> > > >

> > > > @OP how about a nerf to 200 range, & having the counter attack being single target? i’ve never been keen on getting punished be something of my foolish teamate

> > >

> > > I agree spellbreaker needs to be toned down, but thats going too far. That's over an 80% nerf in perfect conditions.

> >

> > it nerfs the class in teamfights, but lets it still be good 1v1 while allowing for more counterplay. seems pretty good imo.

> >

> > all the defence stays, the offensive power just drops off for teamfights.

>

> the game isn't about 1v1 though and the vast majority of situations are not 1v1 or if they are don't stay that way. also that's not counterplay that's taking it out of play in a teamfight.

 

outside of team queing and being able to try to force teamfights I pretty much just recorded a random video the first one and it proves you very wrong 1v1 is almost the majority of encounters in conquest 4v4 usually happens once per game at mid then you get all kinds of 1v1 and 2v2 I plan on putting commentary on how lackluster conquest is due to never being team vs team and how disappointed I am at this point in the match to run into 1v1 for the rest of the game. In a fuckin team game thats supposed to be 5v5 not 1+1+1+1+1 vs 1+1+1+1+1 on different sides of the map. They may as well just spawn us all in different spots with one person from the other team and let us do 5 1v1s per match to decide the game thats almost the current state. People need to stop defending what doesnt need to be defended and is bad for the sake of status quo which is also bad.

 

And this was me recording the first game not trying to get a good one to show the concept and nearly everything is 1v1. The first one was good enough why question it or even do another one if the results are going to be the same? Even as a healer in random youre going to end up in 1v1 and not even able to heal your team. Random arenas is so much more ideal than random conquest.

[ArthurDent.9538]

> @choovanski.5462 said:

> > @Zuko.7132 said:

> > > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > > > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

> > >

> > > dude, you know thats only because warrior has high base health right? because if they had the same base hp as guardian they would run marauders too, & vice versa. all of the other classes would be able to drop vitality on amulets if they had high base hp. it’s not because warrior has extra sustain at base, so many other classes (guardian engi etc) have high sustain without healing power too, they just lack high base hp.

> > >

> > > @OP how about a nerf to 200 range, & having the counter attack being single target? i’ve never been keen on getting punished be something of my foolish teamate

> >

> > I agree spellbreaker needs to be toned down, but thats going too far. That's over an 80% nerf in perfect conditions.

>

> it nerfs the class in teamfights, but lets it still be good 1v1 while allowing for more counterplay. seems pretty good imo.

>

> all the defence stays, the offensive power just drops off for teamfights.

 

The condi copy on from revenge counter turns full counter into an aoe nuke in team fights when condi builds are around which is pretty much always thanks to scourges being everywhere. And there is really pretty much no way to avoid being hit by it in a teamfight other than stand more than 300 range away since the animation once triggered is way too fast to really react to when you can't anticipate who or what is going to trigger it. From a revenant perspective I basically can't do anything in teamfights where it is friendly condi builds against a spellbreaker otherwise I basically die to full counter condi bomb. Just feels way too much having an incredible 1v1 spec also pretty much forcing a team fight focused build out of team fights.

[Zuko.7132]

> @"R E F L H E X.8413" said:

> > @Zuko.7132 said:

> > > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > > @Zuko.7132 said:

> > > > > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > > > > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > > > > > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

> > > > >

> > > > > dude, you know thats only because warrior has high base health right? because if they had the same base hp as guardian they would run marauders too, & vice versa. all of the other classes would be able to drop vitality on amulets if they had high base hp. it’s not because warrior has extra sustain at base, so many other classes (guardian engi etc) have high sustain without healing power too, they just lack high base hp.

> > > > >

> > > > > @OP how about a nerf to 200 range, & having the counter attack being single target? i’ve never been keen on getting punished be something of my foolish teamate

> > > >

> > > > I agree spellbreaker needs to be toned down, but thats going too far. That's over an 80% nerf in perfect conditions.

> > >

> > > it nerfs the class in teamfights, but lets it still be good 1v1 while allowing for more counterplay. seems pretty good imo.

> > >

> > > all the defence stays, the offensive power just drops off for teamfights.

> >

> > the game isn't about 1v1 though and the vast majority of situations are not 1v1 or if they are don't stay that way. also that's not counterplay that's taking it out of play in a teamfight.

>

> outside of team queing and being able to try to force teamfights I pretty much just recorded a random video the first one and it proves you very wrong 1v1 is almost the majority of encounters in conquest 4v4 usually happens once per game at mid then you get all kinds of 1v1 and 2v2 I plan on putting commentary on how lackluster conquest is due to never being team vs team and how disappointed I am at this point in the match to run into 1v1 for the rest of the game. In a fuckin team game thats supposed to be 5v5 not 1+1+1+1+1 vs 1+1+1+1+1 on different sides of the map. They may as well just spawn us all in different spots with one person from the other team and let us do 5 1v1s per match to decide the game thats almost the current state.

>

> And this was me recording the first game not trying to get a good one to show the concept and nearly everything is 1v1. The first one was good enough why question it or even do another one if the results are going to be the same? Even as a healer in random youre going to end up in 1v1 and not even able to heal your team.

 

Do you honestly think 1 video from one person's perspective counts as statistical evidence for the vast majority of fights being 1v1s? Even doing some simple thinking proves that wrong. There are three points in conquest. 5 players on each team. Assuming everyone isn't being a dumbass and having seperate 1v1s off point, the most 1v1s you can have at once is 2 1v1s with one 3v3. The other options are 1 1v1 and a vast majority of different combinations on other points or no 1v1s at all. So in the best scenario 4 of 10 players are in a 1v1. Every other scenario has 2 or zero players out of 10 in a 1v1. Therefore the vast majority of situations are not 1v1.

[R E F L H E X.8413]

" the most 1v1s you can have at once is 2 1v1s with one 3v3."

The games are ten minutes long thats only like 50 per fuckin game.

 

I've bitched about 1v1 in conquest in other threads and its been in my mind since beta.

 

1v1 should never happen in team game the only acceptable way of it happening is if the teams are forced to fight 5v5 and have a lord and the teams are 5v5 so only one or two people split for lord and then get in a smaller encounter.

[Zuko.7132]

> @"R E F L H E X.8413" said:

> " the most 1v1s you can have at once is 2 1v1s with one 3v3."

> The games are ten minutes long thats only like 50 per fuckin game.

>

> I've bitched about 1v1 in conquest in other threads and its been in my mind since beta.

 

So 1 1v1 finishes every 12 seconds? You and I are clearly playing different games. Also like i said 2 1v1s going on at once is one out of very many scenarios and is actually one of the least likely to occur.

[R E F L H E X.8413]

No were playing the same game and youre in denial.

[Zuko.7132]

> @"R E F L H E X.8413" said:

> No were playing the same game and youre in denial.

 

Yes I am in denial of your anecdotal evidence and 1 sample statistics from 1 perspective. Meanwhile you're in denial from the objective facts I layed out that proves even under the best conditions most players aren't in 1v1s unless everyone is fighting off point or 4 of the 10 players are on respawn and that there are plenty of other conditions in which there are none or only 1 1v1 going on at all. I like my denial better.

 

But this is derailing the thread so I'm done. You have a good day. Back to balance changes for scourge and spellbreaker.

[R E F L H E X.8413]

1 perspective of facts. and one game when ive been playing for 5 years and it runs through my head every single game so recording one game at very random and not recording another one and getting exactly what I want clearly doesnt mean its a problem every game pretty much.

 

When they are "busy doing other things" its normally 2v2 2v1 or 3v1 which is just as bad or even worse.

[Sartharina.3542]

I think Full Counter needs to be re-worked to do exactly what it's advertised to do - Retaliate against the attacker for the next skill used on the Spellbreaker - dealing unblockable, unevadable damage to the attacker (Damage based on the skill used against them), and providing full immunity to that skill's hits.

 

The most significant things to note would be:

It's tied to skill activation during the counter window, not merely hit. You can't full-counter already-placed AoEs.

It completely negates the damage of the skill used against the Spellbreaker (Or even eliminates the skill completely) - Pretty much wasted on Autoattacks or other light, single-use activations, but able to provide a hard counter to skills with lasting effects. Though that will likely lead to Spellbreakers countering Spellbreakers in WvW from Winds of Disenchantment being completely countered.

[R E F L H E X.8413]

> @Zuko.7132 said:

> So 1 1v1 finishes every 12 seconds? You and I are clearly playing different games.

 

https://clips.twitch.tv/RockyVivaciousSnakeDxAbomb

 

He almost kills the necro in like 2 seconds then "i stood in his pillar for a second and im dead".

 

Like someone else said in another thread he almost kills the necro in 3-4 secs and then dies in 3-4 secs many 1v1s dont even take long.

 

The best part about this vid is if we look at mini maps we see 4 1v1s going on.

 

See its so common I dont even need my video the first one I see proves the point.

 

If he traded blink for powerspike he woulda won; and just use jaunt like blink. Powerspike is a very rewarding damage spam. He dont need the stunbreak due to dodges stunbreak + decoy being sufficient enough.

[BikeIsGone.8675]

> @choovanski.5462 said:

> > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

>

> dude, you know thats only because warrior has high base health right? because if they had the same base hp as guardian they would run marauders too, & vice versa. all of the other classes would be able to drop vitality on amulets if they had high base hp. it’s not because warrior has extra sustain at base, so many other classes (guardian engi etc) have high sustain without healing power too, they just lack high base hp.

>

> @OP how about a nerf to 200 range, & having the counter attack being single target? i’ve never been keen on getting punished be something of my foolish teamate

 

The high base health certainly helps, agreed. But saying thats the main reason why they dont need defensive stats is a bit far fetched. Necros are in the same base-health tier and are NOT able to run zerker/viper without getting seriously punsihed. Warriors just have the tools to compensate for that. Conditions (which tend to punish low HP setups severely) are not an issue for warriors (unless we add corrupts/boonrips). They can regen ~600 HP per second (!) with passive healing signet and 2 stacks of adrenal health. AND on top of that, they can kite like gods with access to blocks, invulns, ressistance and GS-mobility.

 

 

[Khenzy.9348]

From Full Counter, the damage is too high, the radius is too large and the CD is too low. Not the evades, not the daze, not the resistance. Such a defensive skill should NOT do the damage it does, at such a radius and with such frequency. Period. Or either leave the damage alone but reduce its defensive atributes. It can't and shouldn't be both.

Though, why does it refresh the other burst skills? It's not in the tooltip right? Is it a bug? That's way too strong too.

 

When it comes to Scourge... well. The damage is absurd. Like, ridiculously absurd. Most of that damage comes from Shades+burning and from 98736456837 stacks of torment that come from Shades+Desert Shourd+Ghastly Reach+corrupting boons and then applying even more stacks. Even with two of them if you don't immediately cleanse, you practically instantly die. This spec wasn't properly tested and was clearly not ready to ship on live like this. The balance team really screwed up big time here.

You just can't avoid NOT getting any boons, so you will always have a LOT of torment stacks when facing a Scourge. There's no counter to their stupidly low CD abusive boon corruption.

[Lighter.5631]

> @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

>

> Anyway I think that FC (even when not running zerker) does too much dmg. Its supposed to be a utility/defensive tool and as it is right now its a massive aoe nuke as well.....this needs to be adressed. Maybe make it not able to crit or just decrease the base dmg all together. A 3-4k crit/hit max should be perfectly fine with such a skill imo.

 

That's because warrior's defense solely depends on traits, not stats nor weapon skills filled with evade like weaver or ranger, thief w/e which you can go offense traits (lighting rod weaver/poison thief/herald/scourge) and still be survivable

if you go paladin or any tank ammy and go full offense trait, you will still be squishy AF just because you don't have the traits, you will be food to most mobile(teleport insta) burst specs, i would gladly give up berserker ammy if that means i can spec strength;arms/discipline/berserker;spellbreaker and not be food

anyway even warrior is able to run zerker better, it's still super risky anyway in higher tier pvp, also i would give up berserker ammy if that means warrior can get teleports like guardian

[Shadowflare.2759]

 

> @Lighter.5631 said:

> > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

> >

> > Anyway I think that FC (even when not running zerker) does too much dmg. Its supposed to be a utility/defensive tool and as it is right now its a massive aoe nuke as well.....this needs to be adressed. Maybe make it not able to crit or just decrease the base dmg all together. A 3-4k crit/hit max should be perfectly fine with such a skill imo.

>

> That's because warrior's defense solely depends on traits, not stats nor weapon skills filled with evade like weaver or ranger, thief w/e which you can go offense traits (lighting rod weaver/poison thief/herald/scourge) and still be survivable

> if you go paladin or any tank ammy and go full offense trait, you will still be squishy AF just because you don't have the traits, you will be food to most mobile(teleport insta) burst specs, i would gladly give up berserker ammy if that means i can spec strength;arms/discipline/berserker;spellbreaker and not be food

> anyway even warrior is able to run zerker better, it's still super risky anyway in higher tier pvp, also i would give up berserker ammy if that means warrior can get teleports like guardian

 

You clearly don't know how elementalists work if you honestly think that we can survive on our weapon skills alone. Water trait line has been mandatory for god knows how long, our utility skills are almost always filled with defensive skills, and that lightning rod build trades off a huge chunk of survivalbility for damage. It's for the most part a glass cannon that just hopes to all-in and burst the enemy to death before they're able to retaliate. To add insult to injury, even while taking the air traits + damage buffs from weaver, LR weaver probably deals less damage than the average spellbreaker, especially if you consider the constant spam of stability which completely negates lightning rod.

[Thorniss.2301]

> @Exciton.8942 said:

 

> Scourge:

>

> F2 CD increase to 8 sec (PvP only)

>

> Same player only got strike once by F skills even if he is within range of both shade and scourge himself.

>

> To compensate, scourge should gain a bit more barrier on F3 and F5.

 

I completely agree.

 

In addiction, I would give a higher life force cost on Nefarious Favor and make it convert 3 conditions (instead of 2) to compensate.

 

Keeping the previous changes, another idea I had is to switch the "F" slots of Nefarious Favor and Sand Cascade, so to take condition convertion and (if the Curses trait Path of Corruption is taken) boon corruption in 2 separate skills, because I think that having these 2 effects togeter on a same skill is too much.

 

Last, a shared cooldown (of 1/2, or 1/4 second maybe) between the "F" skills would be nice, possibly keeping out F5 from this.

[Master Ketsu.4569]

> @Lighter.5631 said:

> Problem with spellbreaker is not with damage nor CC, CC and damage are completely fine

> it's because it lives too long, it can 1v2 for a long time(to chain FC within dodges, evades and blocks and endure pain)

> on white node or owned node and wait to friends to +1

>

> simply put if you just change CD to 12 and not touch anything else, SB would be C/B tier imo,

 

Basically, as I have been saying - FC itself isn't the main problem. The problem is FC can be taken with the defense trait line which gives warrior stances the ability to upkeep stability and passive defense for a full 24 seconds which is insane. This is why every time Warrior has a viable damage/disruption build people take to the forums and cry, because the Last Stand trait is flat out broke.

 

I'd like to see warriors have to trait more into dodges with offense instead of defense. If you have ever fought a Might is right FC warrior that doesn't use Last Stand/BS it's actually very balanced and 100% more fun to fight against.

 

 

 

[choovanski.5462]

> @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > @choovanski.5462 said:

> > > @BikeIsGone.8675 said:

> > > Tbh im thinking the main issues with SB run way deeper than just the elite. Warror itself (the entire class in general) has way too much sustain. They are the ONLY class, where it is completely acceptable to run a fully offensive amulet on (like zerker, or viper/destroyer back in season 4/5). The damage on their skills is fine considering every class does this much dmg when running a offensive 4 stat amulet. If they d be forced to run another amulet (like every other class is), their dmg would be fine I think.

> >

> > dude, you know thats only because warrior has high base health right? because if they had the same base hp as guardian they would run marauders too, & vice versa. all of the other classes would be able to drop vitality on amulets if they had high base hp. it’s not because warrior has extra sustain at base, so many other classes (guardian engi etc) have high sustain without healing power too, they just lack high base hp.

> >

> > @OP how about a nerf to 200 range, & having the counter attack being single target? i’ve never been keen on getting punished be something of my foolish teamate

>

> The high base health certainly helps, agreed. But saying thats the main reason why they dont need defensive stats is a bit far fetched. Necros are in the same base-health tier and are NOT able to run zerker/viper without getting seriously punsihed. Warriors just have the tools to compensate for that. Conditions (which tend to punish low HP setups severely) are not an issue for warriors (unless we add corrupts/boonrips). They can regen ~600 HP per second (!) with passive healing signet and 2 stacks of adrenal health. AND on top of that, they can kite like gods with access to blocks, invulns, ressistance and GS-mobility.

>

>

 

yeah, but engineer, guardian, rev, thief etc would all run zerker amulet if they had the same base hp as warrior (actually everything that runs marauder would). classes like ranger and engineer actually far outsustain warrior if they get healing power access too. comparing warrior, or any classes defenses to necro is going to make the class look OP. because these comparisons leave out the base ~40k hp that necro has. necro has the worst defensive abilities out of all the classes because of death shroud, and the huge hp advantage it provides. necro also gets more value out of vitality, as it boosts LF too, so a necro is always going to be more inclined to run +vit amulets.

 

warrior's defensive tools are not that great when compared to other classes tbh (they have good resistance uptime, but their condi clear is actually pretty bad). they have to trait heavily for defense, and fill their whole utility bar with sustain skills. they are taking every bit of sustain the class allows for. so it's no surprise that taking all the tanky stuff they can makes them kinda tanky lol.

 

so, as far as the whole 'warrior is so tanky it can run zerker amulet' argument goes. nope. I don't think it holds water. if any other class was raised to max health pool they would be able to run zerker amulet just fine.

 

like honestly, do you think thief and guardian wouldn't drop marauder if you raised their base hp? they would dude, and they wouldn't be the only classes

[Lighter.5631]

> @"Master Ketsu.4569" said:

> > @Lighter.5631 said:

> > Problem with spellbreaker is not with damage nor CC, CC and damage are completely fine

> > it's because it lives too long, it can 1v2 for a long time(to chain FC within dodges, evades and blocks and endure pain)

> > on white node or owned node and wait to friends to +1

> >

> > simply put if you just change CD to 12 and not touch anything else, SB would be C/B tier imo,

>

> Basically, as I have been saying - FC itself isn't the main problem. The problem is FC can be taken with the defense trait line which gives warrior stances the ability to upkeep stability and passive defense for a full 24 seconds which is insane. This is why every time Warrior has a viable damage/disruption build people take to the forums and cry, because the Last Stand trait is flat out broke.

>

> I'd like to see warriors have to trait more into dodges with offense instead of defense. If you have ever fought a Might is right FC warrior that doesn't use Last Stand/BS it's actually very balanced and 100% more fun to fight against.

>

>

>

 

except the fact that simply dodging can no where compare with defense line...without defense, warrior is basically food to any insta teleport bursts, like thief/rev/mes/guard..not matter what ammy you take