Staff as a DPS weapon

[Castiel.9048]

> @"sorudo.9054" said:

> the DPS of the ele is quite pathetic and timing restricted, the reason why i want to use it but i rather not.

 

This is the truth for ele. Not biased by the unrealistic golem dps benchmark videos that are wrong.

Staff as a dps weapon for eles is pathetic at best.

[RaidsAreEasyAF.8652]

> @"Castiel.9048" said:

> This is the truth for ele. Not biased by the unrealistic golem dps benchmark videos that are wrong.

 

Whats wrong about the benchmark video?

[ZDragon.3046]

> @"Castiel.9048" said:

> > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > the DPS of the ele is quite pathetic and timing restricted, the reason why i want to use it but i rather not.

>

> This is the truth for ele. Not biased by the unrealistic golem dps benchmark videos that are wrong.

> Staff as a dps weapon for eles is pathetic at best.

 

When we do ranged Deimos i manage to get power staff weaver to 18-20k dps 21k if boons are perfect (You really need alacrity to be on point) and i dont make any mistakes so its not bad but its not good thats about the only case where i use it though. Oddly enough in this one case it does out-damage a lot of other ranged setups but i mean i dont thin kits bad its just too situational if you need ranged only dps its pretty good. If you have the option to go melee though Sword is better option for almost everything else with power or condi weaver.

[ZDragon.3046]

> @"Uden Reavstone.3426" said:

> > @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> > Necromancer staff is pretty weaksauce in pve. The pretty much only use for it is rapid tagging in open world groups, nothing more.

>

> Or loading the enemy up with condis before switching to s/d or s/t. In four attacks, you got at least two stacks of bleed, one poison, fear, weakness, chill, whatever condis are on you, and, depending on your traits, burn, torment, and/or vulnerability. And this is all AoE which, with the right trait, is unblockable and you a kitten-ton of life force. Doesn't seem like "weaksauce" to me. Now the aa does kind of suck, I'll give you that.

 

The reason its weaksauce is because the marks are lackluster mark of blood is just really kind of joke. All of the marks do not generate LF at base meaning you 100% must invest in the trait to even make the weapon have real utility for its caster which is more of a pain.

 

If you use staff without the trait you will find it is indeed weaksauce.

Ideally the trait is doing the heavy lifting for everything you just said above, the staff and its base value is very weak and could be considered garbage. Its not uncommon to use a weapon without its related trait and the weapon can still be considered viable but necro staff will not allow that and that is why it is "weaksuace"

[sokeenoppa.5384]

^ for pve ur always better with s/t and s/t than staff.

[Uden Reavstone.3426]

> @"ZDragon.3046" said:

> > @"Uden Reavstone.3426" said:

> > > @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> > > Necromancer staff is pretty weaksauce in pve. The pretty much only use for it is rapid tagging in open world groups, nothing more.

> >

> > Or loading the enemy up with condis before switching to s/d or s/t. In four attacks, you got at least two stacks of bleed, one poison, fear, weakness, chill, whatever condis are on you, and, depending on your traits, burn, torment, and/or vulnerability. And this is all AoE which, with the right trait, is unblockable and you a kitten-ton of life force. Doesn't seem like "weaksauce" to me. Now the aa does kind of suck, I'll give you that.

>

> The reason its weaksauce is because the marks are lackluster mark of blood is just really kind of joke. All of the marks do not generate LF at base meaning you 100% must invest in the trait to even make the weapon have real utility for its caster which is more of a pain.

>

> If you use staff without the trait you will find it is indeed weaksauce.

> Ideally the trait is doing the heavy lifting for everything you just said above, the staff and its base value is very weak and could be considered garbage. Its not uncommon to use a weapon without its related trait and the weapon can still be considered viable but necro staff will not allow that and that is why it is "weaksuace"

 

I use staff all the time without it's trait. It's strength comes from the condis it applies, not the life force it generates. That's just a plus. Even without any traits what so ever, it applies 5 to 8 condis in four attacks. I don't see how the traits "do the heavy lifting," but hey, this is just my opinion.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Castiel.9048" said:

> > @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > the DPS of the ele is quite pathetic and timing restricted, the reason why i want to use it but i rather not.

>

> This is the truth for ele. Not biased by the unrealistic golem dps benchmark videos that are wrong.

> Staff as a dps weapon for eles is pathetic at best.

 

The staff tempest benchmark is off bye around 3-4k to meta top end builds. It has no unreasonable time frame (2 minutes is pretty standard for dps test), so the cool down argument is moot.

 

Sorry if you are unable to do the rotation required be it due to lack of personal skill, lack of proper team setup, or what ever reason. Some classes have harder and some easier rotations. The simple fact remains: staff on elementalist is a great support weapon with very high damage output.

[Gryphon.2875]

> @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> Necromancer staff is pretty weaksauce in pve. The pretty much only use for it is rapid tagging in open world groups, nothing more.

 

I know. Sad face. Mainly cause the Crossing is such a great skin for a Neco, but Staff isn't worth it.

[Tiviana.2650]

The problem isnt the weapon, its the fact that its made purposely weak as a caster ranged weapon, just like bow. I can see that in pvp, but in open world and pve its a shame that ranged weapon dps is the suck.

[Knighthonor.4061]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

> Yet again I am not advocating change to existing staff skills with the exception of Druid but I won't get into that. I was merely pointing out that there is a lack of solid direct DPS staff (save melee combat professions). I posited the concept of allowing staves to be used as DPS weapons where they would be more effective at close range that at further distances. All of which never mentioned changing existing support structures. So I will leave it at this, If they decide to add another elite spec in the future it would be nice to have the option to use staff as something more than a support weapon. It was wishful thinking to get people to talk about it. Instead everyone focused on what's existing and completely missed the point I was trying to make. I am completely aware of what is available currently for staff DPS in regards to casters.

 

iam confused perhaps by the terminology being used in this discussion. You mean future Staff weapons to be DPS weapons, or do you mean future staff weapons being melee dps weapons?

[Knighthonor.4061]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

> I have been playing consistently for a sometime now and I realized there aren't any professions that can use a staff as a main DPS weapon outside of Elementalist and Mirage. I understand this is a melee focused game and the closer you are the more risk and thus more reward. I just see a lot of interesting animations and class fantasy in staff usage. I really like Druid and the celestial aspect and using a staff would be amazing with the beams of light and celestial energy slamming down on foes. As of right now I realize that staves shouldn't do the same damage as melee but what if there were traits or skills that improved or only worked at or near melee range for professions that can use a staff? If a Revenant can smash people at range with a hammer how is it out of the question for other professions to have something similar?

 

you want a short range non melee staff thats DPS focused? Am I clear on your request?

[LucianDK.8615]

Sounds like he wants a scepter. Theres plenty of pretty large scepters that could make it -easilly- as a staff in size.

[Vardogr.9371]

I do not want a scepter. I want to be able to have more caster DPS able to use staves. It is quite clear in the progression of this thread that I do not want to change anything about current staves but the ability to have the option for more classes to have access to Staves as a DPS weapon and not solely a support weapon that does some DPS . I was proposing that for a staff DPS caster scenario to work maybe have its damage be greater when closer to the target so it can maintain the close range combat does greater damage than ranged combat. I used revenant to highlight how it can do something similar to what I am looking for with its hammer skills. It can do a lot of damage in certain applications with a hammer and most of the skills are ranged. It would be interesting to have a caster that can use a staff that isn't a support weapon outside of the professions mentioned throughout this thread. I mentioned Druid because it seemed like at least to me the initial concept may have been more damage oriented but the games philosophy may have herded it in a more support role but I could be wrong.

[Cameron.6450]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

>I mentioned Druid because it seemed like at least to me the initial concept may have been more damage oriented but the games philosophy may have herded it in a more support role but I could be wrong.

 

Druid was purpose built to be a support, it was never damage oriented. You might have it mixed up with the interpretation of druids in other fantasy settings.

 

 

[Vardogr.9371]

No I have not mixed it up. I said Druid seemed like it was damage oriented in the initial concept, meaning not the eventual version you see today or when it was releasesd. This whole thread was more of a thought experiment about having casters do DPS with staves and building on that fantasy but it turned into marking peoples inability to read nuance.

[Cameron.6450]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

> No I have not mixed it up. I said Druid seemed like it was damage oriented in the initial concept, meaning not the eventual version you see today or when it was releasesd. This whole thread was more of a thought experiment about having casters do DPS with staves and building on that fantasy but it turned into marking peoples inability to read nuance.

 

What do you mean by initial concept? Because if you mean the initial concept of druid in gw2 then you are just simply wrong. It wasn't a support from the release of hot, it was a support from its conception. If you disagree, would you mind pointing out what information suggests druids were initially damage dealers?

 

If by initial concept you mean druids as a general fantasy concept are damage dealers, then yeah i agree with you, but that's based on interpretations from outside the game. In gw2, druids have only ever been support.

[Vardogr.9371]

What part of seemed like it was is getting lost on you? The statement is opinion on the design of the class not the current or released presentation. I am saying initial conception means on the drawing board not what was presented to players. That whole statement about what I thought the class's design intent was to be is speculation. I can not be wrong because it isn't an objective concept it is merely opinion. I have never argued the point of druid being a damage dealer and it being changed or that it was never support. I do not honestly get how that is missed in most of this thread. I used language that was never absolute in nature. Druids skills _look to me_ as if they were intended to be something other than support when they were being designed. That is an opinion not a fact. Hitting people with astral energy to heal them in the fashion of Cosmic Ray or Lunar Impact with aggressive beams of light made me say hmm that just doesn't seem right or that doesn't strike me as intentionally being a support type skill. Which leads me to say what I said about druids. Also concept does not mean final product. When something is conceived it rarely stays the way it was at conception.

[Brycar.2651]

It would be cool to have a DPS staff that you stamp on the ground. THOU HALL NOT PASS!

[Vardogr.9371]

Well that was sort of my intent of this post originally. I look at all the animations and skills that use staff and they look really cool but aren't meant for damage. It would be fun to some of us to be able to use a staff like a caster that isn't Elementalist, Mirage, or Daredevil. Being able to have a staff as a main damage weapon like greatsword is to warrior would be a blast. I concede it may never happen but I was throwing out the Idea of having a caster maybe be viable with a staff outside of the very few we have now.

[Cameron.6450]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

> What part of seemed like it was is getting lost on you? The statement is opinion on the design of the class not the current or released presentation. I am saying initial conception means on the drawing board not what was presented to players. That whole statement about what I thought the class's design intent was to be is speculation. I can not be wrong because it isn't an objective concept it is merely opinion. I have never argued the point of druid being a damage dealer and it being changed or that it was never support. I do not honestly get how that is missed in most of this thread. I used language that was never absolute in nature. Druids skills _look to me_ as if they were intended to be something other than support when they were being designed. That is an opinion not a fact. Hitting people with astral energy to heal them in the fashion of Cosmic Ray or Lunar Impact with aggressive beams of light made me say hmm that just doesn't seem right or that doesn't strike me as intentionally being a support type skill. Which leads me to say what I said about druids. Also concept does not mean final product. When something is conceived it rarely stays the way it was at conception.

 

Oh nothing was lost on me. I was trying to give you the benefit of doubt in the hope that you were basing your statements on something more substantial. If you think that the skill animations and names were developed before the devs had an idea of what they were building, I don't really know what else to say to you. You keep saying that you think the initial concept of druid was dps, and yet you're using the skill names that were launched with a support spec. Your only information to go on is the final release. If it swapped from dps to support early in development, you'd need to have some information before the release version to support this. For example, we can say that revenants in their initial conception only used one weaponset. Why? Because in a beta weekend of HoT, that's how revenants worked. Given that you don't have anything to work with on the druid as dps side, I'd suggest that rather than stubbornly sticking to this line "because it's your opinion", maybe rethink the validity of that opinion.

 

As a side note, just because something is your opinion, does not make it some untouchable statement that no one can disagree with you, or point out that there is nothing substantial to base that opinion on.

[Vardogr.9371]

You and I can't know what the entire design process was for the druid as we were not part of it. You are literally arguing that my opinion is wrong that I thought something had a different intention than maybe what is presented today. There is no way anyone could know other than the devs who sat down and fleshed out the design in the brainstorming sessions and then walked that design through the entire process to what it is now. So yes I am stubbornly sticking to my _subjective_ opinion that It seemed to me that something seemed like it could have had a different intention at another time than what was presented at release or now.

 

Certain opinions can't be right or wrong. As some are subjective not objective. You are essentially saying anyone who says blue cars are awesome is wrong. That is a subjective opinion and can't be inherently wrong or right. Having the opinion the world is flat is an objectively wrong opinion as it has been proven otherwise and is based solely on fact not feelings. Me pointing out that it seemed something like the druid may have had a different intention is not an objective opinion but an example of a subjective opinion. Me using the current druid skills I highlighted were vehicles to justify my subjective opinion and have no basis in actual facts. They were meant to show how I came to my subjective opinions conclusion. https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/objective-subjective/ please read that and understand what I am trying to impart to you as I think it is critical to you grasping the difference between what you are thinking I am saying and what I am actually saying.

 

I am not trying to attack you but it seems as though you aren't understanding anything I have been trying to explain. Plus you have completely missed the original intent of the post to argue the minutiae of a subjective opinion than to contribute to the conversation. Have a good day and Happy Holidays.

 

[kharmin.7683]

Perhaps you should refocus your argument to what you think that the staff weapon should be like that is different from the current implementation as well as why this would be better than scepters which seem to already have the function that you suggest. Then, show how the game (not just you) would benefit from such a change which would encourage ANet to accept your proposal.

[Vardogr.9371]

This really wasn't a proposal to ANet as it really wouldn't be something I would expect them to give any real serious thought too. Scepters do not have to be the be all end all to caster DPS. Using the example of a Revenant using a hammer for ranged damage, a Staff can be done similarly without the need for support being the real purpose of a staff. Not an entirely difficult concept to come to terms with. Not every profession uses scepter either.

 

Most weapons honestly make no sense to me, for example Mesmer using a greatsword as a ranged weapon when staff and scepter already exist and I am aware of the different purposes of those weapons. Essentially the greatsword could be replaced by staff in theory and nothing would need to change really. Bear in mind I am not advocating for that change but merely pointing out that it would be closer to what I am trying to impart. Revenant and Daredevil use staves in a melee capacity and that works. So my thought was having some sort of caster being able to use a staff as their main weapon as a Warrior uses a greatsword or a Daredevil uses a staff . Not the same execution as those two classes i mentioned but as a way to have more magic or scholar based classes have the option for a main weapon being a staff.

 

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Vardogr.9371" said:

> You and I can't know what the entire design process was for the druid as we were not part of it. You are literally arguing that my opinion is wrong that I thought something had a different intention than maybe what is presented today. There is no way anyone could know other than the devs who sat down and fleshed out the design in the brainstorming sessions and then walked that design through the entire process to what it is now. So yes I am stubbornly sticking to my _subjective_ opinion that It seemed to me that something seemed like it could have had a different intention at another time than what was presented at release or now.

>

> Certain opinions can't be right or wrong. As some are subjective not objective. You are essentially saying anyone who says blue cars are awesome is wrong. That is a subjective opinion and can't be inherently wrong or right. Having the opinion the world is flat is an objectively wrong opinion as it has been proven otherwise and is based solely on fact not feelings. Me pointing out that it seemed something like the druid may have had a different intention is not an objective opinion but an example of a subjective opinion. Me using the current druid skills I highlighted were vehicles to justify my subjective opinion and have no basis in actual facts. They were meant to show how I came to my subjective opinions conclusion. https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/objective-subjective/ please read that and understand what I am trying to impart to you as I think it is critical to you grasping the difference between what you are thinking I am saying and what I am actually saying.

>

> I am not trying to attack you but it seems as though you aren't understanding anything I have been trying to explain. Plus you have completely missed the original intent of the post to argue the minutiae of a subjective opinion than to contribute to the conversation. Have a good day and Happy Holidays.

>

 

He was simply poking at one of your main arguments: that druid was not designed as healer primarily.

 

You never provided any substantial evidence to solidify this claim. As such this is not an argument but rather an opinion. That is fine, no one wants to take from you having an opinion. It would be advisable to not treat this opinion as fact.

 

For example: I could claim that the entire animation theme (flowers, roots, etc) and the color theme (green and blue) strongly suggest that the animations in place have much more in common with lore and mechanic wise support oriented aspects (blue being the color of water spells, which mechanically heal when blasted. Nature being thematically often in line with growthand sustain). My claim would be just as unfounded as yours and a pure opinion. I do not treat my opinion as fact though.

[Biermeister.4678]

DD Rev Necro are the ones that use staff the most for me

DD and Rev are close in with staff

Necro is all area's