Guild Wars 2

This trait is extremely problematic for the simple reason that you cannot out-skill it; you can dodge all you want, block all you want, the next 1-2 hit(s) will simply burn you.

Balthazar is not the problem as this was already a problem before that patch, it was always a problem.

The change could be as simple as the trait recharging when the hit that was dodged would have been critical. You could also consider it only proccing at the first hit after a kit swap ( every 10s ), so if you dodge that first, it will be recharging.

Putting the main source of [reliable] damage as passive trait that you cannot out-skill is an extremely bad idea.

How so?

How much damage per second can the P/P, P/S, or rifle put out with this trait that makes it a problem?

This was one trait that was mentioned as being a selection to assist the very low damage weapons. I have seem this thread remade multiple times, yet I have never seen anyone justify how this effects DPS levels to justify a worthy complaint in my eyes.

The fact that you call this a “main source” of damage without showing one iota of proof that it out damages any weapon set at all (because it doesn’t) is a clear display you are not looking for an honest discussion on the subject.

They don’t need to change it but add an animation before the burn procs,because it can’t be dodged.

dancingmonkey.4902:

How so?

How much damage per second can the P/P, P/S, or rifle put out with this trait that makes it a problem?

This was one trait that was mentioned as being a selection to assist the very low damage weapons. I have seem this thread remade multiple times, yet I have never seen anyone justify how this effects DPS levels to justify a worthy complaint in my eyes.

The fact that you call this a “main source” of damage without showing one iota of proof that it out damages any weapon set at all (because it doesn’t) is a clear display you are not looking for an honest discussion on the subject.

If it’s not a main source of damage then why isn’t there a single meta spec that skips the trait?

Because base damage is too low.

Wow, 3s burning every 10 seconds. A drop in the ocean of damage, at best.

shimmerless.4560:

If it’s not a main source of damage then why isn’t there a single meta spec that skips the trait?

It is? Got any proof of this, or is it just a random with no evidence to offer?

Which meta are you referring to? The power engineer meta that dominated both sides of the ToL? The minority condition meta? The CC meta?

Example. 112 engineers in ToL EU/NA. from what I see 27 used this trait. Yet you claim it is in every meta build. 77% of the engineers used power builds.

Incendiary Powder is not able to be evaded forever when you’re trading blows. This is a fact. But Incendiary Powder can be body blocked and wasted on fodder targets.

It’s also important to look at Incendiary Powder in the context of the entire Engineer profession.

Engineers have pretty awful long range poke damage. In fact, the reliable Engineer ranged poke is pretty much only 1spam. Engineer 1spam is also miserably weak, as a class design.

Basically, if accurate Engineer ranged damage is nerfed, it will present a lot of problems when going up against Professions that simply stay at ranged and play really defensively: Shortbow Thieves and Mesmers (who already body block IP with clones.)

Edit: Unavoidable burning also seems to be kind of a theme with most professions. Combustive Shot for all on point, group Justice Virtue for all, Sun Spirit burns for all.

Abilities like Combustive Shot, Incendiary Powder, Sun Spirit, Virtue of Justice – by design is to be a hugely bottlenecked damage source (can’t stack in intensity) but at the same time designed to add a damage component that will ensure that without proper condition removal that the attrition fight will continue to work. It essentially puts an expiry time on the fight.

dancingmonkey.4902:

shimmerless.4560:

If it’s not a main source of damage then why isn’t there a single meta spec that skips the trait?

It is? Got any proof of this, or is it just a random with no evidence to offer?

Which meta are you referring to? The power engineer meta that dominated both sides of the ToL? The minority condition meta? The CC meta?

Example. 112 engineers in ToL EU/NA. from what I see 27 used this trait. Yet you claim it is in every meta build. 77% of the engineers used power builds.

Actually, the Celestial build still should take Incendiary Powder. It’s hybrid, I don’t think it’s right to claim that Power Engineers dominate anything. They still suck.

Chaith.8256:

Incendiary Powder is not able to be evaded forever when you’re trading blows. This is a fact. But Incendiary Powder can be body blocked and wasted on fodder targets.

It’s also important to look at Incendiary Powder in the context of the entire Engineer profession.

Engineers have pretty awful long range poke damage. In fact, the reliable Engineer ranged poke is pretty much only 1spam. Engineer 1spam is also miserably weak, as a class design.

Basically, if accurate Engineer ranged damage is nerfed, it will present a lot of problems when going up against Professions that simply stay at ranged and play really defensively: Shortbow Thieves and Mesmers (who already body block IP with clones.)

Edit: Unavoidable burning also seems to be kind of a theme with most professions. Combustive Shot for all on point, group Justice Virtue for all, Sun Spirit burns for all.

Abilities like Combustive Shot, Incendiary Powder, Sun Spirit, Virtue of Justice – by design is to be a hugely bottlenecked damage source (can’t stack in intensity) but at the same time designed to add a damage component that will ensure that without proper condition removal that the attrition fight will continue to work. It essentially puts an expiry time on the fight.

This is completely spot-on and I think Jimmy would agree. The problem though is that this doesn’t justify the poor design. The proper response would be to either bring up Engineer’s ranged options (arguably difficult given the nature of grenades) or more simply bump the damage onto their actual weapon skills. Other classes have been designed without completely unavoidable damage just fine, so it can be done.

There is no reason at all for passive burns to work this way (I too have argued in the past that they’re an intentional threshold put in to limit game length). The game has no dedicated healer; any target can be brought down eventually through power alone. In fact because players bring the appropriate removals (as well as a solid mid Guard/Ele) the passive pressure punishes sidepoints play the most, where it should really be about the abilities you use and not the amulet or the traits you’ve chosen.

With all of the passive traits in the game that give added precision or a percentage direct damage increase in various conditions, or apply conditions, what makes this trait a special problem?

Mesmers for example can apply a multitude of damage and conditions just because a clone dies.

Why do we select specific traits and make threads on them? Why is one is better or worse then the other? Where does the bias come from?

All in all, I would much rather have this trait removed and have the damage I can achieve with it just have the damage spread out across the damage skills on the P/P, P/S, and rifle.

Might as well take all “on crit” items out of the game, so everyone can just wear soldiers or dire gear.

The problem with this idea, is that often, the same people complaining about removing things that offer a need for precision investment, will simply make more threads complaining about a lack of build diversity after they are done demanding all of the things that give value to other stats are removed at their demand.

There are ALL KINDS of on crit conditions including runes not to mention skills in other classes.

It is just the big hit spike damage attacks that need a tell. The “tell” of burning is the flashing condition tag. Just remove it.

jimmyimo.2089:

I"m not calling this a main source of damage; it is Engineers whom repeatedly claim that you cannot ‘nerf’ this trait because they will lack damage.

This is also not about the amount of damage it outputs, it is about that you cannot out skill it.

So again, what about all of the other passive traits on every profession that you “cannot out skill”, why do you ignore those and single this one out? Where does the clear bias come from?

Chaith.8256:

Basically, if accurate Engineer ranged damage is nerfed, it will present a lot of problems when going up against Professions that simply stay at ranged and play really defensively: Shortbow Thieves and Mesmers (who already body block IP with clones).

You mean, you will finally have a weakness like every other spec in the game?

dancingmonkey.4902:

jimmyimo.2089:

I"m not calling this a main source of damage; it is Engineers whom repeatedly claim that you cannot ‘nerf’ this trait because they will lack damage.

This is also not about the amount of damage it outputs, it is about that you cannot out skill it.

So again, what about all of the other passive traits on every profession that you “cannot out skill”, why do you ignore those and single this one out? Where does the clear bias come from?

I refuse to answer you as your statement is ridiculous. A mesmers’ clone death you can avoid, you do not have to kill clones; they can force them to “die” but this can be easily out ranged (the range on the debil clones is very small). And for your information, I am a multiclass player and am however not biased by any thing.

What my personal opinion is about Sigils such as Fire, Air and any thing that cannot be out-skilled? Its’ garbage. Remove it out of the game. However, this is about Engineers and Incendiary Powder. Make an other topic about it, this is not the right place.

->
All in all, I would much rather have this trait removed and have the damage I can achieve with it just have the damage spread out across the damage skills on the P/P, P/S, and rifle.
->

I would gladly support this idea too as long as its’ not on the auto attack and still requires the trait.

jimmyimo.2089:

Chaith.8256:

Basically, if accurate Engineer ranged damage is nerfed, it will present a lot of problems when going up against Professions that simply stay at ranged and play really defensively: Shortbow Thieves and Mesmers (who already body block IP with clones).

You mean, you will finally have a weakness like every other spec in the game?

Hah, someone sounds like they got burned to death by an Engineer. In conquest, I still consider Engineer to be A-Tier, but since you’re implying that Engineers have no weaknesses, you need to remember a few things..

Engineers have a good share of weaknesses. Combine extremely poor condition removal with no teleports and you have a profession that becomes immob-2-win against. Really bad/infrequent stunbreaks with really bad/infrequent condition removal makes an Engineer equally dead if you condi-load an Engineer, or have a Necro around to fear him to death.

jimmyimo.2089:

dancingmonkey.4902:

jimmyimo.2089:

I"m not calling this a main source of damage; it is Engineers whom repeatedly claim that you cannot ‘nerf’ this trait because they will lack damage.

This is also not about the amount of damage it outputs, it is about that you cannot out skill it.

So again, what about all of the other passive traits on every profession that you “cannot out skill”, why do you ignore those and single this one out? Where does the clear bias come from?

I refuse to answer you as your statement is ridiculous. A mesmers’ clone death you can avoid, you do not have to kill clones; they can force them to “die” but this can be easily out ranged (the range on the debil clones is very small). And for your information, I am a multiclass player and am however not biased by any thing.

What my personal opinion is about Sigils such as Fire, Air and any thing that cannot be out-skilled? Its’ garbage. Remove it out of the game. However, this is about Engineers and Incendiary Powder. Make an other topic about it, this is not the right place.

->
All in all, I would much rather have this trait removed and have the damage I can achieve with it just have the damage spread out across the damage skills on the P/P, P/S, and rifle.
->

I would gladly support this idea too as long as its’ not on the auto attack and still requires the trait.

Interesting. You suggest you have no bias, then go on to say it is okay on your chosen profession of mesmer. Defend mesmer, then go on to say this issue is about the engineer.

So again, what about all of the other passive traits on every profession that you “cannot out skill”, why do you ignore those and single this one out? Where does the clear bias come from?

jimmyimo.2089:

You mean, you will finally have a weakness like every other spec in the game?

You mean such as conditions? We have the lowest rate per minute of condition removal out of all of the professions. We have no stun breaks with less then a 40s stun break either.

As well, we lose a slot for a stun breaker or condition cleanse in order to have a kit to swap too. Thus to have a second weapon set, we have to sacrifice a utility slot. Personally, I feel that is a massive weakness.

This thread forgets that we are playing an MMORPG. You don’t out skill damage modifier, power, precision, ferocity, healing, vitality, toughness.

You want completely skill based 100% control then you need to play a fighting game where you always have a defensive button ready. MMORPG always have had passives as soon as you put on your first piece of gear. If Anet wanted everything to be unavoidable they would have made the game different and let you dodge roll infinitely or gave us some sort of always available block.

You getting vigor on crit? How do I out skill weapon swap sigils? Sigils of force? Clone on dodge? When I hit X health I get Y? There are a ton of passives in this game that the enemy can’t do anything about because we are playing a RPG.

oZii.2864:

This thread forgets that we are playing an MMORPG. You don’t out skill damage modifier, power, precision, ferocity, healing, vitality, toughness.

You want completely skill based 100% control then you need to play a fighting game. MMORPG always have had passives as soon as you put on your first piece of gear.

You getting vigor on crit? How do I out skill weapon swap sigils? Sigils of force? Clone on dodge? When I hit X health I get Y? There are a ton of passives in this game that the enemy can’t do anything about because we are playing a RPG.

Yep.

I’d like to outplay Air Sigils too, while we’re at it.

I would love to out play Unblockable necro marks.

I think some want gw2 to just be your weapon and your class no traits no gear FIGHT.

The problem is you cannot outskil it, right?

Well, you also cannot outskill any of the other on-crit procs in the game. This is true across the entire game, every profession, trait, sigil, rune.

And then we’re just talking about on-crit procs. What about on-hit procs? What about passive defensive traits that passively make you evade CCs for example? I dont know if my opponent has such a trait, but i did just lose a CC.

So you’re going to have to do much, much better if you’re going to argue in crippling Incendiary Powder and only Incendiary Powder with such an asinine mechanic.

All proc skills should be changed so they can be like any thief venom, ranger sharpening stone, or engi incendiary ammo. That way, the procs can be blinded, blocked, or dodged.

Eurantien.4632:

All proc skills should be changed so they can be like any thief venom, ranger sharpening stone, or engi incendiary ammo. That way, the procs can be blinded, blocked, or dodged.

Hrm.
There’s an interesting idea behind that.

Say for example my “Illusion crits cause Bleeding”. What if it had charges. Every X seconds, each illusion builds up a charge, which will discharge on the next attack (not crit).

This way, such procced skills are much more reliable, and also handle breaks in combat better. Enemy manages to gain distance for 15s but you close in again? Bunch of procs loaded up and ready to fire off. On the flipside, the enemy also knows that.

dancingmonkey.4902:

As well, we lose a slot for a stun breaker or condition cleanse in order to have a kit to swap too. Thus to have a second weapon set, we have to sacrifice a utility slot. Personally, I feel that is a massive weakness.

How is trading 1 utility slot for 5 weapon skills a weakness, especially if you can do this three times? This is a very silly remark. ANY other class would make this trade-off in a heartbeat, yet here you are complaining about it.
Not to mention many kits bring just that utility; condition cleansing and even stun breaks on the toolbelt (Elixir Gun’s toolbelt skill is a stunbreak on a potential 30 3/4 second cooldown).
This is without even considering that all your utility skills come with a free extra skill in the form of the toolbelt to begin with.

Don’t try to downgrade engineer. It is the single most powerful class in the game at this moment outside of PvE. Even you know that, which I bet is where all the attempts to nerf everything else and defend engineer come from.

Now you will tell me I have to prove this, and I won’t. I do not feel the need to prove something that is known by most.

On topic: I don’t know if nerfing on crit effects is the way to go when it comes to nessecary engineer nerfs.

Cygnus.6903:

Don’t try to downgrade engineer. It is the single most powerful class in the game at this moment outside of PvE. Even you know that, which I bet is where all the attempts to nerf everything else and defend engineer come from.

Interesting, because half the forums seems to sell Warriors as that. And some Thieves. And there’s a fair few threads about Necros and Mesmers being the most powerful, too.

And statistically, Guardians would easily be the top, up there with Warriors (but Guardians are more consistent, see tournament).

Why is Engineer the most powerful profession then?

Carighan.6758:

Cygnus.6903:

Don’t try to downgrade engineer. It is the single most powerful class in the game at this moment outside of PvE. Even you know that, which I bet is where all the attempts to nerf everything else and defend engineer come from.

Interesting, because half the forums seems to sell Warriors as that. And some Thieves. And there’s a fair few threads about Necros and Mesmers being the most powerful, too.

And statistically, Guardians would easily be the top, up there with Warriors (but Guardians are more consistent, see tournament).

Why is Engineer the most powerful profession then?

Gotta go with Carighan on this one just about every profession has been complained about on these forums outside of Ranger. Necros still get lumped in the conversation just because of the condition QQ. Guards have never left the meta in s/tPvP and Warrior and Thief qq threads are always on the forums. There is no conspiracy to cover up Engineers or any thing of that sort. Guards only get a semi pass from QQ just because they aren’t killing people so not many care as long as guards aren’t doing the damage. Mesmer get QQ because of PU in WvW. Ele gets QQ because of celestial ammy and strength runes.

I honestly wouldn’t even know where to begin with what is the most powerful profession if we sat down and think about it. You would have to segregate game modes because mesmers get WvW QQ but not s/tPvP QQ. Then have some sort of agreement on what makes a profession too power. If it is consistency in the meta in s/tPvP then it would be Guards and Thief as they have never really left the meta. I don’t know if that is necessarily a problem because those professions are viable. The alternative is that you nerf them so they aren’t viable? You could make the case to nerf them down so other classes can fit in the meta and all are viable but you need a standard and what class is OK/balanced to buff/nerf other classes.

Honestly I think it would just end up going no where with nobody agreeing. You could say Mesmers are weak but then someone points to helseths TOL, and someone else say PU WvW. It’s all confusing if you look at the entire picture to try to determine what is OP and what is balanced.

Eurantien.4632:

All proc skills should be changed so they can be like any thief venom, ranger sharpening stone, or engi incendiary ammo. That way, the procs can be blinded, blocked, or dodged.

There is no evidence that proc-based traits, runes or sigils are, in general, overpowered compared to “steady” traits. Yet you want to severely nerf these traits, runes and sigils across the board?

Why?

Cygnus.6903:

How is trading 1 utility slot for 5 weapon skills a weakness, especially if you can do this three times? This is a very silly remark. ANY other class would make this trade-off in a heartbeat, yet here you are complaining about it.
Not to mention many kits bring just that utility; condition cleansing and even stun breaks on the toolbelt (Elixir Gun’s toolbelt skill is a stunbreak on a potential 30 3/4 second cooldown).
This is without even considering that all your utility skills come with a free extra skill in the form of the toolbelt to begin with.

The tradeoff is a bit more then just 1 utility slot. But you want kits? First we’re going to take away your ability to weaponswap, also denying you access to two sigils.
Then we’re going to take away most of your weapon choices, till you have only 3 choices left, one of which is an off-hand exclusively.
Then we’re going to nerf these weapons to be just subpar, (yes, arenanet actually admited they did this).

Then you will have kits, that are even more subpar as a weapon, and we balance your professions around the idea that you always sacrifice atleast 1 utility slot for a weaponkit. And force you to pick up a lot of traits, or deep traits, for most of your kits to even be somewhat viable. But even that is no guarentee.

You see, the sacrifice is quite a bit more then just a utility slot. And dont bring Toolbelt into this, thats the class mechanic, like Warriors get Burst, Mesmers get Shatters, etc.

Don’t try to downgrade engineer. It is the single most powerful class in the game at this moment outside of PvE. Even you know that, which I bet is where all the attempts to nerf everything else and defend engineer come from.

This is a joke and a half. Engineers are one of the rarest professions in WvW and the second least played profession in the ToL.
Engineers are so good no one wants to play them? Or, maybe you are just talking out of the wrong orifice.

Now you will tell me I have to prove this, and I won’t. I do not feel the need to prove something that is known by most.

The “i dont have to proof anything, if you dont believe me you are just dumb” argument. Well if you provide no evidence of your claim, i dont need evidence to disregard your claim.
I guess that settles it, your just talking out of the last part of your colon, and everybody knows it.

Terrahero.9358:

Words…

I think this post procced incendiary powder.

Engineers are a rare profession, therefore they are bad. Strong logic…

In my opinion the best way to make this trait a bit more skillfull is to change the proc from on critical hit, to on hit with a weapon (not kits). This should promote a bit more skillfull play with the trait while making it more reliable.

Flamestrike is even more op – permanent burning without a single trait point!

Impossible to outskill!

Tim.6450:

In my opinion the best way to make this trait a bit more skillfull is to change the proc from on critical hit, to on hit with a weapon (not kits). This should promote a bit more skillfull play with the trait while making it more reliable.

I don’t know how this promote skillful play at all since a skilled player switches between kits and weapons very frequently anyway and/or builds with no kits that require a lot less skill juggling can just stick to their weapons.

Also, IP isn’t any different from any other procs on other profession. These complaints aren’t valid.

law.9410:

Engineers are a rare profession, therefore they are bad. Strong logic…

I don’t think anyone is saying engineers are BAD, just that there are far less viable builds for engineers, and that those viable builds really rely on a few key traits. I will definitely say that I have FAR more builds that I can do reasonably well with on my guardian and warrior than on my engineer, and that the engineer takes considerably more work to achieve results that those other two professions get. I don’t have a lot of time invested in the other classes, but looking at the subforums, there is a much wider variety of builds that are acknowledged as appropriate than you will find on the engineer subforum. In general, for engineers, if you’re not running some form of bomb/grenade build, it’s generally accepted that you’re going to be considered as sub-par in group content. A lot of it comes down to engineers seemingly being balanced on a notion of relying on conditions to boost damage, which means that traits like IP are the backbone to engineer damage builds. If engineer base damage was a bit closer to normalized in comparison to other professions, I could see this being a bit more of a legitimate concern.

Edit: Also, the cooldown on IP is 10 seconds, which means that it’s not exactly an “always on” sort of thing. My warrior has a 33% chance to apply bleeds on EVERY critical, not just one critical every 10 seconds. I don’t understand why IP would be such a big deal over other similar traits.

isolatedchimp.2510:

I don’t know how this promote skillful play at all since a skilled player switches between kits and weapons very frequently anyway and/or builds with no kits that require a lot less skill juggling can just stick to their weapons.
aren’t valid.

It promotes skillfull play since a player can now time his burn better. A player now has to hit with specific skill now to inflict burning so no grenade spamming into a point and getting a free burn. I don’t think any build without kits is even viable let alone a condition build.

isolatedchimp.2510:

Also, IP isn’t any different from any other procs on other profession. These complaints aren’t valid.

Well then let’s revert the nerf to dhuumfire and make it a master trait.

Ele is so op because they burn you whole time.

Tim.6450:

Well then let’s revert the nerf to dhuumfire and make it a master trait.

I suspect the dhuumfire nerf had less to do with it being overpowered itself, and more to do with the ability of the necromancer to spread conditions with epidemic. That’s obviously just my opinion, though.

Tim.6450:

isolatedchimp.2510:

I don’t know how this promote skillful play at all since a skilled player switches between kits and weapons very frequently anyway and/or builds with no kits that require a lot less skill juggling can just stick to their weapons.
aren’t valid.

It promotes skillfull play since a player can now time his burn better. A player now has to hit with specific skill now to inflict burning so no grenade spamming into a point and getting a free burn. I don’t think any build without kits is even viable let alone a condition build.

isolatedchimp.2510:

Also, IP isn’t any different from any other procs on other profession. These complaints aren’t valid.

Well then let’s revert the nerf to dhuumfire and make it a master trait.

My point is that for engis with any skill whatsoever this isn’t going to make ANY difference at all in regards to “more skilled play”. It’s not hard at all to switch to the main weapon to proc IP. In fact, I consider it somewhat a buff since it gives engis more control on when to proc their burning (i.e. after the opponent’s cleanse). So if your intention was a nerf, I think it fails.

As for your Dhuumfire argument, that’s on a different profession with different mechanics, weaknesses and strengths. It’s dishonest to compare these two traits. I was simply pointing out that the argument that IP has no counterplay and that it’s passive can be applied to a ton of stuff out there. Why is IP being singled out? Especially since engis aren’t dominating any meta out there with burning.

isolatedchimp.2510:

My point is that for engis with any skill whatsoever this isn’t going to make ANY difference at all in regards to “more skilled play”. It’s not hard at all to switch to the main weapon to proc IP. In fact, I consider it somewhat a buff since it gives engis more control on when to proc their burning (i.e. after the opponent’s cleanse). So if your intention was a nerf, I think it fails.

I never intended a nerf, I had a trade-off in mind. I also find it absurd that you claim that it won’t change anything while you showed that you could improve the effectiveness of the trait with skillfull play.

isolatedchimp.2510:

As for your Dhuumfire argument, that’s on a different profession with different mechanics, weaknesses and strengths. It’s dishonest to compare these two traits. I was simply pointing out that the argument that IP has no counterplay and that it’s passive can be applied to a ton of stuff out there. Why is IP being singled out? Especially since engis aren’t dominating any meta out there with burning.

Funny you just claimed that IP was just a proc like any other on another profession and was treated unjustly while dhuumfire (which is a more costly version of IP) has been in exactly the same position, but that is acceptable in your eyes.

Dhuumfire may have been a copy of IP. But the professions behind them is entirely different.

Necro’s conditions were based on not-burning. When they suddenly got a trait that added burning they got a large boost in their damage.

Engineer conditions are based on burning, its the main condition. IP adds stability, reliability, to condition engineers. But even without IP an engineer can keep Burning up 100% of the time.

IP doesnt do nearly as much for Engineers as Dhuumfire did for Necromancers.

Tim.6450:

I never intended a nerf, I had a trade-off in mind. I also find it absurd that you claim that it won’t change anything while you showed that you could improve the effectiveness of the trait with skillfull play.

Funny you just claimed that IP was just a proc like any other on another profession and was treated unjustly while dhuumfire (which is a more costly version of IP) has been in exactly the same position, but that is acceptable in your eyes.

Read my post again, Timmy. I said it doesn’t change anything regarding skillful play. Any engi with any skill whatsoever is already switching back and forth between kits and his weapon often. Having IP proc on main weapon only doesn’t change any of that. Also, buffing something doesn’t automatically mean it increases skilled play. Do I really have to explain that?

And my point about procs and IP is that I see people complain about IP but can’t put forth an argument that isn’t an argument that could be applied to other procs but nothing specific to IP or engis themselves (i.e. it’s passive, it has no counter play, etc etc). Go read Chaith’s post earlier in this thread since he explains it far better.

Terrahero.9358:

Dhuumfire may have been a copy of IP. But the professions behind them is entirely different.

Necro’s conditions were based on not-burning. When they suddenly got a trait that added burning they got a large boost in their damage.

Engineer conditions are based on burning, its the main condition. IP adds stability, reliability, to condition engineers. But even without IP an engineer can keep Burning up 100% of the time.

IP doesnt do nearly as much for Engineers as Dhuumfire did for Necromancers.

I disagree with this statement for one reason – most meta specs don’t actually take any of the many sources of burning available (and don’t have to) because of this trait. In effect, it is serving the same purpose as dhuumfire was (although engineers have more access to control, mobility, and confusion, with fewer bleeds than necros). If most engineer specs had IP to make burning more reliable, your logic would work, but, at this point, IP is so strong and powerful that they forego all other sources of burning. To me, that is a problem.

I know that many engineers here are going to defend this trait vociferously, and nothing that is said will change their opinion. However, I do think it is good to raise some of the design issues that exist with this trait. Pretty much every class has similar design problems that could be brought up, and fixing them gradually would be an excellent thing to make this game more skill-based and fun to play.

BlackBeard.2873:

I know that many engineers here are going to defend this trait vociferously, and nothing that is said will change their opinion. However, I do think it is good to raise some of the design issues that exist with this trait. Pretty much every class has similar design problems that could be brought up, and fixing them gradually would be an excellent thing to make this game more skill-based and fun to play.

I honestly used it and didn’t really notice a huge difference, so haven’t used it since. It may be more useful for a single-target build, but with most engineer “preferred” builds being AOE centered, I can’t really see Incendiary Powder being reliable in application to the intended target. Honestly, I wouldn’t care if they changed it to be more like the current iteration of Dhuumfire, and I doubt many others would either. I think most people who are questioning the cry in this post to change it are doing so because there really isn’t any driving NEED to change it. Again, engineers can’t spread conditions like necromancers, so this is a single-target only trait.

BlackBeard.2873:

I disagree with this statement for one reason – most meta specs don’t actually take any of the many sources of burning available (and don’t have to) because of this trait. In effect, it is serving the same purpose as dhuumfire was (although engineers have more access to control, mobility, and confusion, with fewer bleeds than necros). If most engineer specs had IP to make burning more reliable, your logic would work, but, at this point, IP is so strong and powerful that they forego all other sources of burning. To me, that is a problem.

I do not think you know what your talking about. Are you suggesting bomb kit is not in “the meta”? Are you forcing the sPvP meta on us as a representation of the games entirety? Amost every engineer I know takes rocket boots in WvW for the benefit of mobility + AoE burning. Bomb kit is used by many many engineers in all three game modes. Flame thrower is a very popular kit in WvW for burning through doors, incendiary ammo, and the CC available to it. Clearly you have absolutely no understanding of the meta in the least.

His logic does work. It is the only manner of ranged Application of burning to the profession. That seems fairly logical to me, as when we know the other forms of burning are all 600 range or less

BlackBeard.2873:

I know that many engineers here are going to defend this trait vociferously, and nothing that is said will change their opinion. However, I do think it is good to raise some of the design issues that exist with this trait. Pretty much every class has similar design problems that could be brought up, and fixing them gradually would be an excellent thing to make this game more skill-based and fun to play.

Defending it? No, I could care less. They could remove it right now. I never take it, because I have been a bomb kit addict since say one, and I often run P/P, and I almost always use rocket boots. This trait is pointless to me. Though players who want to run a gadget build or elixir build who would not be using rocket boots or bomb kit, may find great benefit in it. I do not think using a meta, accurate or not, as the boogey man, justifies nerfing a trait.

igmolicious.5986:

I honestly used it and didn’t really notice a huge difference, so haven’t used it since. It may be more useful for a single-target build, but with most engineer “preferred” builds being AOE centered,

I would not speculate enough to say most or not, but I have to agree that in my experience, I see a vast amount of players looking for AoE builds. The only real situation I see IP being particularly valuable is in P/S or rifle builds with all elixirs, or gadget builds, both in 1 v 1 situation.

igmolicious.5986:

I can’t really see Incendiary Powder being reliable in application to the intended target. Honestly, I wouldn’t care if they changed it to be more like the current iteration of Dhuumfire, and I doubt many others would either. I think most people who are questioning the cry in this post to change it are doing so because there really isn’t any driving NEED to change it. Again, engineers can’t spread conditions like necromancers, so this is a single-target only trait.

Yeah, with bomb kit being our highest damage out put, it is popular. Thus our AoE burning is popular. I have to agree with you igmolicious, I find it hard to understand where the complaint comes from. It seems to me it generally comes from those who do not really understand the profession or have a grasp on what most players are using.

Honestly, to me it seems like another case of using the mythical met conjured up by perception used to make complaints that are not grounded in the reality of what most players actually use.

BlackBeard.2873:

I disagree with this statement for one reason – most meta specs don’t actually take any of the many sources of burning available (and don’t have to) because of this trait. In effect, it is serving the same purpose as dhuumfire was (although engineers have more access to control, mobility, and confusion, with fewer bleeds than necros). If most engineer specs had IP to make burning more reliable, your logic would work, but, at this point, IP is so strong and powerful that they forego all other sources of burning. To me, that is a problem.

I know that many engineers here are going to defend this trait vociferously, and nothing that is said will change their opinion. However, I do think it is good to raise some of the design issues that exist with this trait. Pretty much every class has similar design problems that could be brought up, and fixing them gradually would be an excellent thing to make this game more skill-based and fun to play.

If something is good or popular doesn’t mean it’s bad or broken. Lets look at our beloved Elementalist, How often do you see a Ele spec that doesn’t have elemental attunement? How about evasive arcana?

Anyway, the trait adds reliability to burning it is also in the trait line for nades and bombs so why wouldn’t you take it?
The other master tier traits aren’t better.
3 stacks of might on heal?
Short fuse? ok thats good but not needed
Explosive powder?

That is why people take IP if there was something better to take people probably would try it. If IP was tucked away deep into inventions I doubt anyone would reach for it.

Edit:
I just looked up some old quotes from Jon Peter on the December balance preview and he basically said the same thing. It was really good adept so they moved it up because the alternatives also didn’t beat IP. He also considers IP as a good Neutral Build trait. Which I agree it is in a line your going to go into and it works for power/condi builds.

More on topic about out skilling the trait which doesn’t happen for any proc.

coglin.1867:

Defending it? No, I could care less. They could remove it right now. I never take it, because I have been a bomb kit addict since say one, and I often run P/P, and I almost always use rocket boots. This trait is pointless to me. Though players who want to run a gadget build or elixir build who would not be using rocket boots or bomb kit, may find great benefit in it. I do not think using a meta, accurate or not, as the boogey man, justifies nerfing a trait.

You do need Incendiary Powder.. Even if you play with bombs/Pistol offhand or otherwise.

You need it because when players decide to play defensively, your burn up-time with Rocket Kick, Fire Bomb, and Blowtorch becomes basically 0%. They’re all either slow abilities, with tiny reach, or both. You cannot defeat competent players who don’t want to be defeated without a certain level of reliable damage.

Other than Incendiary Powder, in terms of reliable damage, there’s pretty much nothing for Engineer. That’s why this trait gets taken as a ‘must have’ – because it’s reliable, easy to apply damage in profession devoid of unavoidable damage (by proper movement/positioning.) There’s no instant 900 range heatseeking Steal that teleports you through terrain on a 21s cd, (stealth buffed April 15th), or a heatseeking Mirror Blade / Phantasm attacks, or Air Sigils exploding on you as people poke you with Ranged Weapons.

Every profession has components of attrition based, difficult to counter – yet somewhat bottlenecked – forms of damage. It’s PvP, it’s ok to have to grab them. I could rattle off a list of a ton of sustained pressure/low counterplay abilities present on each profession. At some point we have to accept this as a necessary evil design.

Hit this topic up again when there are thriving professions that blindside you with a reliable, long range, heatseeking, surprise burst from hell, who aren’t all-in glass cannons.

Chaith.8256:

You do need Incendiary Powder.. Even if you play with bombs/Pistol offhand or otherwise.

You need it because when players decide to play defensively, your burn up-time with Rocket Kick, Fire Bomb, and Blowtorch becomes basically 0%. They’re all either slow abilities, with tiny reach, or both. You cannot defeat competent players who don’t want to be defeated without a certain level of reliable damage.

Sorry, but I do not buy this at all. You are literally stating that if a player uses good defensive play, some how, magically, all of our skills become useless and our only damage is from procs? How do you justify or explain that?

In know way, did you offer any logical explanation for your claim that others cannot land those skills. Neither rocket kick or blow torch are particularly slow or any more or less easy to avoid then other P/S skills.

Your suggesting that you would not be a capable player as an engineer Chaith, without this one single trait? If that is the case, why are you, personally not making threads to get the profession repaired?

dancingmonkey.4902:

Sorry, but I do not buy this at all. You are literally stating that if a player uses good defensive play, some how, magically, all of our skills become useless and our only damage is from procs? How do you justify or explain that?

Something to note… whenever you are pressured and forced to play defensively yourself (play on Engineer vs. teams that are aiming at you) you’ll quickly realize that your 300 range Rocket Kick becomes pretty ineffective at maintaining pressure, and too high a liability to sacrifice your positioning for. Meanwhile your Incendiary Powder is highly effective from max range. Add in a couple well aimed Grenades, and possibly doom Sigil proc, and your defensive mode pressure is actually not terrible.

Your idea of how Engineer plays seems to mostly be chilling on point, within 300 range of your enemies, spam bombing and nading the hell out of them without fear for your life.

My impression of playing Engineer vs. competent teams is that without Elixir S or Toolkit block, every group of 2+ enemies can swap-immobilize kill you in under 5 seconds. An Engineer’s primary language in teamspeak is screaming.

A lot of your skills are going to be useless a lot of the time when either party is forced into a defensive position. :P

dancingmonkey.4902:

In know way, did you offer any logical explanation for your claim that others cannot land those skills. Neither rocket kick or blow torch are particularly slow or any more or less easy to avoid then other P/S skills.

Your suggesting that you would not be a capable player as an engineer Chaith, without this one single trait? If that is the case, why are you, personally not making threads to get the profession repaired?

Well, this just isn’t true. There is plenty of logical explanations to why landing bombs or other 300 range skills can be problematic on an Engineer – it sacrifices your positioning, for one.

Despite vulnerability to immob and other conditions, I think Engineer is totally useful even in top team queues.

Chaith, I feel part of your problem here, is that you are automatically assuming that every posters comments refer exclusively to specific situations in sPvP. I saw nothing in the title or the OP that specifies this discussion is based on sPvP. I cannot speak for everyone else, but I was not being exclusive to a specific game mode in my comments.

I would appreciate it if you would not take my statements out of context and apply it to only one specific situation, and presume to declare my opinion as discount able, simply because you only see things in terms of sPvP.