Guild Wars 2

pretty please with sugar on top… if that helps

I agree with that.

Should be like daze/stun/etc.

agree with OP as well

alanis.6094:

Should be like daze/stun/etc.

Yes and no, reduce the durations for skills like Earthshaker and Supply Drop then I’ll have no problems with it stacking.

Which builds/classes in particular are you referring to, although its a pretty general thing…
Anet did change the immob back down to 3 stacks from 5…

maybe 2 stacks for pvp?

I would prefer they make it like Fear, counts as a CC and a condition, has the advantages and disadvantages of both.

Conncept.7638:

I would prefer they make it like Fear, counts as a CC and a condition, has the advantages and disadvantages of both.

What does that mean for Stability?

Conncept.7638:

I would prefer they make it like Fear, counts as a CC and a condition, has the advantages and disadvantages of both.

please no, fear shouldn’t count as a condition and “stun” at the same time.. just causes more balance problems with + -condi duration, condi immunity, condi clear+stunbreakers

Vuh.1328:

Conncept.7638:

I would prefer they make it like Fear, counts as a CC and a condition, has the advantages and disadvantages of both.

please no, fear shouldn’t count as a condition and “stun” at the same time.. just causes more balance problems with + -condi duration, condi immunity, condi clear+stunbreakers

I agree.

The game was designed for ONLY 1 stack of immobilize.

Any more changes to mechanics would be unnecessary.

all cc has to be handled a little different imo.

knockdowns should make the target immune to second cc so target has at least a chance to recover. i got knocked down 3 times in a row without the chance to react or block

immobilize: should not stack at all and again target should be immune for a few seconds before it can be immobilized again.

same with stun, stun is not such the biggest issue as we got lots of stunbreakers in the game

also chill/cripple should not stach as i have found myself many times now being either perma chilled or perma crippled.

Immobilize should not stack. Hard CCs, like knockdown, knockback + launch, should not stack either. Each hard CC should be followed by at least 0.5 sec immunity to hard CC.

They are currently way overpowered in WvWvW. It is typical to get chain CCed there. I am also using it against the enemies. When I manage to land a long-lasting immobilize on my target, he is pretty much dead if there are any allies around. Even his team mates are rarely able to save him.

Nerfing CC across the board isn’t a solution. See: Past MMORPGs.

I don’t know a better solution, but just nerfing the hell out of CC isn’t one.

I disagree that nerfing CC across the board is the way to go here. Clearly the issue at fault is Immobilise stacking – every other CC at the moment has no such problems with stacking.

Not sure where the high level decision was made to make Immobilize stack, but it clearly has not worked out for the best. Engineers will also take a hit to Net Turret completely out of the blue as well as a result of this decision – both the utility Net Turret and the Supply Crate will be hit.

The solution here is not to tackle the symptom – Long Immobilise durations resulting from certain skills that allow repeated Immobilise application – but instead to tackle the root cause of the problem – which is to eliminate Immobilise stacking.

At most , Immobilise should never stack past 2, to allow for some leniency on co-ordinated teams CC-Chaining a target. The maximum number of stacks at the moment is 3, but 5-10 seconds of Immobilise are possible, which is clearly something that is highly abusable.

Certainly, some skills with Immobilise duration could be looked at and have their duration reduced, but I do think that 2 stacks or even no stacks (again) should be seriously considered. 3 makes it too easy to initiate an Immobilise chain and maintain that CC.

And besides, wasn’t Immobilise chaining in the first place made so to make a Thief venom reliably apply its effect? I feel that the whole issue could have been sidestepped if Arenanet had merely altered the venom’s effect rather than change a mechanic that lead to all this abuse.

+1 to the argument. Immob is out of control on every front. Make it not stack and were good.

MonMalthias.4763:

I disagree that nerfing CC across the board is the way to go here. Clearly the issue at fault is Immobilise stacking – every other CC at the moment has no such problems with stacking.

I thought that was exactly what the topic was about. Did I misunderstand something?

EDIT: Oh, wait. I think I get it now. You agree there should be no stacking and disagree with a-nets incoming changes. English > me.

Reesha.7901:

MonMalthias.4763:

I disagree that nerfing CC across the board is the way to go here. Clearly the issue at fault is Immobilise stacking – every other CC at the moment has no such problems with stacking.

I thought that was exactly what the topic was about. Did I misunderstand something?

Just some posts arguing for nerfing CC (all types) rather than tackling one thing at a time.

I have never seen anyone argue that immobilize stacking was a good change. Kind of surprised this thread hadn’t popped up already.

I never really understood this change. And I also don’t understand the implementation of torment and now the crit-damage change or the change of sigills. Nobody demanded them (maybe except that you can place two sigills on a 2h) and there was/is absoluteley no need for those changes. These are fundamental interventions into game balance and they show that either the game was far from beeing balanced after release or that we’re moving more and more away from a balanced state.

Needs to be one of two things:
1. Only allow one stack
2. Treat immobilize as a CC instead of a condition. It really doesn’t make sense as a condition anyway.

I think the buff to immobilize makes sense in PvE, but it is out of place and creates frustrating /cheesy situations in both WvW and PvP.

Please reduce immobilize max stacks to 1 for WvW and PvP, leave it at 3 for PvE.

I like the fact that immobilise would be a CC. Stun breakers would stop that just like all the others which brings good play/counter play.

Arena net talked a HUGE amount on the love stream about this ability to counter play, example being dhunmfire and the likes. Yet there is little to no counter play to immobilise stacking in the way it’s done now.

Make it a CC. Allow stun breaks to clear. Stop the stacking. Gives it a counter play. Arena net logic applied.

Zaix.2480:

I have never seen anyone argue that immobilize stacking was a good change. Kind of surprised this thread hadn’t popped up already.

It has. I posted movies of being stuck in root for 20+ seconds. Why do you think it was changed from 5 stacks to 3?

It shouldn’t stack at all, of course. Root was dangerous before the change, but not a death sentence.

Totally agree.
You can counter chain CCs with stability 100% of the time (well, unless a necro corrupts you, that is, but that is still counter-play), there is no frigging way to counter immobilize spam once you get caught (have fun cleansing that specific condition among the 1000 other you have on you, only Lyssa can save you!)

Vuh.1328:

Conncept.7638:

I would prefer they make it like Fear, counts as a CC and a condition, has the advantages and disadvantages of both.

please no, fear shouldn’t count as a condition and “stun” at the same time.. just causes more balance problems with + -condi duration, condi immunity, condi clear+stunbreakers

Immobilize already scales off condition duration, is vulnerable to condition immunity, and is affected be negative condition duration. It is after all, a condition. It’s main problem is that it is a condition with nearly all the advantages of a CC and none of the drawbacks.

This wouldn’t change anything except making immobilize vulnerable to stun breakers, stun reduction, and stability; in short giving it those drawbacks it should already have as a control skill. Granted it would also now work off Sigil of Impact and Sigil of Paralyzation, but that’s not that big of a deal compared to all the new hard-counters it would have.

I fully support this. Being 5+ seconds immobilized is just silly and unfun.

I think there is a bug with immobilize cleansing. It is ALWAYS the last-out condition it seems, and doesn’t even cleanse right when it should. I say this as an ele who frequently uses ether renewal which removes condis every tick (~0.5s). I get 1 stack of immob on me and nothing else, and it doesn’t cleanse for 2 s or so. If you get an immob on you and have 3 condis on you, immob is usually the last off it seems. If there is a bug, it could explain why immob is so OP.

BlackBeard.2873:

I think there is a bug with immobilize cleansing. It is ALWAYS the last-out condition it seems, and doesn’t even cleanse right when it should. I say this as an ele who frequently uses ether renewal which removes condis every tick (~0.5s). I get 1 stack of immob on me and nothing else, and it doesn’t cleanse for 2 s or so. If you get an immob on you and have 3 condis on you, immob is usually the last off it seems. If there is a bug, it could explain why immob is so OP.

Sounds crazy and a long shot. Put this exact statement into the bug forum. See if they can investigate it.

LelouchViBritannia.3607:

I fully support this. Being 5+ seconds immobilized is just silly and unfun.

When they buffed Immobilize to 5 stacks, who the hell in ArenaNet staff thought it would be ‘fun’ to be a sitting duck for 5+ seconds?!

Imagine playing League of Legends and Luxs snare lasts for 5 seconds.

It completely ruins fast pace and any chance for recovery.

I use immob allot.. But even i agree on this.
I use immob to land my burst.. Not to stack it where there is no benefit for me atleast..

But where it does is when you get 3+ immob from different people.. Its annoying.
but thats been awhile… Its now max3

I can cleanse it, but i get it if you cant remove it its going to be very annoying.. Stun can take some time also but not 10+ seconds

I think max2 is enough.

I feel like all CC should be governed by high-level traits and armor bonuses, such that you really really have to spec specifically for them in order for them to work. Im talking like remove or reduce CC on base weapon skills and minor traits, and put somewhat stronger buffs to CC on grandmaster traits. Maybe change some rune sets to buff CC, but only on the 6th rune slot. That way DPS and CC builds can be mutually exclusive.

Agree with the OP

“A turret needs a nerf; let that sink in.” Yea, continue to let that statement sink in. I don’t think it has sunk far enough.

Dont think it should ever have been made a stackable, it was a more then powerful condition before anyway. Also took more coordination to land proper immobilize-chains.

And this doesnt just go for pvp.

I too think the immob stacking has got a bit crazy:

- Individuals, such as engineers and thieves can stack a large amount of immobilize on a target (6+ seconds).

- Immobilize is that it’s just as good as stun sometimes because certain abilities won’t trigger properly due to the inability for the player to turn around. Not to mention it can be covered, which is not something that can be done with stuns or dazes.

- It’s true that certain skills are hard counters to immobilize (i.e. rocket boots), but now that’s making players take an immobilize breaker and a stun breaker on the bar at the same time.

For changing it:

- Additional applications of immobilize don’t apply the full duration

or

- Players can still rotate their character when immobilized (like NPCs can)

It’s funny that they’re nerfing immobilize on something like net turret but then also making things stackable. I’d rather have the stacking effect of immobilize reduced and not have individual immobilize skills weakened.

I think Immobilize is good where it is, so long as it’s mostly a single-target thing. AE immos need to be looked at. If a single target can be rooted for long that can be used in a smart way in PvE, and won’t cause a major balance issue in PvP.

Yes please. Immobilise never ever needed to stack. It’s already more powerful than every other form of cc because it can be buried under other conditions and therefore not guaranteed to be removed when cleansing unless you’re fortunate to be a class that has a cleanse specifically targeting immobilise.

I went to Tranquility, got stuck with 10 seconds of immobilize.

THIS IS NOT OKAY ARENANET!

Want to balance PvP? Then fix Immobilize!!

Immobilize is a good control skill. Actually I feel that it SHOULD control your enemy. Every class beside the Elementalist have a really good condition cleanse. It won’t hurt to get one more condition cleanse. Since most players play the warrior I think that the Berserker’s Stance will help too.

I think immobilize is for ranged classes instead of melee classes as the burst Mesmer along with Sword/Sword. I think that the Elementalist’s Elemental Surge completely justifies a lot of immobilize. Anyway its just useful as a staff Elementalist.

No.
Engi’s net turret already get nerfed and no other class can stack immobile alone (except thief with devourer venom or body, but who does that).
You should be promoted to avoid immobilize or situations where multiple stacks of it can be applied to you.
Not the other way. Immobile should NOT be a condition that you can afford to wait out. Don’t dumb the game down.

Or just learn to carry Condition Removal? I have a whole build that focuses on immobilize, and it is not overpowered in any way shape or form, beacuse all anyone has to do is blow their nose and they lose 3 conditions.

Argon.1563:

Or just learn to carry Condition Removal? I have a whole build that focuses on immobilize, and it is not overpowered in any way shape or form, beacuse all anyone has to do is blow their nose and they lose 3 conditions.

There’s no way to guarantee that condi removal removes immobilize, that’s the problem. And most classes don’t have a “remove all conditions” skill, most of them remove only a limited amount of conditions.

LelouchViBritannia.3607:

Argon.1563:

Or just learn to carry Condition Removal? I have a whole build that focuses on immobilize, and it is not overpowered in any way shape or form, beacuse all anyone has to do is blow their nose and they lose 3 conditions.

There’s no way to guarantee that condi removal removes immobilize, that’s the problem. And most classes don’t have a “remove all conditions” skill, most of them remove only a limited amount of conditions.

Bingo. Immobilize has the LOWEST priority.
________________________________________________
For example, a Necromancer uses Signet of Spite then Dark Pact. You’d think the Immobilize from Dark Pact gets removed because of the order that was applied.

NO!

Then a Warrior comes with Pin Down, now that’s 7+ seconds of immobilize that cannot be cured because of every other condition.
__________________________________________________________
So, fix the priority?

That still leaves the problem of most tPvP matches, skilled teams SPAM THE HELL out of AoE immobilize trying to focus people.
Leaving both teams fighting Immobilize more than fighting each other.
__________________________________________________________

Oh AND IT’S NOT FUN.

The answer is so clear! Nerf net turret. /sarcasm

Here here!
Yes. Remove immob stacking. It is not helping the growth of the game in any way.

Condi/immob removal.

Condi immunity, Condi reduction.

no one is happy with the changes to immobilize except for the scrubs who are so bad at the game they NEED their opponent to not be able to move in order to win. This is coming from someone who uses s/s longbow condition warrior. Nerf it back to how it was!

I am torn. How many of you posters play a melee damage class?
One of the key problems of the game has been that ranged damage can’t whittle anyone down very much before they are in “smashface” mode.
The immobilize buff helped.
But it would be pretty boring to just sit.
On the other hand, it is pretty frustrating to be ranged damage with melee in your face in seconds.

If it is toned down, there needs to be something done to make melee’s ability to close range far less effective.