Guild Wars 2

I think ferocity (crit damage nerf) is goin to hit some classes in different ways. Maybe crit damage nerf is a good thing for 1shot thief build (this is just an exemple). These build destroy the game because imo there isn’t fun in a fight like this.

The question is:

Other dps classes are going to suck against condition build? Dps classes have to spent point in 3 different stat to do good damage. Condition damage classes just in 1 and they can spent the rest point in defense stat.

Are condition build goin to destroy dps roaming build more than now? (N.B don’t talk about thieves).

I’d like to read your opinion (and maybe some anet dev opinion)

Condition specs are already great for roaming and will become even more popular.

style.6173:

Condition specs are already great for roaming and will become even more popular.

i think the same thing :-(

Obviously ferocity nerf is a short sighted attempt to prepare PvE+WWW to a new vertical progression step.

Its Always something the game wasn t designed for and the usual huge mistake that will have repercussions for months until the next balance patch…..

Most people on forum thinks it should nt be done, and i wonder why CDI doesn t apply….

If anything, make it only a PvE thing and leave www out

I could argue that soldier gear is popular with some fractions. It’s a true statement, but it doesn’t give the entire picture.

I’m not much for speculating, but all berserker builds will be hit in all aspects of the game (big surprise), and maybe harder when it comes to roaming. Then again, all builds doesn’t shine everywhere.

Bunker condition builds are superior even now when it comes to WvW roaming. This will only solidify that aspect.

The problem as I see it is the misconception is so many players minds. On the whole, direct damage builds out damage condition damage. We have had discussion in the past in which we have threads displaying all of the math proving this. Soldiers gear for example, out damages Dire gear by a fair bit. Dire gear has to have 50% condition duration to even compare, mathematically speaking. The problem is, that so many posters simply regurgitate other post or threads here, without actually having tested anything or developed any facts for themselves.

With that in mind, I do not see ferocity causing any actually reason for anything to shift. The problem isn’t damage in actuality, or how it changes, but with the misconception of the general players base who is more apt to spew misinformation based on presumption and conjecture, or to simply regurgitate and believe what they read, rather then to actually test builds and keep track of damage facts instead od working of said presumption or feeling.

Condi > Power in WvW small scale and roaming

As for OP talking about a 1 shot thief build….no such thing.

1 Shot warrior builds…..ya they are there

I think it should be done if it’s an initial step towards condition damage being properly balanced. This isn’t me hoping conditions is nerfed to ground since I frankly carry far too much condition cleansing for condition classes to do anything against me anyways <— The problem.

coglin.1867:

We have had discussion in the past in which we have threads displaying all of the math proving this. Soldiers gear for example, out damages Dire gear by a fair bit. Dire gear has to have 50% condition duration to even compare, mathematically speaking. The problem is, that so many posters simply regurgitate other post or threads here, without actually having tested anything or developed any facts for themselves.

Condition builds aren’t better than power builds because conditions can deal more optimal damage. Conditions are better because: there are way more counters to power damage, you need to take specific gear, traits and skills to counter conditions, power attacks tend to be way more telegraphed, damaging traits for condi builds give you more conditions which overwhelms any reasonable amount of condi removal and they can deal similar damage to glass cannons from range with the armor/hp of a bunker.

Does your math account for conditions ignoring protection, armor and weakness? Can math account for the fact that conditions get applied without warning on crit? What formula did you use to account for the fact that you can snare and kite most power builds to mitigate their damage, but that is way less effective against condition builds? Do your tests account for the fact that power builds are dealing zero damage the instant they stop hitting somebody? CC, healing, running away, rezzing, finishing and using defensive skills like shield stance means a power build is dealing literally no damage. Condition builds can stop actively attacking for a few moments and the damage is still ticking away.

You’d only need to “test” builds and grab a calculator if you don’t actually play the game. There are lots of things elementary school math can’t account for. As you said, the problem isn’t damage; the problem is the damage in addition to all the other advantages condition builds have going for them. You shouldn’t just regurgitate some numbers you saw without actually playing the game and thinking beyond “this number is higher.”

coglin.1867:

The problem as I see it is the misconception is so many players minds. On the whole, direct damage builds out damage condition damage. We have had discussion in the past in which we have threads displaying all of the math proving this. Soldiers gear for example, out damages Dire gear by a fair bit. Dire gear has to have 50% condition duration to even compare, mathematically speaking. The problem is, that so many posters simply regurgitate other post or threads here, without actually having tested anything or developed any facts for themselves.

With that in mind, I do not see ferocity causing any actually reason for anything to shift. The problem isn’t damage in actuality, or how it changes, but with the misconception of the general players base who is more apt to spew misinformation based on presumption and conjecture, or to simply regurgitate and believe what they read, rather then to actually test builds and keep track of damage facts instead od working of said presumption or feeling.

Mathematics and theory is totally different then what actually happens in game and honestly you can blow most of those numbers out the window.

Really isn’t difficult at all to have 50% condition duration, just use the condition duration food and 10 points into a condition duration tree and there you have it. This doesn’t include going further into condition trees, traits that prolong conditions as well as sigils and runes.

It is also a matter of passive vs active play. For example take a mesmer and a thief. Arguably, condition builds fare better against both of these classes and that isn’t just because they tend to have the lowest condition removal.

A mesmer using a staff has so many ways to mitigate damage. Phase retreat, Blurred Frenzy, Blink, Distortion, etc. It makes it difficult to land burst damage.

A thief has a lot of stealth, blind, evade, shadowstepping abilities, mobility, etc. Which can also make it difficult to land burst damage.

What deals more damage? One hit that deals 600 damage? or One hit that deals 3 stacks of bleeds that tick for 100 and last 5 seconds and also deals 100 direct damage? My point is that condition damage continues to apply pressure on opponents even when you are not hitting them. That is something that mathematics doesn’t take into account. If you look at things on a "per hit" basis, you can see why condition damage can in many situations outdps direct damage.

It also isn’t just about damage dealing conditions. When people talk about a condition meta, people are also talking about non damage dealing conditions. Chill is very deadly, weakness reduces dodging AND direct damage, poison has the effect of dealing damage and reducing healing. Even cripples suck to have on you, immobilize even more so, etc. They also help in covering damage dealing conditions. This is made a lot worse when you have 50% condition duration.

Roaming falls into group roaming and solo roaming.

Is group roaming better with condition builds or power? I would say group power is far better then group conditions. This is represented by the fact ingame that you are far more likely to come across 5 power builds then 5 condition builds as I have only seen a 5+ man condition group like 1 time all P/D thieves.

You will have mix and match on most occasions though.

That leaves solo roaming or 1vX scenarios. You come across 1v2 scenario running your power build and a 1v2 will be more probable to pull out if it is vs 2 power builds but if it is a mix of power+condition build then it is harder to pull off since you are dealing with 2 forms of main damage.

Now if you are winning 1v2’s then you are probably beating players that aren’t equally skilled or you Rock vs 2 scissors. That aside 1v2’s just aren’t possible with good skilled players.

You running your best solo roaming build designed to kill and come across any other class+build grouped with a staff bunker guardian designed to do nothing but support and heal basically bodyguard for the damage dealer you should lose everytime no matter what your running.

Roamers run roamer builds I roam most times but the ferocity change won’t do much. If you where going to lose to the condition build now you would have lost to it after.

killahmayne.9518:

It also isn’t just about damage dealing conditions. When people talk about a condition meta, people are also talking about non damage dealing conditions. Chill is very deadly, weakness reduces dodging AND direct damage, poison has the effect of dealing damage and reducing healing. Even cripples suck to have on you, immobilize even more so, etc. They also help in covering damage dealing conditions. This is made a lot worse when you have 50% condition duration.

Based on the fact that power builds have just as much access to control conditions, I have difficulty seeing how you expect this to aid your point in any way what so ever. It is a very thin line of reasoning to suggest that DoT damage users are more powerful then direct damage users based on crowd control they have equal access too.

coglin.1867:

killahmayne.9518:

It also isn’t just about damage dealing conditions. When people talk about a condition meta, people are also talking about non damage dealing conditions. Chill is very deadly, weakness reduces dodging AND direct damage, poison has the effect of dealing damage and reducing healing. Even cripples suck to have on you, immobilize even more so, etc. They also help in covering damage dealing conditions. This is made a lot worse when you have 50% condition duration.

Based on the fact that power builds have just as much access to control conditions, I have difficulty seeing how you expect this to aid your point in any way what so ever. It is a very thin line of reasoning to suggest that DoT damage users are more powerful then direct damage users based on crowd control they have equal access too.

Seeing as how you ignored the bulk of my post and decided to argue this point as opposed to the others I made, I guess I will assume that you can’t argue with me on those points.

But to address the part of my post that you quoted, it really is quite simple. Power builds do not invest in condition duration as condition builds do. Most condition builds take advantage of the +40% condition duration food. This turns a 5 second cripple into a 7 second cripple, a 6 second chill to an 8 and a half second chill (approx), a 7 second weakness to a 9 and a half to 10 second weakness, etc. Plus any other traits, runes, sigils that they may use to extend these durations even further. To discount how much of a difference this makes in roaming is just silly. Being rooted by immobilize by just an extra second makes a difference.

While it is true that power based builds can have just as much access to these conditions, consider this. A Necro invests 30 points into cursed for withering precision (causes weakness on crit). It is most likely a condition necro that will invest in this trait. Because the line gives +300 condition damage and precision. A Power Necro isn’t going to invest that heavily in what is more of a condition-based tree and also the fact that they will have to give up either 30 in spite or 30 in deathshroud (arguably essential in a power Necro build). In this example the condition necro has more access to a particular non-damaging condition (weakness). While the power necro could in theory do that, it doesn’t come without major sacrifices, sacrifices which really aren’t justifiable, which is the point I am trying to make.

Condition builds, in reality will have more uptime and better access to conditions. Because that is what they concentrate on and build for. Power builds will usually have less uptime and less access to conditions. Because they have to worry a lot about how much power, precision, crit damage they have, etc. It is a lot more difficult for a power build to concentrate on their access to conditions and their uptime because of this without compromising some other part of their build.

If you considered my whole post, you would also have understood that non-damaging conditions is only one of the many reasons I had suggested of why the condition meta is what it is. It never was my whole entire reasoning. These non-damaging conditions also have the extra bonus in condition builds of covering some of the damaging conditions besides the obvious control, CC and utility that they provide.

Theories are all nice and dandy, but often they never work the way you think they do in the actual game. Theoretically a lot of builds should be OP, theoretically warriors should be able to completely destroy every class because of high HP and high toughness, etc. That is why it is important to take a predominantly pragmatic approach to balance rather then consider everything on paper and in a vacuum. Because in a vacuum Killshot is extremely OP, because it can one shot zero toughness uplevels. When in fact it has a long, obvious cast-time, requires one to go full zerker, is easily dodged, blocked and obstructed.

Tei.1704:

coglin.1867:

We have had discussion in the past in which we have threads displaying all of the math proving this. Soldiers gear for example, out damages Dire gear by a fair bit. Dire gear has to have 50% condition duration to even compare, mathematically speaking. The problem is, that so many posters simply regurgitate other post or threads here, without actually having tested anything or developed any facts for themselves.

Condition builds aren’t better than power builds because conditions can deal more optimal damage. Conditions are better because: there are way more counters to power damage, you need to take specific gear, traits and skills to counter conditions, power attacks tend to be way more telegraphed, damaging traits for condi builds give you more conditions which overwhelms any reasonable amount of condi removal and they can deal similar damage to glass cannons from range with the armor/hp of a bunker.

Does your math account for conditions ignoring protection, armor and weakness? Can math account for the fact that conditions get applied without warning on crit? What formula did you use to account for the fact that you can snare and kite most power builds to mitigate their damage, but that is way less effective against condition builds? Do your tests account for the fact that power builds are dealing zero damage the instant they stop hitting somebody? CC, healing, running away, rezzing, finishing and using defensive skills like shield stance means a power build is dealing literally no damage. Condition builds can stop actively attacking for a few moments and the damage is still ticking away.

You’d only need to “test” builds and grab a calculator if you don’t actually play the game. There are lots of things elementary school math can’t account for. As you said, the problem isn’t damage; the problem is the damage in addition to all the other advantages condition builds have going for them. You shouldn’t just regurgitate some numbers you saw without actually playing the game and thinking beyond “this number is higher.”

This^

Condition meta will not only continue, but expand.

Also, I am very curious about those numbers. Is that simply auto-attacking?

Cygnus.6903:

Tei.1704:

coglin.1867:

We have had discussion in the past in which we have threads displaying all of the math proving this. Soldiers gear for example, out damages Dire gear by a fair bit. Dire gear has to have 50% condition duration to even compare, mathematically speaking. The problem is, that so many posters simply regurgitate other post or threads here, without actually having tested anything or developed any facts for themselves.

Condition builds aren’t better than power builds because conditions can deal more optimal damage. Conditions are better because: there are way more counters to power damage, you need to take specific gear, traits and skills to counter conditions, power attacks tend to be way more telegraphed, damaging traits for condi builds give you more conditions which overwhelms any reasonable amount of condi removal and they can deal similar damage to glass cannons from range with the armor/hp of a bunker.

Does your math account for conditions ignoring protection, armor and weakness? Can math account for the fact that conditions get applied without warning on crit? What formula did you use to account for the fact that you can snare and kite most power builds to mitigate their damage, but that is way less effective against condition builds? Do your tests account for the fact that power builds are dealing zero damage the instant they stop hitting somebody? CC, healing, running away, rezzing, finishing and using defensive skills like shield stance means a power build is dealing literally no damage. Condition builds can stop actively attacking for a few moments and the damage is still ticking away.

You’d only need to "test" builds and grab a calculator if you don’t actually play the game. There are lots of things elementary school math can’t account for. As you said, the problem isn’t damage; the problem is the damage in addition to all the other advantages condition builds have going for them. You shouldn’t just regurgitate some numbers you saw without actually playing the game and thinking beyond "this number is higher."

This^

Condition meta will not only continue, but expand.

Also, I am very curious about those numbers. Is that simply auto-attacking?

I would also be curious to see the math on that as well and how that was tested.

nerf pizza
see where we stand

insanemaniac.2456:

nerf pizza
see where we stand

Play s/tPvP and you can see where you stand without pizza. sPvP already has issues with conditions so with or without pizza must not matter much.

Cygnus.6903:

Also, I am very curious about those numbers. Is that simply auto-attacking?

killahmayne.9518:

I would also be curious to see the math on that as well and how that was tested.

These two post make the point in themselves. You both do not have the slightest idea what condition builds do compared to power builds. You both are suggesting condition damage builds are OP or more powerful damage wise, then go on to point out that you would like to see the damage comparison numbers. Clearly displaying that your making accusations without having the slightest idea what the facts actually are.

Why are you here complaining about conditions, and arguing against them, when you don’t even have a clue that they are out damaged by direct damage builds?

Take engineers for example, they have 3 weapons combo choices, Pistol/Pistol, Pistol/Shield, and Rifle. The rifle is basically all power oriented while pistols are condition damage. Rare veggie pizza adds 0 damage to 3 of the 4 damage skills, while for example the +100 power food adds a total of 11.5% damage to the rifle skills total. When total damage of the pistols with rare veggie pizza are combined it is a 7.7% damage increase. Giving the power weapon with power food a 3.5% damage increase over the condition focused weapons with rare veggie pizza.

oZii.2864:

insanemaniac.2456:

nerf pizza
see where we stand

Play s/tPvP and you can see where you stand without pizza. sPvP already has issues with conditions so with or without pizza must not matter much.

- hambow (in their sights)
- condi nades ( IP + shrapnel + shrapnel nade are the offenders)
- dumbfire (in their sights)

other condi builds arent meta. ok?

coglin.1867:

Cygnus.6903:

Also, I am very curious about those numbers. Is that simply auto-attacking?

killahmayne.9518:

I would also be curious to see the math on that as well and how that was tested.

These two post make the point in themselves. You both do not have the slightest idea what condition builds do compared to power builds. You both are suggesting condition damage builds are OP or more powerful damage wise, then go on to point out that you would like to see the damage comparison numbers. Clearly displaying that your making accusations without having the slightest idea what the facts actually are.

Why are you here complaining about conditions, and arguing against them, when you don’t even have a clue that they are out damaged by direct damage builds?

Take engineers for example, they have 3 weapons combo choices, Pistol/Pistol, Pistol/Shield, and Rifle. The rifle is basically all power oriented while pistols are condition damage. Rare veggie pizza adds 0 damage to 3 of the 4 damage skills, while for example the +100 power food adds a total of 11.5% damage to the rifle skills total. When total damage of the pistols with rare veggie pizza are combined it is a 7.7% damage increase. Giving the power weapon with power food a 3.5% damage increase over the condition focused weapons with rare veggie pizza.

Another solid argument, well done. Why didn’t you respond to the earlier post explaining why condition damage is OP?

Everybody knows direct damage has higher DPS potential. That’s basically why direct damage > condition damage in PvE. There are just a plethora of reasons that make condition damage more powerful in PvP.

Basic math means close to nothing in a game with this many variables.

But ok teacher teacher, teach us.

A lot of solo and duo roamers run conditions, but not many small groups do. Most 5 man groups I’ve seen are power based. Large groups are almost never built around conditions.

Larger groups that are good against power are also good against conditions due to all of the guardians and warriors. For small groups both power and condition works unless you are fighting a group built around toughness and permanent uptime on protection, in which case conditions is better. If you aren’t facing such a group, then power is fine.

Conditions are very strong for solo and duo since you don’t have to worry about a ton of group cleansing. There are power builds that are just as good for this, however.

Both cygnus an coglin have good points and both are right.

Coglins math supports the damage output on a spreadsheet.

Cygnus is correct when it comes to PvP I won’t say condition builds are OP that part I don’t agree with. What makes condition builds effective is ease of application.

Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing.

Once the DOT is applied it is working no matter what happens until it is cleansed or run its course. Now the direct damage has to keep being applied. TTK favors direct damage but you rely more on key attacks.

Any good condition build out there has a condition applying auto attack usually bleeds and it also usually has ranged.

There is a reason conditions thieves roll with P/D instead of D/D death blossom spam.

Without rehashing what has been said many times in many threads. A condition build has a much easier time applying the damage then power builds and usually has the option of maintaining pressure through ranged auto attacks that is why they are so effective.

coglin.1867:

Cygnus.6903:

Also, I am very curious about those numbers. Is that simply auto-attacking?

killahmayne.9518:

I would also be curious to see the math on that as well and how that was tested.

These two post make the point in themselves. You both do not have the slightest idea what condition builds do compared to power builds. You both are suggesting condition damage builds are OP or more powerful damage wise, then go on to point out that you would like to see the damage comparison numbers. Clearly displaying that your making accusations without having the slightest idea what the facts actually are.

Why are you here complaining about conditions, and arguing against them, when you don’t even have a clue that they are out damaged by direct damage builds?

Take engineers for example, they have 3 weapons combo choices, Pistol/Pistol, Pistol/Shield, and Rifle. The rifle is basically all power oriented while pistols are condition damage. Rare veggie pizza adds 0 damage to 3 of the 4 damage skills, while for example the +100 power food adds a total of 11.5% damage to the rifle skills total. When total damage of the pistols with rare veggie pizza are combined it is a 7.7% damage increase. Giving the power weapon with power food a 3.5% damage increase over the condition focused weapons with rare veggie pizza.

Ok, suppose that we both don’t know what we are talking about, you still haven’t refuted or disproved any of our arguments. We also disproved how basing everything on theory and math isn’t nearly anything close to how things work when you actually play the game. If I knew absolutely nothing then why haven’t you made any good counterarguments?

And now you try to counter with even more math and theory which we already established is faulty in itself when talking about conditions and balance. First of all you are not even considering condition procs on crit. Second of all you are using percentages. Percentages only tell you how they scale, you mention nothing about absolute and baseline values. Third of all you can’t conclude anything from making that comparison that therefore power &gt; condition damage. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

If you had read and understood my post (which again you have failed to) you would understand that I never once did say that condition damage outdamages power flat out. In fact I agree that power &gt; condition damage in terms of raw damage output. That is why Berserker builds are favoured in PvE, everybody knows that it is obvious.

What I did say however, or what I was trying to get at is that due to the mechanics of the game, (i.e: evading, kiting, the endure pains, blocking, etc) condition builds often times outdps direct damage in wvw. I made the example in my previous post that one hit from a power build did 600-700 damage. Where as one hit from a condition build did 100 damage, +2 stacks of bleed for 5 seconds at 100 per tick. That is 1,100 damage. Condition damage just takes longer time to ramp up that is it and this is the exact type of phenomenon that is seen. Unless you are constantly inflicting direct damage (which we know in a real world scenario isn’t a reasonable assumption like in PvE). Especially if you are a full PVT build vs a full CVT, most classes in CVT will deal more damage when it comes to WvW and roaming because of all the extraneous variables you have to consider. Conditions continue to deal damage even when you aren’t landing any hits, direct damage relies on landing all of your hits and arguably direct damage is more easily mitigated then condition damage.

And again, you make the assumption that I do not know what I am talking about based solely on my interest on seeing the numbers that you are referring to. Even if I didn’t do the calculations and math, you don’t need that to see that conditions especially in a 1,2,3 v X aspect are very passive in nature compared to direct damage and it is because of this passivity and ease that DPS is applied that they have become popular and effective roaming builds. There is a reason why people would roam in CVT gear and why almost nobody would roam pure PVT gear is there not?

I also agree with the notion that condition builds become less effective if you have let’s say a 5v5 scenario. That is because of group cleansing and the fact that 5v5’s aren’t about attrition. It is more about focusing targets, getting them down as fast as possible to make it a 4v5. That is not to say condition builds aren’t effective in this scenario, and that you should just run all power builds (it’s good to mix it up with 1 or 2 condition based builds). It is just that there is a tapering and drop off some point down the line for certain condition-based builds (i.e condition warriors would be utterly crap and ineffective in most 5v5 scenarios compared to a power warrior).

What is so theoretical? A dodge causes the direct damage to fail to do damage. A dodge fails to apply the condition. Blocks, fail to apply conditions, just as they do with a direct damage attack. You mention “endure pain" as if it is relevant, have you ever heard of “Berserker Stance”, it has an 8s duration, while “endure pain” has a 4 s duration. That is double the duration of the skill that prevents conditions compared to the skill that prevents direct damage, with the same cool down.

You are implying that direct damage skills are for some reason more difficult to make contact with then condition applying skills. That is simply not true. It seems to be a common argument though. I have yet to have anyone prove to me that it is, in any way, easier to land the skills that apply conditions then it is the ones that apply direct damage.

When you focus on the idea that CC conditions are effected by stats that condition builds use, it appears you also seem to forget all of the knock downs, knock backs, and blow out effects that direct damage skills apply, or other CC such as guardians ring of warding.

coglin.1867:

What is so theoretical? A dodge causes the direct damage to fail to do damage. A dodge fails to apply the condition. Blocks, fail to apply conditions, just as they do with a direct damage attack. You mention “endure pain" as if it is relevant, have you ever heard of “Berserker Stance”, it has an 8s duration, while “endure pain” has a 4 s duration. That is double the duration of the skill that prevents conditions compared to the skill that prevents direct damage, with the same cool down.

You are implying that direct damage skills are for some reason more difficult to make contact with then condition applying skills. That is simply not true. It seems to be a common argument though. I have yet to have anyone prove to me that it is, in any way, easier to land the skills that apply conditions then it is the ones that apply direct damage.

When you focus on the idea that CC conditions are effected by stats that condition builds use, it appears you also seem to forget all of the knock downs, knock backs, and blow out effects that direct damage skills apply, or other CC such as guardians ring of warding.

Have you ever wonder why berserker stance is 8 secs and endure pain is only 4 secs? Once you figure that out, it is /thread.

But really, it is comparing apples to oranges.

I will probably not reply or comment in this thread again but I want to throw this out there. Anet is nerfing condi build albeit slowly. e.g. dhumfire nerf next patch. Also, if condition wasn’t so powerful you wouldn’t have the monster warrior that it is today and Anet would have ever put diamond skin in for ele. We can think whatever we want to but at the end of the day, Anet decides what is OP and what needs to be toned down. You can clearly see it in the balancing patch that they do want to tone down condition to an extend by putting in more cleanses (e.g. increase cleases for Mesmer on heal trait or hard counters).

oZii.2864:

Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing.

What is that for an argument?
You got hit and still can counter it makes condition more powerful then direct damage, where you get hit and you eat all that damage. There is no button that heals you for the direct damage you received during the last 5 seconds (That’s what cleanses theoretically do).

Conditions have the same way of preventing the damage as direct damage (dodge, block, blind, stealth, stuns, …) There are skills that make you immune to damage (some for conditions/direct damage only and some for both). Just because the conditions continue to tick, does not mean that those things have no effect. The damage you may receive during a dodge role was applied earlier and if you would stop that as well it would be like a heal to previous dealt direct damage (same as above).

unleashed.8679:

oZii.2864:

Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing.

What is that for an argument?
You got hit and still can counter it makes condition more powerful then direct damage, where you get hit and you eat all that damage. There is no button that heals you for the direct damage you received during the last 5 seconds (That’s what cleanses theoretically do).

Conditions have the same way of preventing the damage as direct damage (dodge, block, blind, stealth, stuns, …) There are skills that make you immune to damage (some for conditions/direct damage only and some for both). Just because the conditions continue to tick, does not mean that those things have no effect. The damage you may receive during a dodge role was applied earlier and if you would stop that as well it would be like a heal to previous dealt direct damage (same as above).

A large part of your damage is from auto attacks in a condition build and usually ranged.

There really is no consequence in missing with a auto attack because it has no cooldown and short cast time. Take a terrormancer who can put alot of pressure on you just from scepter auto attacks also proccing dhuumfire while at range.

Really how many melee condition builds do you see out there? S/S LB warriors are the only ones that come to my mind as truly melee with application.

>>Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing

This statement is not logical. ONCE damage is applied via a direct damage attack I have already taken the damage in a single strike. The only way I can gain the health back is disengage from battle or heal.

Condition damage is DOT meaning the direct damage is much lower. You can not compare damage after the fact that Conditions apply and ignore the upfront damage already taken from a direct damage attack.

If my direct damage Heartseeker did 6k in damage and my condition type attack did 400 in direct damage and needs to be stacked to 8 more stacks and NOT cleansed for the next 6 seconds to even come close to that heartseeker , how can you conclude the Condition damage was easier to apply?

The autoattack direct damage of ranged weapons tends to be low when compared to melee weapons . The autoattack of a person specced for power over conditions on a a weapon set do much more direct damage with their autoattack.

If one is designed as a melee type fighter and allows an enemy to fight and remain at range then one deserves to lose the fight every time. It does not matter if that person at range is a condition spec or a direct damage spec.

babazhook.6805:

>>Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing

This statement is not logical. ONCE damage is applied via a direct damage attack I have already taken the damage in a single strike. The only way I can gain the health back is disengage from battle or heal.

Condition damage is DOT meaning the direct damage is much lower. You can not compare damage after the fact that Conditions apply and ignore the upfront damage already taken from a direct damage attack.

If my direct damage Heartseeker did 6k in damage and my condition type attack did 400 in direct damage and needs to be stacked to 8 more stacks and NOT cleansed for the next 6 seconds to even come close to that heartseeker , how can you conclude the Condition damage was easier to apply?

The autoattack direct damage of ranged weapons tends to be low when compared to melee weapons . The autoattack of a person specced for power over conditions on a a weapon set do much more direct damage with their autoattack.

If one is designed as a melee type fighter and allows an enemy to fight and remain at range then one deserves to lose the fight every time. It does not matter if that person at range is a condition spec or a direct damage spec.

The condition fight doesn’t usually care about his direct damage numbers but what his bleeds are ticking for. Just like when I’m on my ele and I use ring of earth I don’t care what my bleeds are ticking for because I’m not conditions.

DOT builds and the players that play those builds made a decided choice to play DOT. They don’t care that they can’t backstab for 9k.

Sure condition builds do direct damage but for most that is a formality and part of the game. The main form of damage from condition builds is the damage conditions. That person doesn’t care what their marks are hitting for or how much they enfeebling blood does for direct damage.

Sure on paper yada yada I get that and it is correct. The fact is though that condition builds the good ones have good auto attacks usually applying bleeds which is the main form of damage, followed by cover conditions some of which are additional damage depending on class/build.

You as a condition player don’t care all that much bout your direct damage. You care about bleed ticks, burns, poison, etc. The white damage might aswell not even be there.

oZii.2864:

A large part of your damage is from auto attacks in a condition build and usually ranged.

There really is no consequence in missing with a auto attack because it has no cooldown and short cast time. Take a terrormancer who can put alot of pressure on you just from scepter auto attacks also proccing dhuumfire while at range.

Really how many melee condition builds do you see out there? S/S LB warriors are the only ones that come to my mind as truly melee with application.

If you compare all skills #2 to #5 they have comparable CD and if you can assume that those skills are equally being used, you will end up with the result, that power builds will also use autos most of the time, just like condition builds do.

And if your problem is the fact, that most condibuilds use ranged weapons, no one said direct damage has to be melee.

PS: Terrormancer usually dont use auto attacks. Usually they use all sort of fear skills to kill you

oZii.2864:

A large part of your damage is from auto attacks in a condition build and usually ranged.

Yes, because the engineers 2s bleed on thier auto attack is obviously breaking the game. I mean I can appreciate your opinion, but for the love of Pete, keep it reasonable.

Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing.

You guys have to get over this irrational thought process like this. Care to offer a reasonable argument to support this? Perhaps compare a popular direct damage build to a popular condition build, and offer a reasonable break down of how conditions magically are easier to damage with then power builds. A dodged, blocked, or cleansed condition does literally 0 damage, just as a dodged or blocked direct damage attack.

And this *
“there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing”*
How do you negate direct damage once it is applied? You cannot mention one manner in which direct damage is fully negated that doesn’t fully negate condition damage.

>>ou guys have to get over this irrational thought process like this. Care to offer a reasonable argument to support this? Perhaps compare a popular direct damage build to a popular condition build, and offer a reasonable break down of how conditions magically are easier to damage with then power builds. A dodged, blocked, or cleansed condition does literally 0 damage, just as a dodged or blocked direct damage attack.

You quoting the wrong person. I was responding to that claim.

Are people really saying condition builds are underpowered compared to damage builds? L O L

Looks like I have to repeat this:

It’s not about pure damage numbers, it’s not about continuous ticking, it’s all about ease of application.
Conditions are far, far easier to hit with than direct damage due to low telegraphing and low skill cast times+delays, not to mention autoprocs, and the damage on condition skills tends to be spread more evenly than on direct damage, especially due to crit procs and autoattacks. This devalues active defenses, which is always a bad thing, because dodging/blocking is far less effective against even spreads of damage (the more even damage spreads are, the less valuable intelligent dodging is, and the more dodging just becomes a stall).
It almost has the same issue as stealth, where it punishes players who take active defenses in preference to passive ones.

There are always those misinformations in this forum, like:

• conditions cant be dodged (they can)
• only 1 stats (they need 3.5)
• only auto-attacking

I think we should differenciate a few points. Peoply are allways claiming that conditions are OP, but only a few say what excactly seems OP to them, the application, the damage, specific skills,….

Basically condition damage is the damage type, that is strong against high toughness targets (lets say ~2600+ armor). Around this point, condition builds should deal comparable damage to direct damage builds. This leads to the question, do they deal the same damage, or how much armor is needed?

The next point is, the “ease of application”. Here I see several issues in skill design. We have no good ranged direct damage weapons and on the other hand, no good melee condition weapons. The only alternative you have is a melee direct dmg build, that gets kited by a ranged condi build. This makes condition builds appear OP, but again, condition damage as it is, isnt.

Then people claim about telegraphs, well actually condition damage doesnt kill you instant, its sustain damage. There are a few skills, that (should) have telegraphs, for example epidemic (which is telegraphed), because they are strong and deals huge damage. But there are only a few condition skills, that aplly conditions that deal 8k+ damage at once, like direct damage skills. And you should not forget, you can still cleanse conditions.

So please, if you want to discuss condition damage, take the time, make some examples, test it and show your results.

I dont care about metas at all. If we have a lot of tanks, there will be a lot of condition builds and if we have a lot of condition builds, direct damage builds will get more popular. There will always be some sort of meta, so who care….

anet is pushing towards a condition-centric/tank meta and it’s obvious.

conditions are already incredibly unbalanced against direct damage builds as it is in small scale situations, and they’re only making direct damage burst less and less viable while making small changes (and calling them nerfs) to conditions that don’t actually remedy any of the actual problems.

conditions should be what’s being looked at for potential nerfs, NOT direct damage.
anyone saying that conditions aren’t broken is a fool and that’s the end of it.

The majority of players will jump to condition build = more money from transmutation crystals. Once enough people have coughed up more doe, than condition damage will get nerfed and the cycle continues. That’s my prediction.

Kept happening in D3.

I’m starting to think Jay Wilson is secretly working for Anet.

coglin.1867:

oZii.2864:

A large part of your damage is from auto attacks in a condition build and usually ranged.

Yes, because the engineers 2s bleed on thier auto attack is obviously breaking the game. I mean I can appreciate your opinion, but for the love of Pete, keep it reasonable.

Applying your damage is easier with a condition build then a direct damage build since there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing.

You guys have to get over this irrational thought process like this. Care to offer a reasonable argument to support this? Perhaps compare a popular direct damage build to a popular condition build, and offer a reasonable break down of how conditions magically are easier to damage with then power builds. A dodged, blocked, or cleansed condition does literally 0 damage, just as a dodged or blocked direct damage attack.

And this *
“there is only one way to stop the damage once it’s applied and that’s through cleansing”*
How do you negate direct damage once it is applied? You cannot mention one manner in which direct damage is fully negated that doesn’t fully negate condition damage.

Let me help Ozii out.

“You cannot mention one manner in which direct damage is “fully” negated that doesn’t “fully” negate condition damage."

Hello…endure pain.

Also, direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things and one of which has a 100% up time, armor.

MIrra.3604:

Let me help Ozii out.

“You cannot mention one manner in which direct damage is “fully” negated that doesn’t “fully” negate condition damage."

Hello…endure pain.

Ah and berzerker stance that completely negates conditions and last twice as long should doubly help my point based on your logic, thank you.

MIrra.3604:

Also, direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things and one of which has a 100% up time, armor.

Feel free to read my post, I am fairly certain I put “fully” in bold. Secondly, does armor negate 40% of direct damage as bowl of lemongrass poultry soup. As well, cleanses can negate all of a round of condition damage. It is simply a fact.

So you state “direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things”, please feel free to list them. As of now your making the argument of many here, by making blind and uninformed statements yet not offering any facts, please, by all means, list them.

Is there a food that increases power damage by 40% then?

There are several traits that increase damage by 10% that dont effect condition damage

Several, not one.

THANKS Anet for nerf normal dmg, AGAIN condi spam FTW. This game is already broken

So far, the only professions that will take direct “damage” from crit nerf in WvW is thieves, to some unknown extent rangers (depends on how badly this affects pets too) and medi guards.

Tei.1704:

The damage traits for condi builds give you more of the same damage conditions or all new damage conditions. What about “conditions on crit” makes people think those aren’t damage traits?

Egret.9374:

Other dps classes are going to suck against condition build? Dps classes have to spent point in 3 different stat to do good damage. Condition damage classes just in 1 and they can spent the rest point in defense stat.

On a Terrormancer with PvP Rabid gear, those On-crit-effects increase your DPS by about 25%. (I didn’t include any direct damage from attacks nor the chances that attacks miss/get blocked)

BUT with the same stats (45% crit chance * 1,7) a power build will get the same damage increase from the critical damage. With critdamage a power build would profit even more.

Oh and if i take other gear, beacuse conditions only need one stat it is getting even worth. So why dont you compare on-crit-effects with crits?

So very much arguing about conditions ignoring armor and ease of applying, QQ conditions killed me

…

…conveniently ignoring the myriad of ways to nullify (clense/immune) the condition damage to zero on most classes

…conveniently ignoring the condi damage ramp up

…conveniently ignoring that if the condi player makes a wrong move the power player gets to melt him/her or blowing off a good chunk of life

…yeah

coglin.1867:

MIrra.3604:

Let me help Ozii out.

“You cannot mention one manner in which direct damage is “fully” negated that doesn’t “fully” negate condition damage."

Hello…endure pain.

Ah and berzerker stance that completely negates conditions and last twice as long should doubly help my point based on your logic, thank you.

MIrra.3604:

Also, direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things and one of which has a 100% up time, armor.

Feel free to read my post, I am fairly certain I put “fully” in bold. Secondly, does armor negate 40% of direct damage as bowl of lemongrass poultry soup. As well, cleanses can negate all of a round of condition damage. It is simply a fact.

So you state “direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things”, please feel free to list them. As of now your making the argument of many here, by making blind and uninformed statements yet not offering any facts, please, by all means, list them.

You asked for one instance "where direct damage is “fully” negated that doesn’t “fully” negate condition damage" and I gave it to you. Then you tried to switch the focus to something else. Good job?

“Ah and berzerker stance that completely negates conditions and last twice as long should doubly help my point based on your logic, thank you.”

It makes perfect sense to me. Since condition builds are OP, they need to make it last longer. What other proof do you need when Anet said 4 secs of Berserker Stance was too weak vs the condition meta so we DOUBLED the duration to give the warrior a chance?

“So you state “direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things”, please feel free to list them. As of now your making the argument of many here, by making blind and uninformed statements yet not offering any facts, please, by all means, list them."

Physical damage is mitigated by
Armor –
Protection –
Weakness –
Blind-
Invul-
Block-
Evade
etc

There you go. I listed some example to further explain my comment of “direct damage is mitigated by a lot of things.”