Guild Wars 2

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

engineer is one of the most broken professions right now, and anybody who plays one that isn’t deluded by their bias will tell you this. this nerf would be, for once, a step in the right direction to making this profession more in line with everything else.

sinject.4607:

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

engineer is one of the most broken professions right now, and anybody who plays one that isn’t deluded by their bias will tell you this. this nerf would be, for once, a step in the right direction to making this profession more in line with everything else.

The problem is with balthazar runes not incendiary powder.

sinject.4607:

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

It could be because you also fail to realize that a necromancer =/= engineer. The engi always had good access to burning you know since launch. The necromancer always had better access to bleeds you know since launch. The necromancer also has fear, terror, can corrupt your boons turn them into conditions, better chill uptime, transfer your conditions back to you so even if you have +300% burning duration the necro had no burning he could give it back to you.

I could go on but the point is that simply a engineer =/= necromancer. Sure if you just started playing the gamer AFTEr necro’s received burning you might think differently but engineers always had access to it. People just started complaining about burning across the game once Necro’s had access to it. Then magically burning became OP and everything that deals with burning should be nerfed, including a class that always had access to it prior but nobody complained about that until Necro’s received burning.

oZii.2864:

sinject.4607:

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

It could be because you also fail to realize that a necromancer =/= engineer. The engi always had good access to burning you know since launch. The necromancer always had better access to bleeds you know since launch. The necromancer also has fear, terror, can corrupt your boons turn them into conditions, better chill uptime, transfer your conditions back to you so even if you have +300% burning duration the necro had no burning he could give it back to you.

I could go on but the point is that simply a engineer =/= necromancer. Sure if you just started playing the gamer AFTEr necro’s received burning you might think differently but engineers always had access to it. People just started complaining about burning across the game once Necro’s had access to it. Then magically burning became OP and everything that deals with burning should be nerfed, including a class that always had access to it prior but nobody complained about that until Necro’s received burning.

This 1000x over.

oZii.2864:

sinject.4607:

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

It could be because you also fail to realize that a necromancer =/= engineer. The engi always had good access to burning you know since launch. The necromancer always had better access to bleeds you know since launch. The necromancer also has fear, terror, can corrupt your boons turn them into conditions, better chill uptime, transfer your conditions back to you so even if you have +300% burning duration the necro had no burning he could give it back to you.

I could go on but the point is that simply a engineer =/= necromancer. Sure if you just started playing the gamer AFTEr necro’s received burning you might think differently but engineers always had access to it. People just started complaining about burning across the game once Necro’s had access to it. Then magically burning became OP and everything that deals with burning should be nerfed, including a class that always had access to it prior but nobody complained about that until Necro’s received burning.

please tell me in what context is passively applying one of the strongest conditions in the game okay? it seems you’re trying to justify it without actually going into any detail by just attacking necro.

Burn stacks in duration, not intesity. Engineer is more then capable, even without IP, to stack long duration burns. I can hit 20+sec easily.
Thats where the majority of damage comes from for a condition build engineer.

So a trait to proc more burning is usefull to help with consistency and make damage flow more reliably. But it typically doesnt add all that much dps. Really long burns just get cleansed anyway before they do their full damage.

For a necro, without burn except Dhuumfire, it was an increase of 900 damage per second when it procced. Not so for an Engineer who already has burning running from various other sources.

sinject.4607:

please tell me in what context is passively applying one of the strongest conditions in the game okay? it seems you’re trying to justify it without actually going into any detail by just attacking necro.

You started your argument against incendiary powder based on Necromancer with dhuumfire what are you talking about? You did say

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

You laid your argument foundation but I am the one attacking the necro? You didn’t give any details I gave details into some of the things that makes a necro DIFFERNT then a engineer. Your whole topic is based on Dhuumfire is bad on Necromancers therefore it’s bad on Engineers when engineers had this since LAUNCH.

I don’t need to provide details for defense you made the claim with little details then ask me for more details. The only detail that needs to be said to counter your claim is Necromancer doesn’t equal a Engineer Period. I didn’t attack Necromancer’s I have a Necro and a Engineer and when I made my engineer with in a few hours of play it was clear how their condition damage builds differ and why many Necromancers said Necro’s never needed to have burning. I didn’t realize this until I made my Engineer though and I disagreed with them until I had played my Engineer.

Go take a necromancer put 30 in curses go to the mist stack 25 bleeds now attempt that with a Engineer and it should be easy to figure out why blanket statements of Dhuum is bad so Incendiary is bad don’t fit.

Necro’s access to burning was/is very strong because they have amazing condition coverage. The addition of Burning just sends all the condition damage that Necro could already do even higher.

Engi’s condition coverage has always been lower than Necro as a default and burning has been a staple of the coverage that it CAN provide. Nerfing it would severely weaken condition-based Engineer builds FAR worse than nerfing it on Necro, perhaps putting it in to unusable territory.

The comparisons you are making are totally unfair.

Engineers have always been like playing piano, just to be effective and stay alive. Who cares if they have a strong talent that works well with rune overhaul. It’s not like they haven’t a had to work their kitten off to “stay in the fight” for 2 years prior.

It might look easy or overpowered to you, but like all things engineer. There are multiple layers of difficulty you just don’t see when you’re on the opposing end,

Bowflex.4502:

Engineers have always been like playing piano, just to be effective and stay alive. Who cares if they have a strong talent that works well with rune overhaul. It’s not like they haven’t a had to work their kitten off to “stay in the fight” for 2 years prior.

It might look easy or overpowered to you, but like all things engineer. There are multiple layers of difficulty you just don’t see when you’re on the opposing end,

engineers have been one of the top professions since launch, and at this rate they’re only getting stronger alongside this ridiculous condition meta.

sinject.4607:

please tell me in what context is passively applying one of the strongest conditions in the game okay? it seems you’re trying to justify it without actually going into any detail by just attacking necro.

We already went over this in the previous threads on this topic. Someone already poster the numbers and laid it out. A warrior in full soldiers P/V/T gear, with literally zero traits or trait points spent, using simply the auto attack of axe, will significantly out damage an engineer with pistol/shield who is using IP in dire gear.

sinject.4607:

engineers have been one of the top professions since launch, and at this rate they’re only getting stronger alongside this ridiculous condition meta.

Got any evidence of this?

You appear to be very spectacular at proclaiming your personal opinion as if it were cannon, yet extremely poor at actually using any facts. Why do you avoid offering any facts with your claims?

Flamthrower is also OP! Burning on auto attack and the toolbelt skill! Not to mention Engineers get way too many fire fields! Burning all day and nothing I can about it!!!

On a serious note, I’m loving all these ignorant people claiming Engineers are op. It makes those noobs so fun to troll. Keep the tears coming.

People only started whining about incendiary powder after dhuumfire was introduced and then even more after dhuumfire was changed. The only thing that needs to change are balthazar runes which could do with being split from pvp.

If we’re going to use necromancer as a reason to nerf engineer then you don’t really understand either class. Engineers have to work much harder to keep conditions on their target whereas necros are much more capable at bursting players down quickly with their massive bleed stacks and damage from terror.

…that’s why engineers get to keep incendiary powder and necros do not

I don’t even run incendiary powder on my hybrid engi in WvW. Mostly because I get burning from blowtorch, rocket kick, fire bomb, and supply crate. I have near 100% burning uptime from blowtorch alone, no condi increasing runes necessary. Incendiary Powder is just redundant at that point.

And that is why IP isn’t OP. Engineers have the most access to burning out of any class in the game, both in how many ways they can apply it, and how effectively they apply it. Where for necromancers, Dhuumfire was an extremely powerful change that marked the conversion into the condi meta for the next year to come, for engineers it was monday.

So… if it is redundant, why leave it? Auto procs dumb down fights because there is nothing to mitigate it reliably. Even ranged auto attacks can crit once in a while, which puts another 4 to 6 seconds of burning every 10ish seconds on you.
Engineers already have great access to several conditions (confusion is one of them, btw) and cover conditions via traits and low-cooldown-spells.
Why give them traits like IP when most condition and hybrid engineer builds already can reapply strong conditions faster then necros while having better access to defensive spells and boons? I don’t see how IP improves overall gameplay, player skill and fun for all players involved.

maeggle.6021:

So… if it is redundant, why leave it? Auto procs dumb down fights because there is nothing to mitigate it reliably. Even ranged auto attacks can crit once in a while, which puts another 4 to 6 seconds of burning every 10ish seconds on you.

This sure seems to be a poorly thought out statement. The devs stated before this trait allows subsequent damage for the weak weapons damage on build that do not run kits. So how you came to your assessment is beyond me.

Particularly after it was broken down in a previous thread on this topic (thanks OP for spamming the forums with remakes of threads repeatedly by the way). So the MH Pistol skills are very limiting for the engineer. If you take a full dire gear engineer with trait points invested for IP compared to a warrior with hammer, axe, mace, or greatsword, in all soldiers gear, and of those auto attacks by themselves, significantly out damage the pistol or rifle auto attack on the engineer with IP.

maeggle.6021:

Engineers already have great access to several conditions (confusion is one of them, btw) and cover conditions via traits and low-cooldown-spells.
Why give them traits like IP when most condition and hybrid engineer builds already can reapply strong conditions faster then necros while having better access to defensive spells and boons? I don’t see how IP improves overall gameplay, player skill and fun for all players involved.

What build do you run on your engineer? I mean, you are telling us what they can and cannot do, so it is reasonable to share your build. What seems odd, is that you refer to the profession in terms of “them” instead of “us”, which displays a clear and defined biased against the profession as a whole.

This whole angle of what conditions a profession can apply or reapply is irrelevant. The only thing that matters, is how much those skills do in damage over time when added up and totaled, in comparison to a comparable direct damage build.

dancingmonkey.4902:

This sure seems to be a poorly thought out statement. The devs stated before this trait allows subsequent damage for the weak weapons damage on build that do not run kits. So how you came to your assessment is beyond me.

Please read again, or just read along if you didn’t get my point yet:
Off-hand pistol, rocket boots and flame turrets (as well as the supply crate) can be used to apply burning on a slow rate without relying on kits. If you want to have better access to burning you can throw a BK and the FT toolbelt skill into the mix.
I do not quite see the necessity for putting the most reliable and most efficient way of getting an opponent burnt on a trait. As I already stated there is no counter play to it like you’d have by evading / LoSing / blocking / blinding / interrupting certain skills with certain effects. IP just cannot be avoided (except for killing the engineer before he can land a single crit), thus it promotes no skilled gameplay.

dancingmonkey.4902:

If you take a full dire gear engineer with trait points invested for IP compared to a warrior with hammer, axe, mace, or greatsword, in all soldiers gear, and of those auto attacks by themselves, significantly out damage the pistol or rifle auto attack on the engineer with IP.

Yes, please more of this AA-till-dead nonsense! … Don’t mind range, don’t mind utility and mitigation skills, don’t mind conditions and damage coefficients on #2-#5, don’t mind anything which goes beyond raw numbers.

What build do you run on your engineer? I mean, you are telling us what they can and cannot do, so it is reasonable to share your build. What seems odd, is that you refer to the profession in terms of “them” instead of “us”, which displays a clear and defined biased against the profession as a whole.

When I’m on my engineer I like to run my rifle hgh build, cause I don’t like playing condition builds (even tho my ele relies on burning and bleeds for some additional damage and utility, and my guardian can also put some more pressure on opponents via burning), but well, that’s totally unrelated to IP. I was speaking of full condition or hybrid engineer builds….

dancingmonkey.4902:

This whole angle of what conditions a profession can apply or reapply is irrelevant. The only thing that matters, is how much those skills do in damage over time when added up and totaled, in comparison to a comparable direct damage build.

It starts to matter if you can mitigate the one but not the other. As stated above, I don’t mind reapplication or strong condition pressure as long as I can deal with it in a manner which requires me to use my own and my characters abilities to deal with it. You seem to be keen on trying to twist my words here and relate to the stupid “conditions are OP discussion” while they are not. We can’t have a serious and constructive discussion by reducing everything to common catch-phrases (“conditions OP”, “thieves OP”, “warriors OP”, etc instead of trying to single out stuff which allows some builds to become over the top).

maeggle.6021:

So… if it is redundant, why leave it? Auto procs dumb down fights.

Wow, yet your perfectly fine with 1000 auto attacks that Are cleave on other professions in soldiers gear. But your completely against an engineer with a auto attack of 150 + 2s bleed for a total 400ish getting a trait designed to subsequent it’s damge? That sure seems biased.

coglin.1867:

Wow, yet your perfectly fine with 1000 auto attacks that Are cleave on other professions in soldiers gear. But your completely against an engineer with a auto attack of 150 + 2s bleed for a total 400ish getting a trait designed to subsequent it’s damge? That sure seems biased.

sigh you can use kits, turrets, gadgets or other skills on your main weapon set, you know?

So maeggle, what your saying is, that in a very unreasonable build that no one uses, that is specifically build by you as an example, makes the trait OP? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to make practical comparisons ?

As for your suggestion to auto attack nonsense, well you do not think it is OP when over a 60s period, a axe warriors auto attack can deal more damage then all of the engineers MH pistol combines, if they are spammed the second they come off cool down? You can make all the attacks on the comparison you like. If you add in other attacks, the damage difference between an axe warrior in soldiers gear and a pistol MH engineer in dire. The damage capability is in massive favor of the warrior.

maeggle.6021:

sigh you can use kits, turrets, gadgets or other skills on your main weapon set, you know?

sigh No, actually the engineer cannot. That is in no way how it works.

A) kits and only kits work in place of weapons swap.
B) Kits take a limited utility slot limiting a condition cleanse or stun break options
C) Now your crying fowl with IP by presuming no one is permitted to run a full turret build (has no weapon swap), all elixir HgH build (has no weapon swap), and gadgeteer build (has no weapon swap).

maeggle.6021:

When I’m on my engineer I like to run my rifle hgh build, cause I don’t like playing condition builds (even tho my ele relies on burning and bleeds for some additional damage and utility, and my guardian can also put some more pressure on opponents via burning), but well, that’s totally unrelated to IP. I was speaking of full condition or hybrid engineer builds….

If it is so obviously OP, why is it that you do not use it? If it was so entirely OP that it needed a change, then everyone would use it.

Bowflex.4502:

Engineers have always been like playing piano, just to be effective and stay alive. Who cares if they have a strong talent that works well with rune overhaul. It’s not like they haven’t a had to work their kitten off to “stay in the fight” for 2 years prior.

It might look easy or overpowered to you, but like all things engineer. There are multiple layers of difficulty you just don’t see when you’re on the opposing end,

I don’t think you play piano if you think cycling through bomb/nade kite to spam condis on point and then dropping a crate comes close to what it takes to play piano lol

dancingmonkey.4902:

So maeggle, what your saying is, that in a very unreasonable build that no one uses, that is specifically build by you as an example, makes the trait OP?

Please go to the engineer forum for an up to date list of FotM p/s + BK builds. I just chose some common traits and gear because I didn’t bother. It doesn’t really matter because my point was and still stands that you cannot avoid IP like any other burst skill. Even backstabs (QQ skill #1) can be dodged by observing and listening. Eviscerate, burning speed, shatters, etc are obvious skills and can be dodged or mitigated via boons and skills pretty reliably.

If so much comes from a mere master trait, maybe it would be wise to ask for buffs to other aspects of the engineers’ skills and utilities instead of defending a random proc from one trait.

dancingmonkey.4902:

sigh No, actually the engineer cannot. That is in no way how it works.

That is exactly how it works. You also got toolbelt skills, btw.

dancingmonkey.4902:

B) Kits take a limited utility slot limiting a condition cleanse or stun break options

Other classes also have to pick either defensive or offensive utilities… Your point is?

dancingmonkey.4902:

C) Now your crying fowl with IP by presuming no one is permitted to run a full turret build (has no weapon swap), all elixir HgH build (has no weapon swap), and gadgeteer build (has no weapon swap).

I don’t know what you’re trying to tell me here, because nothing of what you wrote relates to anything I stated. You’re free to run all of those builds. Btw, I’d really like to see some of the skills involved to be buffed slightly.
What I don’t agree on, though, is that IP should be necessary to be on-par with other players and builds (which already is the case to be honest). The trait has no skill-reliant counter, thus it is a bad one.

He/she is trying to tell you your wrong when you claim the engineer has

sigh you can use kits, turrets, gadgets or other skills on your main weapon set, you know?

When it is a hard core fact that the engineer can neither use turrets or gadgets in place of their weapon swap/skills as your inaccurately claiming. Those are utilities that offer no weapon swap abilities in any way, and only offer damage, buff, or utilitarian benefits exactly as utility skills work for every other profession.

That is pretty much it. If someone is going to tell us how our profession works, and that it is OP, the least they can do is not claim we can use gadgets or turrets as weapon swaps. Next you will be telling us how OP elixirs are when armed as MH weapons too right?

Where exactly did I talk about weapon swaps on engineers and what has that to do with IP?

sinject.4607:

i fail to see how anyone can consider dhuumfire problematic and yet be okay with how anet leaves incen powder completely alone and then goes on to make it even stronger with balthazaar runes.

engineer is one of the most broken professions right now, and anybody who plays one that isn’t deluded by their bias will tell you this. this nerf would be, for once, a step in the right direction to making this profession more in line with everything else.

Ah, I remember the days when I cared about 1-to-1 balance and usually misinterpreted problematic situations where I died, too. Good times.

Anyhow, as you so eloquently said, Balthazar Runes are overpowered.

maeggle.6021:

Where exactly did I talk about weapon swaps on engineers and what has that to do with IP?

Here

maeggle.6021:

sigh you can use kits, turrets, gadgets or other skills as your main weapon set, you know?

After you quoted some of this post here.

dancingmonkey.4902:

The devs stated previously one of the intended values of this trait is to offer subsequent damage for the weak weapons damage on build that do not run kits. This was posted after the discussion that stemmed from the dev posted balancing philosophies in which they stated, the engineers under powered weapons was an intended design.

maeggle.6021:

Why give them traits like IP when most condition and hybrid engineer builds already can reapply strong conditions faster then necros while having better access to defensive spells and boons? I don’t see how IP improves overall gameplay, player skill and fun for all players involved.

It’s so we are not forced into one specific kit to have access to burning.

maeggle.6021:

I do not quite see the necessity for putting the most reliable and most efficient way of getting an opponent burnt on a trait. As I already stated there is no counter play to it like you’d have by evading / LoSing / blocking / blinding / interrupting certain skills with certain effects. IP just cannot be avoided (except for killing the engineer before he can land a single crit), thus it promotes no skilled gameplay.

So you are saying the engineers sole purpose is to proc IP during a fight and that there’s nothing else they are doing that’s killing you?

Andy.9137:

maeggle.6021:

Why give them traits like IP when most condition and hybrid engineer builds already can reapply strong conditions faster then necros while having better access to defensive spells and boons? I don’t see how IP improves overall gameplay, player skill and fun for all players involved.

It’s so we are not forced into one specific kit to have access to burning.

Oh, heaven forbid!

maeggle.6021:

you can use kits, turrets, gadgets or other skills of your main weapon set, you know?

Please excuse my brain fart right there. Does it make more sense to you now?

dancingmonkey.4902:

The devs stated previously one of the intended values of this trait is to offer subsequent damage for the weak weapons damage on build that do not run kits. This was posted after the discussion that stemmed from the dev posted balancing philosophies in which they stated, the engineers under powered weapons was an intended design.

I read such statements in the past, but I don’t agree with the approach. It would make more sense to me if they made some skills, which aren’t used often with multi-kit-builds, more valuable instead of advertising random proc traits to compensate for lack of weapon skills damage.

Andy.9137:

So you are saying the engineers sole purpose is to proc IP during a fight and that there’s nothing else they are doing that’s killing you?

We can do the cherry picking all night long if you so desire. Let us not discuss the topic but assert some random stuff which doesn’t provide anything for both of us.
To be honest I don’t have many problems with p/s + bk + ip builds while roaming in WvW, but I still think the trait sucks big time. I don’t like fighting randomness, it does not promote clever gameplay for both parties — as stated several times already.
And obviously the answer to your question would be: no.

maeggle.6021:

Andy.9137:

So you are saying the engineers sole purpose is to proc IP during a fight and that there’s nothing else they are doing that’s killing you?

We can do the cherry picking all night long if you so desire. Let us not discuss the topic but assert some random stuff which doesn’t provide anything for both of us.
To be honest I don’t have many problems with p/s + bk + ip builds while roaming in WvW, but I still think the trait sucks big time. I don’t like fighting randomness, it does not promote clever gameplay for both parties — as stated several times already.
And obviously the answer to your question would be: no.

If you don’t have problems with it, then why are you arguing? It’s not a question of what you do or don’t like, that’s not the topic.

Absolutely if you do not have a problem with, why are you making repeated post here?. With all of the traits out there on every profession, on crit/hit % sigils, and on hit % chance runes, it sure seems particularly bias of you to single this trait out to crusade against.

I have to agree with Andy here. Out of all the skills, traits, runes, and sigils, that work off of procs, what makes this one “more” op then the rest ??

coglin.1867:

With all of the traits out there on every profession, on crit/hit % sigils, and on hit % chance runes, it sure seems particularly bias of you to single this trait out to crusade against.

Go ahead and open topics on sigil of fire / air, sharper images, etc if you think they should be reworked, and I’ll try to provide some input there as well. This thread happens to be about IP, so I shared my opinion about it. I’m really sorry bout that.

You can nit-pick all day long about stuff which has nothing to do with the topic and ignore any argument I provide, but please take note that I’ll just leave this conversation in this case, because it won’t get us any further.

Wait……You brought up passive game factors. Then you specific stated that you have no problem with IP in builds. It seems to me that is is a very reasonable question to ask why you crusade against this particular so called " passive factor " in the game. I mean, to go from 7 post trying to rationalize your dislike for it, then on to specifically state that you have no problem with it. Perhaps he/she is asking so they may follow up with asking the reason your replies changed suddenly.

I hardly call it nit picking to question the logic of attacking only one trait out of all the traits, sigils, skills, and runes that have the exact functionality.

this trait is a no brainer.

47.5% uptime of burning with that trait alone without any modification is to strong. even a monkey would pick that in every build that want apply dmg. any argumentation against that fact comes only from ppl missing any sense of balance.

maeggle.6021:

coglin.1867:

With all of the traits out there on every profession, on crit/hit % sigils, and on hit % chance runes, it sure seems particularly bias of you to single this trait out to crusade against.

Go ahead and open topics on sigil of fire / air, sharper images, etc if you think they should be reworked, and I’ll try to provide some input there as well. This thread happens to be about IP, so I shared my opinion about it. I’m really sorry bout that.

You can nit-pick all day long about stuff which has nothing to do with the topic and ignore any argument I provide, but please take note that I’ll just leave this conversation in this case, because it won’t get us any further.

It’s not nit-picking. You explicitly stated you had no problem with the trait, then you complain about not liking the functionality. So either this is about you being biased against IP or you should be making an argument about every single trait/skill/sigil that functions the same way.

hooma.9642:

this trait is a no brainer.

47.5% uptime of burning with that trait alone without any modification is to strong. even a monkey would pick that in every build that want apply dmg. any argumentation against that fact comes only from ppl missing any sense of balance.

This seems poorly thought out. With a P/P HgH build you have 100% AoE up time on an OH pistol skill. Why would someone waste 20 trait points for a trait that will generally develop zero damage out of the build at all?

I never see this trait used in SD builds either.

HgH builds as mentioned, generally are x/6/x/6/x builds, with no 4 left over for the explosive line. I am going to assume 20=4. Someone forgot to use the converted numbers since the last patch.

There are plenty of build that do not us IP.

dancingmonkey.4902:

hooma.9642:

this trait is a no brainer.

47.5% uptime of burning with that trait alone without any modification is to strong. even a monkey would pick that in every build that want apply dmg. any argumentation against that fact comes only from ppl missing any sense of balance.

This seems poorly thought out. With a P/P HgH build you have 100% AoE up time on an OH pistol skill. Why would someone waste 20 trait points for a trait that will generally develop zero damage out of the build at all?

Your response seems poorly thought out.

It is impossible to dodge IP, or know when it is coming. Why would you spec into HGH when you can get a 7 second unblockable/undodgeable burn from IP?

Pistol 4 is strong, not as astrong as IP.

It’s also hilarious to note how high ranked engies like Ostricheggs think that IP takes skill while Dhuumfire didn’t.

dancingmonkey.4902:

Then you specific stated that you have no problem with IP in builds.

Yes, I don’t have severe problems dealing with most engineer condition builds which use IP because I put several condition removal tools into most of my builds, and am able to mitigate most of the nasty stuff which would otherwise be actively applied (also includes direct damage burst). Also most players using the goto FotM builds are just bad and provide no challenge whatsoever, even when they run very powerful builds.

Anyways, this doesn’t change my point that IP and its passive nature are bad mechanics for the reasons already mentioned. It is beyond my grasp that some of you seem to think such mechanics are good and needed for balanced and fun fights, instead of asking for changes, or discussing what doesn’t work without IP and how Anet could buff such builds and play styles in a more engaging manner.

just be careful what you wish for, IP is one of the few things requiring an engie to actually have precision in a condition build.

Well yes, they cannot start the real hard core dire gear crying, until they destroy the need for rabid gear first.

What some people may not have been around to remember is they already moved it from adept to master to address perceived imbalance issues. Changing/Removing IP addresses the symptom, rather than the disease that is Runes of Balthazar. Which, BTW, is way more effective with BK2 (short fuse & explosive powder), P4, and FT1 & IA than IP alone.

Nice to see how they make comparisons to other classes when they think something must be nerfed, but no one ever addresses that engineers have a lower baseline to start with.

Give engineers a second weapon and then we can talk about comparisons. Until then, stop with the whine. Cause engineers have to do damage somehow, and if they can’t do it with the weapon skills, they’ll have to have other sources.