The stab changing from a timed boon to a stacked boon was a bad idea:
“Stability: This boon has been changed from a duration stack type to an intensity stack type. Crowd-control effects will remove one instance of stability apiece each time they are applied. Each ability and trait has been adjusted to apply a certain number of stacks. All instances of stability not listed in these release notes will remain at one stack.”
It greatly favors the biggest groups because they will have more cc and will remove all your stacks before you can remove theirs since they simply have the higher numbers.
Basically it further unbalance the WvW experience.
Example :
3 of us trying to protect Mendon tower against about 15 incoming, I use Armor of Earth (in theory a great stability skill), it does not even take 1 seconds and all my stacks of stability a removed.
Before the stability changes I would have been able to use AoE as stability to then cast tornado and knock down a few down the bridge. Now post the stability changes I just got rolled over.
Now if the Anet balance team compensated by increasing the damage or CC AoE limit to favor smaller groups it could perhaps work, but right now after the few months it’s been implemented it just added up to be another nerf to the outnumbered team/servers.
Specifically in High level Fractals- Namely Snowblind and Aetherblade Retreat.
These two Fractals have a lot of KD in places that even with multiple stabs can be ripped through.
While I understand that these areas are meant to be difficult, things that rip off 5 stacks of Stability in a second doesn’t seem like it’s working as intended
The Hammer in Cliffside is meant to provide stability – For running the hammer through the traps/stopping getting the stun at 30 stacks. However, since the hammer only provides 1 stack of stability at a very slow rate, it is now imperative to drop a Stab Skill on your bar – especially for less coordinated groups, and sometimes even dropping a stab will have all it’s stacks removed and you’ll get KDd / Knocked off anyway
Can mods please stop locking threads that are constructive.
Just delete posts that are derailments.
There is. For every object an AoE passes through, its power decreases. Take for example a rain of arrows. Sacrifice a few to create a shield, saving the many.
Someone just learned about Darwinism. Dw tho next week he’ll be repping the cult of domesticity!
I have to say the stab changes are really really annoying in pve. Aetherblade fractal already kittenes me off because I have to swap to guard to do it, but now its worse since i constantly get knocked down even with hollowed ground or stand your ground.
Although It does make some sense in wuvs, to make sure people can’t just mindlessly run through other zergs since they have 10s or w/e of stab, it does seem to just benefit the larger group, which is lame since even in wuvs it should be about who’s better. But then again if you are outnumbered by a lot you shouldn’t win…..
The stab changing from a timed boon to a stacked boon was a bad idea:
“Stability: This boon has been changed from a duration stack type to an intensity stack type. Crowd-control effects will remove one instance of stability apiece each time they are applied. Each ability and trait has been adjusted to apply a certain number of stacks. All instances of stability not listed in these release notes will remain at one stack.”
It greatly favors the biggest groups because they will have more cc and will remove all your stacks before you can remove theirs since they simply have the higher numbers.
Basically it further unbalance the WvW experience.
Example :
3 of us trying to protect Mendon tower against about 15 incoming, I use Armor of Earth (in theory a great stability skill), it does not even take 1 seconds and all my stacks of stability a removed.
Before the stability changes I would have been able to use AoE as stability to then cast tornado and knock down a few down the bridge. Now post the stability changes I just got rolled over.
Now if the Anet balance team compensated by increasing the damage or CC AoE limit to favor smaller groups it could perhaps work, but right now after the few months it’s been implemented it just added up to be another nerf to the outnumbered team/servers.
3 vs 15 Got CC’d to death because you didn’t have enough stability.
Sounds like it’s working as intended. 3 people should not be immune to that much incoming CC.
Improvise, adapt and overcome. Popping stab with 5 times incoming isn’t going to save you anymore.
“You know what the chain of command is?
It’s the chain I beat you with until you
recognize my command!”
Everything about this game favors zergs, and that doesn’t seem to be changing. Unless you count PvE, which was horribly unprepared for megaserver zergs.
I really wish they would look at how other PvP games are balanced, instead of just assuming that some random changes they come up with will work because they sound good on paper. Many games have already deal with these issues and found workable solutions for them by using something called logic.
As a game developer, I realize why they do it though. First its to prevent its abuse in PvE, for example on cliffside fractal where someone could just pop stability and run through all of the traps like it didn’t even matter. Second it is to prevent “jesus walking” in PvP and WvW, where players run through zergs and escape. Lastly it is to save on server resources, which is why all the “pro-zerg” mechanics such as AoE cap, conditions cap, etc. actually exist in the first place. Intensity stacking changes the number of potential calculations against the boon to an always-finite amount.
Unfortunately games have to juggle between idealism and reality. Just because something would be good for the game does not mean it is possible to do easily. That said, nothing is really imposssible in games, as they are a creative medium.
Daisuki [SUKI] LGBT-Friendly Guild Leader | NA – Jade Quarry
I’m usually really sweet… but this an internet forum and you know how it has to be.
/i’m a lesbiab… lesbiam… less bien… GIRLS/
There is. For every object an AoE passes through, its power decreases. Take for example a rain of arrows. Sacrifice a few to create a shield, saving the many.
Basically it further unbalance the WvW experience.
WvW isn’t meant to be balanced, it’s meant to be an unfair war. Instead of relying on CC immunity, play smarter.
Yes, play “smarter”. Get on your ranged character and pew pew blindly, instead of actually paying attention to your enemies and using your CCs intelligently. JOIN THE PIRATE SHIP!
Someone just learned about Darwinism. Dw tho next week he’ll be repping the cult of domesticity!
I have to say the stab changes are really really annoying in pve. Aetherblade fractal already kittenes me off because I have to swap to guard to do it, but now its worse since i constantly get knocked down even with hollowed ground or stand your ground.
Although It does make some sense in wuvs, to make sure people can’t just mindlessly run through other zergs since they have 10s or w/e of stab, it does seem to just benefit the larger group, which is lame since even in wuvs it should be about who’s better. But then again if you are outnumbered by a lot you shouldn’t win…..
Well yes it favors zergs. I think this game had enough zombie zergs running over people it didn’t need more of it.
So 3v15 isn’t balanced because those 3 people will lose, and this is a problem because…?
In a 3v15 situation of course I would have died anyway in the past I may have been able to knock down 1 or 2 from that bridge. The game was just more fun.
Anyway, bigger zergs instead of skill seems to be what people prefer judging form the comments approving that smaller groups be at a disadvantage.
All things equal, bigger always defeats smaller. All things equal, better organized defeats disorganized. All things equal, new tactics will defeat last month’s tactics, especially if those tactics are based on last month’s game mechanics.
I’d be a lot more sympathetic to the OP if — instead of complaining about getting stripped quickly (as was intended) — the OP had asked what tactics a smaller group could use against a bigger one, so that they wouldn’t be overwhelmed by CC. If no one in the game can make that work, then, sure, something might need fixing.
Instead, what I see in WvW is that organized guilds (whether zergish or havoc-ish) have figured out new approaches that aren’t reliant on unstrippable stability.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I’d be a lot more sympathetic to the OP if — instead of complaining about getting stripped quickly (as was intended) — the OP had asked what tactics a smaller group could use against a bigger one, so that they wouldn’t be overwhelmed by CC. If no one in the game can make that work, then, sure, something might need fixing.
So, with the current Stab, what tactics does one use for a smaller group facing a bigger one to not be overwhelmed by CC? How does one “make that work.” Is the answer “pirate-ship?” Because there might well be something that needs fixing even if there is a counter, if that counter is boring as kitten.
It’s like… learning to play all over! Well, for some classes. I play a Thief in WvW, and I hardly ever have any Stab on me, yet I play the same. If I see red circles on the ground, I dodge out of them. If I’m stunned, I use a skill with a Stun Break.
Remember, GW2 is a game where you need to play smart. Hack and slash tactics where you Leeroy into a zerg or stand in AOE just doesn’t work.
It’s like… learning to play all over! Well, for some classes. I play a Thief in WvW, and I hardly ever have any Stab on me, yet I play the same. If I see red circles on the ground, I dodge out of them. If I’m stunned, I use a skill with a Stun Break.
Remember, GW2 is a game where you need to play smart. Hack and slash tactics where you Leeroy into a zerg or stand in AOE just doesn’t work.
Old stability is pretty OP, objectively speaking. Stacked stability is better design overall, because you can’t just mindlessly roll through every kind of trap and CC. It means you still need situational awareness while using stability.
However, that’s mainly because stability applies to both knockbacks and stuns. If it were separated out into two boons, with “stability” being ONLY for pulls, knockdowns, knockbacks and launches as a physical ‘steady on your feet’ thing, and that can keep the old duration behavior, while a second ‘mental fortitude’ type skill that stacks like stability does now and blocks fear, taunt, stun and daze, I think that could be balanced well enough.
Then warriors could go back to being near impossible to push around physically, but you could still stun or fear them, while certain other classes would be much harder to stun but could be knocked around. And some current stability skills could provide both boons still.
I have to say the stab changes are really really annoying in pve. Aetherblade fractal already kittenes me off because I have to swap to guard to do it, but now its worse since i constantly get knocked down even with hollowed ground or stand your ground.
I feel like with PVE mobs you either don’t need stability (they have such little CC you only need evade/stunbreak) or you might as well not have it anyway because they strip it so fast. The only reason I still use it anymore is because it often just incidentally comes with stunbreaks.
I once saw a magnificent sight…a guild raid of 15-20 charrs take on a Zerg about twice their size and only lost a couple of people, while the enemy Zerg lost about half of theirs. They used timing, coordination and tactics to overcome the odds. This was before the stability changes however.
Nowadays, if this sorta thing happened, the smaller raiding party would probably be annihilated. I’m sorry, but that is dumb, to have been coordinated as they were, to time things as well as they did, and if the enemy Zerg is filled with nothing but a bunch of brain dead lemmings, then yes, the smaller party should win. Am I saying it should happen all the time, no only coordinated group efforts should be able to pull that sorta thing off. I do think stability should be reverted back, or another boon put in place that has the effects of old stability, but would only be on elite skills or skills with enormously long cool downs.
A knight in shining armor is a man who never had his metal truly tested.
The Hammer in Cliffside is meant to provide stability – For running the hammer through the traps/stopping getting the stun at 30 stacks. However, since the hammer only provides 1 stack of stability at a very slow rate,
To my knowledge, the hammer has never given stability, unless you mean one of the hammer’s skills. Frankly I think most people use the 30 stack stun as a “you need to drop this hammer very quickly” warning.
Try again. The gvg guild I used to play in while I was active in wvw wiped zergs with a setup that had 40% stability uptime. As a staff ele, one of my jobs was to screw the enemy over with statics so I learned the weaknesses of common frontline setups pretty quickly.
Specifically in High level Fractals- Namely Snowblind and Aetherblade Retreat.
These two Fractals have a lot of KD in places that even with multiple stabs can be ripped through.
While I understand that these areas are meant to be difficult, things that rip off 5 stacks of Stability in a second doesn’t seem like it’s working as intended
The Hammer in Cliffside is meant to provide stability – For running the hammer through the traps/stopping getting the stun at 30 stacks. However, since the hammer only provides 1 stack of stability at a very slow rate, it is now imperative to drop a Stab Skill on your bar – especially for less coordinated groups, and sometimes even dropping a stab will have all it’s stacks removed and you’ll get KDd / Knocked off anyway
Eh?! Is this a scale 30+ issue? I haven’t done any of those and so far just walking around the traps works fine.
I plan my stability but its getting removed in seconds so ya there is a conter to my stability but there is no way i can plan my stability in a strategic way now.
Have been running necro for 90+% of my WvW time, and I really do not care about stability.
Yes if you get static-ed you tend to die. If you do not know how to dodge or are out of dodges when rushed you have a problem, (sidestepping really tends to help though, most ppl dodge forward or back.)
Any stability is a bonus but not mandatory….
and tbh it isn’t mandatory with 3 health bars … >:)
23 lvl 80’s, 9 times map, 4ele, 4ncr, 3war, 3grd, 3rgr, 2thf, 2msm, 1eng, 1 rev.
Been There, Done That & Will do it again…except maybe world completion.
This stabilty change was purely focused on spvp, and don’t take me wrong – It indeedly works incridible on spvp.
But on another side, in pve and mainly on wxw, it just doesn’t work. Stability turned in a useless boon, since even the high stacks skills get removed within seconds, and takes a lot of time to recharge. I thik that the worst skill changed for example is the Ranger skill rampage as one, that gives 3 stacks per pulse. Nice, but try to run trough a gust of wind (Don’t know if it is a bug or bad design, bu it remove multiples stacks of stabilty by just passing trough the gust).
So, yes – I do agree that this stabilty change was not for the greater good, but for one aspect of the game only (I do know it was focused on wxw, but it is not good for wxw). I think it need a rework.
The hammer on Cliffside gives Stability using skill 3. This allows the hammer to be carried past 30 stacks which is very useful in terms of running it from one side of the other with a charge. Since getting stunned wastes a few seconds of said charge. For classes such as Necro/Thief without “readily available” stabilities this is somewhat a pain.
It’s not a massive issue it’s just something I feel was overlooked.
At much higher levels, utility skills are there for survival, and in sub optimal teams then these are even more important.
At the end of cliffside, using Stability to get over the traps on the bridges, with 5 stacks you can still get knocked off. This seems like it’s just not working correctly
Can mods please stop locking threads that are constructive.
Just delete posts that are derailments.
If you’re getting knocked off the path at the end of cliffside, you’re seriously doing it wrong. Obviously if you rush it’s not going to work. Chase the explosions, not outrun. If you’re fast enough you can make it the entire way without stopping or getting knocked off.
That’s not even remotely the point. Popping stab should, one would argue stop you getting knocked off.
My point was, even with 10 stacks/5 stacks of stab you can get knocked off (all stacks removed) in less than a second.
I am well aware of this, but a lot of people do struggle. The amount of time I’ve sat at the end of cliffside waiting for people to get up could have done a lot more fractals in that time.
However, I spent a few minutes testing it one day and I was just shocked at how the changes to stab, changed the way this path worked.
Can mods please stop locking threads that are constructive.
Just delete posts that are derailments.
I think that the solution is quite simple – Add a cooldown between each stack removed, so you can’t fully remove all stacks within 1 second. Likely 0.5s cooldown in between removals.
3 vs 15 Got CC’d to death because you didn’t have enough stability.
Sounds like it’s working as intended. 3 people should not be immune to that much incoming CC.
It does make sense, yes. 3 people should not be able to seriously impact 15 people trying to roll in.
That’s in addition to me personally preferring stack-based effects (in general) because that gives more things to tweak.
That being said, WvW has an overall issue where it doesn’t encourage the two less-populated realms to group up in some meaningful manner. That’s really all it needs to do. Instead it rewards the top two realms raining down on the least populated one.
Still not as kittenPvP issues, but it’s a small detail they got wrong which has huge effects. DAoC did this better, by virtue of the relics. In theory the top realm would trivially be able to take all relics, becoming hugely powerful. The only real way the other two realms had to defend theirs was to spend their effort harassing the big realm from two sides, instead of fighting each other as much as possible.
The strength of heart to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.
Old stability is pretty OP, objectively speaking. Stacked stability is better design overall, because you can’t just mindlessly roll through every kind of trap and CC. It means you still need situational awareness while using stability.
However, that’s mainly because stability applies to both knockbacks and stuns. If it were separated out into two boons, with “stability” being ONLY for pulls, knockdowns, knockbacks and launches as a physical ‘steady on your feet’ thing, and that can keep the old duration behavior, while a second ‘mental fortitude’ type skill that stacks like stability does now and blocks fear, taunt, stun and daze, I think that could be balanced well enough.
Then warriors could go back to being near impossible to push around physically, but you could still stun or fear them, while certain other classes would be much harder to stun but could be knocked around. And some current stability skills could provide both boons still.
This actually sounds reasonable and like an interesting compromise.
Flame me if I’m wrong here but haven’t the durations of the stabs been increased as part of the change?
I think they have and that is the part which annoys me (so hopefully it actually exists ^^). In 5v5 PvP when people used stab I’d just wait for it to wear off then cc them. Now it seems to last forever – with too many stack to clear anyway -.-
3 vs 15 Got CC’d to death because you didn’t have enough stability.
Sounds like it’s working as intended. 3 people should not be immune to that much incoming CC.
It does make sense, yes. 3 people should not be able to seriously impact 15 people trying to roll in.
That’s in addition to me personally preferring stack-based effects (in general) because that gives more things to tweak.
That being said, WvW has an overall issue where it doesn’t encourage the two less-populated realms to group up in some meaningful manner. That’s really all it needs to do. Instead it rewards the top two realms raining down on the least populated one.
Whatever it is the stability changes nerfed outnumbered teams and favors zerging, it’s the complete opposite of what WvW needs. Honestly if 5 amazing players could defeat 15 bad players it would be good for the game. Instead Anet is encouraging blobs spamming 1 and rolling over smaller servers.
Also half the problem is the Area of Effect limit, which is way too low.
When 5 people fight a group of 10 people literally half the AoE damage is lost in the AoE cap for the smaller group, but for the group of 10 all their AoE hits target. It’s honestly quite unfair; other games like ESO found the following solution which is way times better than GW2 limit: As an AoE hits more and more targets the damage dealt to additional targets decreases by some scaled percentage.
3 vs 15 Got CC’d to death because you didn’t have enough stability.
Sounds like it’s working as intended. 3 people should not be immune to that much incoming CC.
It does make sense, yes. 3 people should not be able to seriously impact 15 people trying to roll in.
That’s in addition to me personally preferring stack-based effects (in general) because that gives more things to tweak.
That being said, WvW has an overall issue where it doesn’t encourage the two less-populated realms to group up in some meaningful manner. That’s really all it needs to do. Instead it rewards the top two realms raining down on the least populated one.
Whatever it is the stability changes nerfed outnumbered teams and favors zerging, it’s the complete opposite of what WvW needs. Honestly if 5 amazing players could defeat 15 bad players it would be good for the game. Instead Anet is encouraging blobs spamming 1 and rolling over smaller servers.
Also half the problem is the Area of Effect limit, which is way too low.
When 5 people fight a group of 10 people literally half the AoE damage is lost in the AoE cap for the smaller group, but for the group of 10 all their AoE hits target. It’s honestly quite unfair; other games like ESO found the following solution which is way times better than GW2 limit: As an AoE hits more and more targets the damage dealt to additional targets decreases by some scaled percentage.
lol soooo you’re saying that when uneven numbered teams face off against each other, it is unfair to one team. I think you’re in the wrong game mode. Maybe try your hand at PvP which actually does have evenly matched teams pitted against each other.
i like the affects on pve, buuuut wvw needs an overhaul anyways im tired of seeing big zergs and it would be nice if small groups could defeat them
I hate giant zergs too, which is why I barely go to wvw. I feel like the changes should have made it easier to split an enemy zerg by dropping walls on them, but maybe I’m wrong?
It should also be noted that the stab changes were made with HoT taken into account. There will certainly be many changes in the meta. Whatever happens, Anet can always increase or decrease the number of stacks each skill gives to balance it out.
3 vs 15 Got CC’d to death because you didn’t have enough stability.
Sounds like it’s working as intended. 3 people should not be immune to that much incoming CC.
It does make sense, yes. 3 people should not be able to seriously impact 15 people trying to roll in.
That’s in addition to me personally preferring stack-based effects (in general) because that gives more things to tweak.
That being said, WvW has an overall issue where it doesn’t encourage the two less-populated realms to group up in some meaningful manner. That’s really all it needs to do. Instead it rewards the top two realms raining down on the least populated one.
Whatever it is the stability changes nerfed outnumbered teams and favors zerging, it’s the complete opposite of what WvW needs. Honestly if 5 amazing players could defeat 15 bad players it would be good for the game. Instead Anet is encouraging blobs spamming 1 and rolling over smaller servers.
Also half the problem is the Area of Effect limit, which is way too low.
When 5 people fight a group of 10 people literally half the AoE damage is lost in the AoE cap for the smaller group, but for the group of 10 all their AoE hits target. It’s honestly quite unfair; other games like ESO found the following solution which is way times better than GW2 limit: As an AoE hits more and more targets the damage dealt to additional targets decreases by some scaled percentage.
lol soooo you’re saying that when uneven numbered teams face off against each other, it is unfair to one team. I think you’re in the wrong game mode. Maybe try your hand at PvP which actually does have evenly matched teams pitted against each other.
Well I’m not saying it, it’s a simple fact that the game mechanics favors bigger blobs, other than skills and players numbers the AoE cap and stability change are a buff to blobs and a nerf to smaller groups. It’s not as if blobs needed the game mechanics to be in their advantage, considering they have more people to start with.
I recommend the “perish” as I did. I deeply regret being a paying customer of this company and I highly recommend everyone else to stop paying, (stop buying gems) don’t take my word for it, experience the pitfalls for yourselves.
I sencirly hope that as a business it is their intention to drive people such as myself and others that buy gems on monthly or even weekly basis to quit doing so. Obviously we do not fit A-Nets target demographic and should be removed from it entirely.
I recommend the “perish” as I did. I deeply regret being a paying customer of this company and I highly recommend everyone else to stop paying, (stop buying gems) don’t take my word for it, experience the pitfalls for yourselves.
I sencirly hope that as a business it is their intention to drive people such as myself and others that buy gems on monthly or even weekly basis to quit doing so. Obviously we do not fit A-Nets target demographic and should be removed from it entirely.
If you’re so dissatisfied why are you creeping around the forums instead of just going. They’re not going to change their setup for you. You’re right. You are not their target demo. You are also not representative of anything save yourself. They don’t need you, so if you don’t enjoy the game then you should find something you do enjoy. Your loss won’t impact them.
Well I’m not saying it, it’s a simple fact that the game mechanics favors bigger blobs, other than skills and players numbers the AoE cap and stability change are a buff to blobs and a nerf to smaller groups. It’s not as if blobs needed the game mechanics to be in their advantage, considering they have more people to start with.
And what you’re describing is the nature of WvW. It is intended to be like that. That is true of any war throughout history. The bigger your army, the bigger your chances that you will win.
I recommend the “perish” as I did. I deeply regret being a paying customer of this company and I highly recommend everyone else to stop paying, (stop buying gems) don’t take my word for it, experience the pitfalls for yourselves.
I sencirly hope that as a business it is their intention to drive people such as myself and others that buy gems on monthly or even weekly basis to quit doing so. Obviously we do not fit A-Nets target demographic and should be removed from it entirely.
If you’re so dissatisfied why are you creeping around the forums instead of just going. They’re not going to change their setup for you. You’re right. You are not their target demo. You are also not representative of anything save yourself. They don’t need you, so if you don’t enjoy the game then you should find something you do enjoy. Your loss won’t impact them.
You are absolutely right as well, any paying customer whatsoever such as myself is not a part of their target demo, their target demo as a business that wants to make money are obviously the non-paying customers such as yourself. That has to be it. As a business, they make money by not getting paid. That has to be it.
you’re a very smart person and nailed it as it is and pointed it out to us. Thanks, I appreciate it.
I recommend the “perish” as I did. I deeply regret being a paying customer of this company and I highly recommend everyone else to stop paying, (stop buying gems) don’t take my word for it, experience the pitfalls for yourselves.
I sencirly hope that as a business it is their intention to drive people such as myself and others that buy gems on monthly or even weekly basis to quit doing so. Obviously we do not fit A-Nets target demographic and should be removed from it entirely.
If you’re so dissatisfied why are you creeping around the forums instead of just going. They’re not going to change their setup for you. You’re right. You are not their target demo. You are also not representative of anything save yourself. They don’t need you, so if you don’t enjoy the game then you should find something you do enjoy. Your loss won’t impact them.
You are absolutely right as well, any paying customer whatsoever such as myself is not a part of their target demo, their target demo as a business that wants to make money are obviously the non-paying customers such as yourself. That has to be it. As a business, they make money by not getting paid. That has to be it.
you’re a very smart person and nailed it as it is and pointed it out to us. Thanks, I appreciate it.
What exactly makes you think I don’t, or have not purchased gems? The last time I bought gems I accidentally bought twice as many and even though they were willing to refund the unintended value I just kept them, cause sometimes they come in handy. I’ve purchased many things through the Gem Store. If I find value in an item I’ll buy it.
You are not a special snowflake, nor some kind of mysterious demographic because you have occasionally, or even regularly, purchased gems. What you are is a disgruntled burned out player who is taking it out on the company that presumably has entertained you enough to inspire you to purchase all those gems, but it no longer doing so.
This is why I tried to explain that you are only representative of yourself. Whatever preconceived notions you might have are most likely wrong.
.