Guild Wars 2

then neither should poison

I don’t really follow your logic there.

If it was “since poison slows reviving then healing power should speed it up” then it would make more sense.

Quickness and slow affect the rate while poison would be affecting magnitude.

Khisanth.2948:

I don’t really follow your logic there.

If it was “since poison slows reviving then healing power should speed it up” then it would make more sense.

Quickness and slow affect the rate while poison would be affecting magnitude.

poison directly slows down revival rate, just like slow. worse, it can prevent revival skills from reviving

why does it need an opposite to make sense to you?

Lumpy.8760:

Khisanth.2948:

I don’t really follow your logic there.

If it was “since poison slows reviving then healing power should speed it up” then it would make more sense.

Quickness and slow affect the rate while poison would be affecting magnitude.

poison directly slows down revival rate, just like slow. worse, it can prevent revival skills from reviving

why does it need an opposite to make sense to you?

It doesn’t; that was the point of his post.

The purpose of poison is to cut heals and subsequently res speed. Quickness/Slow are blanket effects which cover any animation and are meant to be used on people who are up and fighting.

Poison slows down revival rate because it’s POISONING YOU. It’s not an issue about speeding up or slowing down time it’s slowing down healing.

Lumpy.8760:

then neither should poison

then neither should healing abilities!

But why stop there, damaging abilities shouldnt affect people who are downed either! They should be able to be revived, or stomped. That’s it.

/sarcasm

Baconomics.8674:

But why stop there, damaging abilities shouldnt affect people who are downed either! They should be able to be revived, or stomped. That’s it.

/sarcasm

That actually sounds like it could be a fun random effect similar to GW1’s Fluxes.

Or maybe a Fractal Insability – all foes get downed instead of killed when defeated, cannot be damaged so only way to kill is to stomp, they cannot be healed or revived by allies but they can use the downed 4 skill to revive themselves if not stomped fast enough.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Baconomics.8674:

But why stop there, damaging abilities shouldnt affect people who are downed either! They should be able to be revived, or stomped. That’s it.

/sarcasm

That actually sounds like it could be a fun random effect similar to GW1’s Fluxes.

Or maybe a Fractal Insability – all foes get downed instead of killed when defeated, cannot be damaged so only way to kill is to stomp, they cannot be healed or revived by allies but they can use the downed 4 skill to revive themselves if not stomped fast enough.

That sounds better than some of the existing instabilities.

When you are ressing something you are healing it.

Thus it gets cut by poison.

They still need to fix the Battle Standard / Poison Field interactions.

They are inconsistent across the board. Sometimes you’ll res them, others they won’t res, and the 3rd one which is comical, they res with 1 hp and die to poison ticks.

Behellagh.1468:

Poison slows down revival rate because it’s POISONING YOU. It’s not an issue about speeding up or slowing down time it’s slowing down healing.

for the sake of argument, Burning should slow down revival rate because it’s BURNING YOU.

and so on and so forth.

Actually I am less after making a point and more after discussing this topic.

I think we can all agree that Anet made the changes to reviving for balance and hopefully a better game, not following logic or realism.

DeceiverX.8361:

Lumpy.8760:

Khisanth.2948:

I don’t really follow your logic there.

If it was “since poison slows reviving then healing power should speed it up” then it would make more sense.

Quickness and slow affect the rate while poison would be affecting magnitude.

poison directly slows down revival rate, just like slow. worse, it can prevent revival skills from reviving

why does it need an opposite to make sense to you?

It doesn’t; that was the point of his post.

The purpose of poison is to cut heals and subsequently res speed. Quickness/Slow are blanket effects which cover any animation and are meant to be used on people who are up and fighting.

how are you so aware that slow and quickness were intended to only function on characters not reviving/finishing? it still affects downed characters. we went years with quickness affecting it until after they added its opposite: slow. how do you know whether poison isn’t the same and they just haven’t tackled it yet?

Lumpy.8760:

DeceiverX.8361:

Lumpy.8760:

Khisanth.2948:

I don’t really follow your logic there.

If it was “since poison slows reviving then healing power should speed it up” then it would make more sense.

Quickness and slow affect the rate while poison would be affecting magnitude.

poison directly slows down revival rate, just like slow. worse, it can prevent revival skills from reviving

why does it need an opposite to make sense to you?

It doesn’t; that was the point of his post.

The purpose of poison is to cut heals and subsequently res speed. Quickness/Slow are blanket effects which cover any animation and are meant to be used on people who are up and fighting.

how are you so aware that slow and quickness were intended to only function on characters not reviving/finishing? it still affects downed characters. we went years with quickness affecting it until after they added its opposite: slow. how do you know whether poison isn’t the same and they just haven’t tackled it yet?

Because if quickness and slow were intended to truly affect res speed they wouldn’t have been nerfed not to. Quickness access has also gone up dramatically over the past year, and it was typically on builds which did not at all feature much ressing potential. It’s not comparable to mention it went unchanged for years on the basis the mechanic was not a boon/changed/buffed/got increased accessibility on-demand substantially over the past year.

And if poison wasn’t intended to cut such healing, it wouldn’t have been described as being a useful effect to prevent enemy resurrection and it wouldn’t have been an addition they gave to the condition in 2012; yes, poison used to not cut healing during the BWE’s before launch, so its heal-cutting was an afterthought they gave it despite it not originally having the effect. It’s had it all these years because it was deliberately meant to.

DeceiverX.8361:

And if poison wasn’t intended to cut such healing, it wouldn’t have been described as being a useful effect to prevent enemy resurrection and it wouldn’t have been an addition they gave to the condition in 2012; yes, poison used to not cut healing during the BWE’s before launch, so its heal-cutting was an afterthought they gave it despite it not originally having the effect. It’s had it all these years because it was deliberately meant to.

He’s right, though. Poison should no longer damage healing specifically because when it was added as an afternote it stacked duration, not intensity, but that has changed and thus the “afternote” should too. Poison is simply a more powerful, and more difficult to come by for most classes, bleed now.

Abilities were not changed in their cooldowns/uptime to reflect the stacking DoT effect, though in order to make it a viable DoT, because poison application abilities with substantial duration either have substantial cooldowns, or have very low durations and very high re-application periods. Bleeding is high access with high duration but low damage per tick. It’s meant to be both a bread-and-butter condition for damage and coverage of other conditions. If you really want to talk about replacements for bleed, your argument is better-focused on torment, which for a variety of classes, is more accessible than bleeding and offers strictly better DoT in a majority of cases by a large margin.

By this logic we could remove all DoT conditions from the game since originally there was no condition damage stat and the effects the builds have via synergy with duration bonuses and control conditions is quite high, no? I mean just look at Reaper’s chill durations. It hasn’t been a problem all this time, though, so maybe they could change it just like slow and quickness, is what you’re saying. And I mean that through global changes by cutting chill’s duration on all sources.

Like I said, this was the explicit design of the condition, and durations and application sources were kept in check to make stacking huge amounts of poison not possible unless for very brief periods of time. The effect’s primary use still remains as cutting healing and was designed and is still designed around cutting healing.

DeceiverX.8361:

Abilities were not changed in their cooldowns/uptime to reflect the stacking DoT effect, though in order to make it a viable DoT, because poison application abilities with substantial duration either have substantial cooldowns, or have very low durations and very high re-application periods. Bleeding is high access with high duration but low damage per tick. It’s meant to be both a bread-and-butter condition for damage and coverage of other conditions. If you really want to talk about replacements for bleed, your argument is better-focused on torment, which for a variety of classes, is more accessible than bleeding and offers strictly better DoT in a majority of cases by a large margin.

By this logic we could remove all DoT conditions from the game since originally there was no condition damage stat and the effects the builds have via synergy with duration bonuses and control conditions is quite high, no? I mean just look at Reaper’s chill durations. It hasn’t been a problem all this time, though, so maybe they could change it just like slow and quickness, is what you’re saying. And I mean that through global changes by cutting chill’s duration on all sources.

Like I said, this was the explicit design of the condition, and durations and application sources were kept in check to make stacking huge amounts of poison not possible unless for very brief periods of time. The effect’s primary use still remains as cutting healing and was designed and is still designed around cutting healing.

Poison wasn’t “designed” that way. Poison probably was fine with just stacking duration like in the past rather than intensity. As for stacking huge amounts of poison you miss the problem; poison stacks intensity just like bleed, it runs concurrent with bleed, but it only requires one stack to maintain the effect of still lowering your healing. So whether it’s 12 stacks of poison or 2 stacks of poison and 10 bleeds the outcome is exactly the same. For at least three classes off the top of my head it’s easy to acquire, easily applied, and easily maintained but instead of just maintaining a modifying effect is now a viable option to add to a condition build as an aggressive source of damage.

Let me restate this:

The more stacks of torment the more punishing moving is. However instead of “poison reduces your healing amount by 2% per stack” it’s a flat 33%, so it really doesn’t matter how long you maintain it, where you get it from, how many stacks, etc. It is a base punishment + now an additional effectiveness.

It’s not a matter of comparing it to other conditions relative to damage. It’s how it works as a mechanic.

Thing is, they nerfed bleeding when they made poison stack. Bleeding potency got cut as a result of a few builds getting a few stacks of poison, and because the primary source of condition damage output comes from high-stacked bleeds (they changed the cap so this could be offset by allowing more bleeds to be stacked as well), torment, and the buffed confusion, with buffed/stacking burning taking the dominant DoT condition. Poison access in general is low-duration/low-cooldown or high-duration/high-cooldown, and bulk application is quite difficult. The only real outlier here is MH dagger thief getting it on the AA chain, but frankly, the AA applies no other condition and gets one stack for 6s per entire chain, only DB applies bleeding, and the majority of the thief’s options are horrible to begin with. Otherwise, poison-uptime is best-upheld by elementalists with Sigil of Doom. A variety of sources that used to inflict permanent poison no longer can by the removal of stacking duration, making the condition act more prominently as a healing interrupt or brief boost in condition damage. High-stacking high-duration poison doesn’t really exist in the game except for Soul Spiral on the reaper, and even that is less than 30% uptime even with food and Viper gear in WvW.

And no, cutting heals for extended periods of time was the explicit design of the condition. It used to not apply healing reductions, but it was later changed to do so because there was no counter to healing and no benefit running the heals which cleansed conditions rather than just the biggest heal per time, and made healing always an off-cooldown thing.

2% per stack would be absolutely dreadful and de-value the condition to the point of it having no purpose. Burning out-damages it by more than a factor of two. Bleeding per stack does almost the same amount yet has over four times the duration potential on most builds and is the single-most accessible condition in the game (hello 20+ seconds of bleed per auto on war, 20+ seconds of 3 stacks of bleed on thief, 1 minute+ durations of several stacks from a corruption bleed necro, etc., etc.). Confusion’s damage per time unit is higher, and Torment’s is 50% more than bleed and poison while the target is moving. Even cutting heals is hard these days with druids and tempests running pretty much permanent condition removal, necros not getting substantial healing in shroud, thieves getting huge condition removal buffs on Daredevil, Revs getting a lot of resistance uptime, and warriors/berserkers being able to out-heal a substantial amount of condition damage via healing signet when such healing cuts are not applied.

Frankly, unless focus-fired by multiple people with lots of poison in their builds/classes, poison stacks will rarely go above maybe five stacks. In which case it’s not the heal cut that did the killing but being ganked by multiple people, and if the 2% figure was replaced instead of the static reduction, the heal cut is worthless and the damage for its accessibility sucks, making the condition strictly bad.

I didn’t compare poison to the damage of other conditions, initially. You did. You said it was strictly a better bleed. I disagree, because the conditions are wildly different in their accessibility and intent. I said that poison was designed to cut healing, which during the BWE’s when it got reworked, it was, per ANet’s own words and intentions. Arguing against that is arguing against fact.

I said this because slow was not designed to cut healing, because if it was, then it wouldn’t have been changed not to so quickly, and the effect is global to all animations. The spike animation slow might have been intentional (based solely off of revenant downed state, but I have no genuine factual basis for this argument other than inspection), and frankly, I don’t have an issue with it. The healing aspect slowing down, however, made no sense, because the animations for healing weren’t getting cut. To nerf slow and quickness simply made sense because the PvP meta was riding on these effects on top of invuln/block effects, pretty much making people either unkillable with fast resurrections or dead on down from it being so slow. These were unintended side effects, clearly, for if they were not, we’d have seen adjustments made to the skills which apply these effects via massively increased cooldowns, seen resurrection be made impossible while invuln, or resurrection abilities across all classes getting more quickness access. This isn’t the case, so I think it’s fair to say such behavior was unintentional.

Poison, mechanically, was designed to cut heals. And as such, despite offering some damage potential, it is largely used as such, because durations are overall weak and accessibility per cooldown quite low, which again, was also directly addressed by ANet during the reworks to poison, for they changed it to stack damage and not duration because they found that most fights just boiled down to everyone getting 100% poison uptime because every few hits would get a short poison duration and re-bumped the condition to maintain its heal cut for too long, or multi-hit attacks would stack ridiculously long poison duration and maintain it permanently. Most poison-applying skills are multi-hit with a stack being applied per hit on low duration, so instead cutting a heal via the condition requires better timing as per a pre-emptive interrupt, but the damage is maintained unless cleansed. This is how it was re-designed and what ANet said. Go dig through patch notes and blog posts, reddit, etc. if you do not believe me.

So with reduced duration uptime, the condition becomes easier to cleanse, making healing easier than it used to be. How is this problematic for a condition that per tick does so little damage when its durations are so short on the abilities meant to inflict poison such that it cannot be permanently maintained?

Your issue stems from the heal cut being applied in full from only one stack and seemingly high amounts of coverage. Sigil of Doom is the real reason this happens, especially on elementalists and engineers, since they can proc it each attunement/kit swap, not because of an inherent flaw with the condition design and the abilities which apply it. To ask for such a nerf would require a full re-design of poison in general to make access very high for stacking and nerf the damage per stack, which puts everyone back in the same place as originally with the whole condition-stack-cap problem by just inflating the numbers for no reason.

Lumpy.8760:

how do you know whether poison isn’t the same and they just haven’t tackled it yet?

Because it’s kitten ed secondary effect IS REDUCED HEALING. You cannot get more obvious that that. Slow and quickness shouldnt have affected reviving in the first place.

As for warbanners, while it says, I think, “revive allies,” it’s true effect is to HEAL the downed person for maybe 90% or so of their downed health. Because it’s a healing effect, it happens to be reduced by poison, so it wont always 100% revive people.

I find it funny that people try to find a logical explanation to that. It’s really simple.

Poison was there since the beginning of the game and it was a good mechanics. Quickness too, but it was accessible in such a limited way that it didn’t created any problem.

Now we have a lot of quickness, and slow was added. That was just too much powerful and so anet decided to nerf those two. It’s all about balance. For now Anet don’t think poison is a balance issue (so do I) so they didn’t nerf it. If a some point poison become a balance issue, they will nerf it. Simple as that.

Skills that heal people can heal them from downed state as well. Poison reduces healing effectiveness to counter healing in general. Neither of those things need changed other than some ground AoE heals don’t seem to hit downed people like Tempest’s, although I’m not 100% sure. It’s not hard to rez while poisoned anyways when you have teammates so it’s hardly ruining anything.

Quickness stomp was just too OP and slow literally just broke the stomp animation completely. There’s enough traits and skills that help and prevent rez/stomping currently anyways. To make it more OP there’s a lot of access to it. Revenent has super easy access to quickness stomp and Druid slow AoE is easy to abuse, I did it myself a lot to completely shutdown stomping.

no one can speak for intent or design; mostly because we aren’t developers, but also because it can change.

how about poison stops preventing revival skills from fully reviving, and instead reduces the amount of health that they stand up with?

Lumpy.8760:

no one can speak for intent or design; mostly because we aren’t developers, but also because it can change.

how about poison stops preventing revival skills from fully reviving, and instead reduces the amount of health that they stand up with?

In all instances of my posts above, I did speak for the intent of design because I researched this information and was playing during the creation and formal discussion on the subjects from ArenaNet to the players.

As I said, arguing regarding these design decisions is quite literally arguing against the word of ANet when announcing these design changes and decisions.

Lumpy.8760:

no one can speak for intent or design; mostly because we aren’t developers, but also because it can change.

how about poison stops preventing revival skills from fully reviving, and instead reduces the amount of health that they stand up with?

Actually, we can. Mostly because it’s anet’s INTENT and DESIGN to make these changes when they drop patches.

Quickness and slow are animation effects.

Poison is a condition specifically designed for reduced healing therefor rallying is slower by 33% (look at poison tooltip, it says 33% reduced healing effects) why would it not consider rallying as a healing mechanic when you’re healing?

sephiroth.4217:

Quickness and slow are animation effects.

Poison is a condition specifically designed for reduced healing therefor rallying is slower by 33% (look at poison tooltip, it says 33% reduced healing effects) why would it not consider rallying as a healing mechanic when you’re healing?

The skills however state reviving…not rallying. I mean if we’re going to play the semantics game, those aren’t the same things.

You’re all quite missing the point. Reviving scales with the HP of the target so that the time is usually the same. Rezz someone with 20k hp and you get a big number, rezz someone with 10k hp and you get half that number, no matter your healing power.
Quickness and slow applied a multiplier to that fixed time, as it quickened/slowed down the time between ticks, which was unwanted. Usually the healing power does not affect reviving, and as poison is a direct cut applied to the final output it effectively lengthens the revive time, which was only comparable with slow.

What about “confused”?

How can someone be reviving someone effectively while “confused”?

DeceiverX.8361:

Lumpy.8760:

no one can speak for intent or design; mostly because we aren’t developers, but also because it can change.

how about poison stops preventing revival skills from fully reviving, and instead reduces the amount of health that they stand up with?

In all instances of my posts above, I did speak for the intent of design because I researched this information and was playing during the creation and formal discussion on the subjects from ArenaNet to the players.

As I said, arguing regarding these design decisions is quite literally arguing against the word of ANet when announcing these design changes and decisions.

being a consumer, a statistic and a testimony has nothing to do with understanding the ever-changing intent and designs of a product

Aidan Savage.2078:

Lumpy.8760:

no one can speak for intent or design; mostly because we aren’t developers, but also because it can change.

how about poison stops preventing revival skills from fully reviving, and instead reduces the amount of health that they stand up with?

Actually, we can. Mostly because it’s anet’s INTENT and DESIGN to make these changes when they drop patches.

your tone contradicts, but your point reiterates mine. their intent is what makes patches possible, not ours