Guild Wars 2

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/10szrq/insight_from_jon_peters_and_karl_mclain_ingame_in/

Some snippets:

Jon
bunker guardian has to much retal period. obviously. frankitteno much prot also. but that is not the heart of the matter. the core problem is real. because with it, bunker builds eliminate spike builds from the meta game. which in turn makes bunker builds OP. so the counter to them is beeing countered by them. aka balance problem. defensive builds are important, they help establish strategies. but they are als determining the entire meta right know.

Zed Zebes > is that PVP blog ever made?
Jon
its done in localization. but that team is backed up. working on localizing other aspects so we are backlogged

kittenmer > so how will u guys fix AFKers and people who leave during tournaments?
Jon
afkers is system in place already. just needs refining. just like lots of things. this is a big game

Kriptic > i do hope the concept of portal will still stay intact, that skill is essential in WvW to break up campers
Jon
portal is great. not sure about taking repair kit through it yet. its cool but its just a big too big of a need on mesmers

Not sure if I agree with Jon’s idea of the meta here.

Bunker is supposed to be the counter to burst, not the other way around. If you bunker down, you’re supressing against burst damage so you don’t die in an instant and live long enough for reinforcements. That part is working how it should., it’s not the job of a burst class to take down the bunker, but to quickly eliminate its reinforcements.

It’s your steady DPS that need to be successful against bunkers. You enable build type to take the role of another and that build type will rule the meta just as badly as Guardians do now.

Lowering retaliation is good, but there needs to be improvements in the classes that work well with AoE and condition damage so that those builds are more effective at their roles.

How is steady DPS supposed to take down a class with tons of protection, healing, reflects and the rest? You’re supposed to overwhelm the bunker, who should not be able to hurt you very much as a cost of their spec. Not slowly whittle him down.

At least that’s my impression. Slowly killing them is not countering bunker.

Kalar has a point I think, but maybe more than he realises

My limits to what a bunker should be capable of is: a steady dps should get him down, even if can live through short burst.

I know conditions work against guardians who are defensively build, but can one steady dps really get a good bunker guardian down alone?

I can’t tell myself, not experienced enough here. But from what info i gather: that is exactly the issue here: 1 steady dps can’t…

Dashel, if a burst can get the bunker down, and the bunker is a bunbker because he can live through burst.
Where does the balancing work on than?

I see what you’re saying, but it has to be either the steady dps, or the burst getting a bunker down.
If neither, than there is a problem.
Which, apparantly, there is now.

Conditions are probably the key here.
And also the reflects you mention.
If you bomb a bunker, that bomb isn’t supposed to bounce back at you

Guardians have much better access to condition removal than my Ranger. I can accept if the Ranger just sucks at dealing with bunker Guardians, what I dislike is how brain dead they make it for them with the Retaliation.

I know guardians have conditions removal, it’s not that I don’t agree with you.

My point was: maybe they shouldn’t have…
This would make them survive the burst but not the steady damage.

Retaliation is a problem by itself. It’s weird they got that too.

To me retaliation seems like the perfect defense for a more damage orientated build.
Like: burst me down and it will hurt you. Wait till I wasted it and I’m dead meat… that sort of reasoning.
And not: burst me down and it will hurt you. Wait till I wasted it and you still won’t kill me…

Pretty awesome if its real.

Kimbald.2697:

To me retaliation seems like the perfect defense for a more damage orientated build.
Like: burst me down and it will hurt you. Wait till I wasted it and I’m dead meat… that sort of reasoning.
And not: burst me down and it will hurt you. Wait till I wasted it and you still won’t kill me…

Therein lies the issue though. You can’t wait til it’s wasted since it has a lot of uptime and it’s easy to get that uptime. It’s not like you’re dumping 30 points into some otherwise not very useful spec line for a trait. You’re picking up a Greatsword for 50% uptime. You can trait for it to trigger on CC, on using a Virtue, on Aegis end, trait to have each application last 25% longer. There’s a ton of utilities too with Retal on it. Save yourself, stand your ground… one of the Virtues. It’s not like I’m going to wait you out to burst.

What is meant by “template” when he says templates are coming but paid tourneys first?

Template = ability to save your old/other builds and instantly load them up whenever you want (instead of manually respeccing). Also people can share their builds with a line of code that other people can simply copy+paste to use.

You’re probably right Dashel, but again it was a suggestion how it should work for me, not how I think it works now.

Just throwing out possible solutions here.

To me it’s somewhat of a disapointment that there is any build at all that requires more than 1 to take it down.
Just like it’s a disapointment some glass canons are nearly impossible to react to.

There you have 2 factors that ruin any pvp balance for me, but that’s personal of course.

It is comforting though that this doesn’t seem to be the designers intend.

The answer has already been stated: Condition damage.

In general it needs to be more effective. As stated before, Guardian has a wide variety of condition removals, while area effects that cause conditions are not as persistant. Duration increases in Condition fields, particuarlly Necromancer would be a powerful boon against bunker builds.

But bunker builds are MEANT to be stalling. They’re meant to make it so they’re buying time for the teammates to come help. This function shouldn’t be removed, just adjusted so that the lenght of time is not so long. The answer isn’t making bunkers more vulnerable to burst, that just ruins the purpose of building anything but burst damage.

Just make it so that the bunker can be worn out quicker, with the roles that should be more of a presence than they are.

Kimbald.2697:

To me it’s somewhat of a disapointment that there is any build at all that requires more than 1 to take it down.

Just like it’s a disapointment some glass canons are nearly impossible to react to.

See, both of these are misnomers.

1 Person can take down a bunker, it just takes a long time to do so, and, if you’re not built correctly, yes, they can pull you into a stalemate. That’s the design of a bunker. If it takes two people to take one bunker down at all, it means one person is being effectively countered by the bunker and shouldn’t be wasting his time on him, but instead should be focusing other targets.

As far as not being able to counter glass cannons, this is an awareness issue. If you can’t beat one, you’re gearing or playing wrong. Glass cannons are by far the easiest to kill, and every profession can do so.

It’s not a game issue if you get caught off guard or out played. And there is a wide difference between a good burst damage player and a bad one. The bad ones die very easily and the good ones will wait until they can catch you.

The issue with those is just learning how to be prepared for them, always keep some sort of defense at the ready.

There’s a larger root meta problem going on here that is explaining a lot of player’s symptoms, which is the lack of AoE/Condition presence in s/tPvp. These need to be made more attractive to players as they serve to address a lot of concerns players have.

Glass Cannons that have to enter an AoE field to reach their target are going to melt regardless of slealth, or have to pull away and not do their burst. And Bunker classes are worn down by the same AoE/Condition sections that are being neglected.

We’re already seeing an emerging trend of AoE Zergs using group numbers and mass field damage to wrack up kills and win every engagement. (It’s not any more effective than a full glass cannon group, mind you, but it proves my principle correct.) This trend woulden’t occur if AoEs and conditions were more effective than they are.

tl;dl? Buff/Fix Necro and Elementalist Conditions/AoEs.

as a necro I find killing bunker guardians pretty easy.. it just takes a year and a day heh and before I know it the enemy team has shown up to deal with me.

In my mind bunker builds are not necessarily meant to counter burst or vice versa. They are just meant to drag out the engagement, so that reinforcements can show up and mop up. So a fight that would last 20 secs is turned into a fight that lasts 1 min.

If anything counters burst it would be an aoe spec, burst or otherwise.
And, if anything where to counter a bunker build it would have to be a condition/boon stripper type of build that takes away or bypasses the targets durability.

Re: dps build = burst build atm… maybe necromancers? Im still confused about how those work.!

I have to say I disagree heavily on the fundamental principle that burst should be countering bunker. This just comes from general pvp knowledge acquired through trial and error of balancing in other games on a soft rock paper scissor system.

If burst can counter bunkers, what doesn’t keep the meta from transitioning to full burst teams? The strength of burst is to kill off other burst classes or medium support targets quickly; that is simply a basic fundamental that has been tried and true in many different pvp games.

Heavy bunkers are supposed to exist so burst teams cant simply dominate the meta. They’re supposed to wear down burst classes since these classes are fragile and bunkers are able to resist them.

It is the job of heavy condition builds to counter bunker targets since their access to conditions allow them to bypass toughness as well as be able to continually apply a strong amount of pressure that downs these targets.

If bunkers are somehow surviving sustained condition builds, then it is an inherent problem with giving bunkers too many condition removal abilities, not too much survivability versus burst classes.

I simply can’t agree in anyway with Mr. Peter’s logic on said issue. He wants to nerf bunkers by allowing burst to counter them, and by doing so force the meta into all heavy dps burst teams? That is effectively killing the role of not only bunkers, but heavy condition and sustained damage builds as well as support builds. This change will effectively turn sPvP into a cool down blowing frag fest more closely related to that of an FPS rather than an MMO team based strategy game.

I sincerely hope he reflects upon this decision heavily and realize that by altering the burst to bunker counter, hes reducing the depth of the pvp meta game immensely.

Burst forces Bunker which forces Sustained Condition builds and Support builds peppered in. This is how a healthy well developed balanced pvp system is designed; not the contrary of Burst counters Bunker and everything else.

I agree with what Chuckles says.

This would totally make everyone just roll complete glasscanon dps setups if there is no counter left to them.

Let bunker builds do what theyre best at, they sacrifice pretty much all of their offense to even do so.

If you want to drive out a bunker, take at least two teammates if you´re unable to get him off the point alone.

p.s. I play an engi, not guardian.

Arvin.3124:

If you want to drive out a bunker, take at least two teammates if you´re unable to get him off the point alone.

I can agree with the statement: send another build player if you can’t get the guardian yourself, like sending a condition build if you’re burst…
I can not accept the necesity to bring TWO players.

That’s the fine line for me.

The point of bringing a heavy defensive class with no offensive is to hold a point long enough for your team to come in and back you up. Instead, you’re given support skills to aid your team in fights.

Retal allows those tank classes to not only have the support and survivability, but also the damage to kill others.

It’s just a broken concept and caters to the lowest common denominator of players.

Don’t know how to play your class? Can’t even “spam 2 to win”? Play a bunker guardian! Just run around and heal while people kill themselves on you.

Don’t know what to say to people who actually think that’s a good idea.

I don’t think Jon said burst should counter a bunker. You guys are putting words in his mouth. He thinks bunkers counter burst too harshly. We all know by now that you bring a poison condition damage build to counter a bunker. That doesn’t change the severity of how hard something else is countered, unless it is countered with the same severity. Fact is bunker builds even when countered take a good chunk of time to bring down. These aren’t countered with the same severity, primarily due to Retaliation.

Mr. Peter’s comment, “The counter to them is being countered by them” unless out of context is pretty difficulty to perceive in a different light.

Kimbald.2697:

Arvin.3124:

If you want to drive out a bunker, take at least two teammates if you´re unable to get him off the point alone.

I can agree with the statement: send another build player if you can’t get the guardian yourself, like sending a condition build if you’re burst…
I can not accept the necesity to bring TWO players.

That’s the fine line for me.

Well, I agree with that. But with the right spec you can drive a guardian of his point alone in most cases (not talking about killing him/her). People roll glass cannons way too much already, they shouldn´t be TOO viable.. Every spec has and should have their counters.

Chuckles.8153:

Mr. Peter’s comment, “The counter to them is being countered by them” unless out of context is pretty difficulty to perceive in a different light.

That comment simply means he feels one of the best ways to deal with bunker builds is to also bring your own. Anything beyond that is why most devs don’t post opinions on public forums. People put words in their mouths and take a single word to mean paragraphs of data.

If you disagree with this, then you would agree to not bringing at least one bunker build into your tPvP. I personally would agree with Jon however, that in whatever the meta is right now bringing in at least one bunker build is a very smart thing to do. Does he plan to do something about it? Probably, but I doubt it is in the way you characterized earlier in the thread.

Soooo, you are telling me Jon Peters wrote this:

“and you can do that in WvW in fact. i do that every time i log into WvW. you can absolutely gank in WvW. the only reason for not beeing able to is if you are sucking.plain and simple. it the truth, i call it like i see it”

Yet i got infraction for asking a guy if he doesn’t like pvp due to lack of awareness and/or skill ?!

I call it fake.

Wow!

I pointed out that that “interview” (reddit one) had many ortographic and grammar mistakes which led me into believing it was a fake and my post got deleted? How does that not provide contribution when it’s a valid question in regard to thread’s subject?!

I’m speechless for the mods here.

No, he meant that burst counters bunkers, but ret counters burst. Go read his word again carefully.

" frankitteno much prot also. but that is not the heart of the matter. the core problem is retal. because with it, bunker builds eliminate spike builds from the meta game. which in turn makes bunker builds OP. so the counter to them is beeing countered by them. aka balance problem. "

He specifically mentioned spike builds.

Sustained DPS should counter bunkers. This allows the bunker to perform his role by stalling the enemy until his team arrives. Bunkers should counter burst. Blow CDs to burn someone down, blow CDs to counter it. Simple, effective. If burst counters bunkers, it becomes a fragfest.

See the problem when we read that you and I come up with completely different concepts of what he said. You are putting words in his mouth. That’s what “reading carefully” means. You are over-interpreting it. I read it, and all I get out of it is that he thinks Retaliation on a Guardian is too strong and Bunker builds need to be looked at. I haven’t inferred some magical connection to claims that suddenly he wants burst damage builds to counter bunker builds.

Animosity.5231:

Sustained DPS should counter bunkers. This allows the bunker to perform his role by stalling the enemy until his team arrives. Bunkers should counter burst. Blow CDs to burn someone down, blow CDs to counter it. Simple, effective. If burst counters bunkers, it becomes a fragfest.

This is where you lose me. You’re saying Sustained should counter bunker… but it still allows bunker to perform his role by stalling. So how exactly is he countered.

Dashel.8056:

Animosity.5231:

Sustained DPS should counter bunkers. This allows the bunker to perform his role by stalling the enemy until his team arrives. Bunkers should counter burst. Blow CDs to burn someone down, blow CDs to counter it. Simple, effective. If burst counters bunkers, it becomes a fragfest.

This is where you lose me. You’re saying Sustained should counter bunker… but it still allows bunker to perform his role by stalling. So how exactly is he countered.

I suppose we really shouldn’t be talking about specifically countering the bunker build but rather countering the node holding strategy that births them right?
I mean if the enemy team has to respond and come help the said bunker out, doesn’t that mean that you have successfully countered that strategy by forcing them to dump more people on that node to hold it? Perhaps thats what he meant by sustained dps countering a bunker build. If one person can put enough pressure on the bunker that the enemy team is forced to send back up to hold it then the attacker has succeeded in weakening the whole point behind the strategy.

The way I look at it is the Glass Cannon should get murdered by the well rounded player who puts some points in defense. I suppose we’re calling that sustained DPS. Bunker will outlast a sustained, since they can’t chew through his defenses quickly enough to take him down without help, but the bunker cant outlast the fully offensive cannon.

Dashel, the counter to bunkers in general is overwhelming them with conditions to counter their removal, maintaining 100% poison uptime. Killing a bunker in a time effective manner will normally involve 2 people, but bunker guardians are pretty susceptible to bomb/pistol condi engis and can be taken out by 1 engi if the engi is able to land their burst.

I really don’t get how Jon is saying that the counter to bunker builds is burst since I am pretty sure everyone makes bunkers to counter burst specs….

It was nice to know that NO ONE is going to get any PvP info until the localization team finishes their “work on other aspects” AKA the team works on more quest dialog fixes while the PvP community waits in the corner, because that’s where the red-headed stepchild is supposed to stand until they are called in for the dinner scraps.

Thanks for the link!

You don’t bring a heavy defensive player to counter heavy offensive. You bring them to counter well rounded players. Heavy defense isn’t that effective vs heavy offense in a game without healers, because that defensive class can’t put enough pressure on the offensive one to down him in time before being downed himself.

That being said, the most effective way to counter heavy defense is with a heavy offensive glass cannon class. You don’t need defense when fighting someone with little to no offensive pressure. That was the point he was making.

And that’s where retal comes in. It counters the heavy offense playstyle. This allows bunker classes to not only be effective agaisnt well-rounded consistent pressure, but also the high burst and heavy offense.

Heavy Defensive > Well-rounded
Heavy Offensive > Heavy Defense
Well-rounded > Heavy Offense

Jon
bunker guardian has to much retal period. obviously. frankitteno much prot also. but that is not the heart of the matter. the core problem is real. because with it, bunker builds eliminate spike builds from the meta game. which in turn makes bunker builds OP. so the counter to them is beeing countered by them. aka balance problem. defensive builds are important, they help establish strategies. but they are als determining the entire meta right know.

Yeah I’m still reading this as spike builds counter bunker, but Retal counters spike so balance problem. Condition might be the way it’s played now out of necessity, I know that’s how I try and deal with Guardians, but only because a power shortbow build is so absurdly easy for a Guard to counter.

Condi vrs Guardian bunker should come down to skillful use of cleanses vrs application.

Spikes vrs Guardian bunker should come down to skillful use of Retaliation vrs burst. Problem is there is way too much Retaliation.

Daays.4317:

You don’t bring a heavy defensive player to counter heavy offensive. You bring them to counter well rounded players. Heavy defense isn’t that effective vs heavy offense in a game without healers, because that defensive class can’t put enough pressure on the offensive one to down him in time before being downed himself.

That being said, the most effective way to counter heavy defense is with a heavy offensive glass cannon class. You don’t need defense when fighting someone with little to no offensive pressure. That was the point he was making.

And that’s where retal comes in. It counters the heavy offense playstyle. This allows bunker classes to not only be effective agaisnt well-rounded consistent pressure, but also the high burst and heavy offense.

Heavy Defensive > Well-rounded
Heavy Offensive > Heavy Defense
Well-rounded > Heavy Offense

How do Condition spec fit in to that?

Let me provide some perspective on this by interpreting what Jon was saying regarding the meta game. He was not strictly saying that a pure burst build is intended to counter a bunker build, rather burst damage was the means by which to counter a bunker build. The difference is subtle, but significant.

What he is proposing is a coordinated effort by two players with well-timed burst should be the way to counter a bunker build. In the meta-game there will still not be a build that flat out counters a bunker build, unless they too are bunker-ish.

For example, let’s say a power/condition necromancer + thief take on a bunker guardian. I believe the meta he is looking for is for the necro to put the guardian in a deficit and, with well-timed cc and thief burst they should be able to put the guardian into his death throes.

Currently that situation would put the guardian in a steep deficit but practically kill off the thief in the process, which would give the Guardian the opportunity to kill off the thief and potentially recover.

A more extreme case would be thief/thief vs bunker guardian. The 2x thief team should be able to finish off the guardian, but instead will probably kill themselves.

I still fail to see how a situation that necessitates two players in order to counter one player is in any way fair or balanced.

I’m glad to see he’s noticed the thief-warrior steal ability is completely ridiculous in nature.

Sprawl.3891:

so the counter to them is being countered by them. aka balance problem. defensive builds are important, they help establish strategies. but they are als determining the entire meta right know.

This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard and I’m quite scared to hear this coming from someone with the ability to make changes…

So how is the burst build the counter to the bunker? How come the bunker build isnt the counter to the burst build?

I guess this idiot rolls glass cannons in all the games hes played and wants to zomg wtf bbq pwn ju pew pew steam roll everything by smashing his face into his hotbar of mindless DPS skills and feels entitled to free kills. I cannot stand people of that mindset.

Heaven forbid people choose to play a thinking mans role and choose to go support and not follow the crowd of mindless DPS zerglings.

I guess this game is going to end up an even bigger clusterkitten of DPS being slung around mindlessly and tactics/strategy can just go out the window… While they’re at it, might as well dumb down sPvP even more by removing the current game type for team deathmatch. Oh, guess you can add crosshairs and make the game mandatory first person view as well. Just sayin…

Someone plays Guardian….

Even if you wanted bunker to be the counter to a spike build, it would be by outlasting it not brain dead passive damage reflect. In most games I’ve played, you spike the healer/paladin down. Maybe they will elaborate on what the intention is.

@Valador, thats not the impression i got at all.

rather what i got. is bunker is simply out of line atm. (and with the right build it is). not by a huge, but enough that its noticeable.

also if you want to talk counters.

bunker beats burst, burst beats sustained (conditions), sustained beats bunker.

Wolfe.3097:

@Valador, thats not the impression i got at all.

rather what i got. is bunker is simply out of line atm. (and with the right build it is). not by a huge, but enough that its noticeable.

also if you want to talk counters.

bunker beats burst, burst beats sustained (conditions), sustained beats bunker.

Out of line? I get my salad tossed by condition build toons, i.e. Necros, who have half a brain. As you stated yourself, I think bunker should beat burst and condition should beat bunker. I don’t think any glass cannon has a leg to stand on whining about it… so hopefully this guy simply suffers from horrible wording and isn’t try to say burst trumps bunker.

I guarantee ANet is going to eventually hate themselves for not going with the “holy trinity” system. Because now instead of 3 facets to look at, now they’re going to be juggling a ton and it’s going to be a nonstop roller coaster of balancing problems.

Just a couple thoughts

Bunker purpose is to “waste time” not necessarily “win” a 1v1 fight. Hold the point until reinforcements come, or simply until they die on the point having bought as much time as possible while denying the enemy the cap points.

Sustain/balanced is not supposed to counter a bunker, because by its very name you can see that it is playing into the bunker’s favor by wasting time. It’s largely irrelevant if the sustain can eventually win, the bunker has prevented the enemy from easily overtaking the point and gained his team time+points. Not to mention there is plenty of time for the guardian to signal to his team’s roamer to come and assist him.

Glass cannons are supposed to be counters to bunkers because they kill quickly, thereby not wasting time and not playing in favor of the bunker’s strategy. I can see what Jon is saying with the retaliation. A bursty glass cannon has minimal hp and would simply blow up against retaliation, when normally a bunker should not have sufficient damage to threaten a squikittenarget. I think the dynamic that they possibly want to encourage is the cannon would fake a burst of some sort to make the bunker trigger their retal, so then they back off and wait for it to end, then kill the bunker quickly. I suppose then it would be an obvious problem if the guardian could just keep retal up most of the time, making a clear opening for the burst difficult to gain.

And then of course balanced/sustain is encouraged to bring some sort of “o kitten” burst defense so they can get out of the glass cannon’s burst and turn around to make him explode like a wet paper bag.

Again, these are only a few thoughts I had after reading everyone’s posts.

Zyrusticae.7245:

I still fail to see how a situation that necessitates two players in order to counter one player is in any way fair or balanced.

Because it’s not that way. A properly specc’ed conditionmancer will drop a bunker guardian 1v1. It will just may take a very long time, and will definitely give the opposing team enough time to supply reinforcements.

Thedenofsin.7340:

Because it’s not that way. A properly specc’ed conditionmancer will drop a bunker guardian 1v1. It will just may take a very long time, and will definitely give the opposing team enough time to supply reinforcements.

In other words… there is no real counter?

Because that’s what it sounds like to me.

milo.6942:

Just a couple thoughts

Bunker purpose is to “waste time” not necessarily “win” a 1v1 fight. Hold the point until reinforcements come, or simply until they die on the point having bought as much time as possible while denying the enemy the cap points.

Sustain/balanced is not supposed to counter a bunker, because by its very name you can see that it is playing into the bunker’s favor by wasting time. It’s largely irrelevant if the sustain can eventually win, the bunker has prevented the enemy from easily overtaking the point and gained his team time+points. Not to mention there is plenty of time for the guardian to signal to his team’s roamer to come and assist him.

Glass cannons are supposed to be counters to bunkers because they kill quickly, thereby not wasting time and not playing in favor of the bunker’s strategy. I can see what Jon is saying with the retaliation. A bursty glass cannon has minimal hp and would simply blow up against retaliation, when normally a bunker should not have sufficient damage to threaten a squikittenarget. I think the dynamic that they possibly want to encourage is the cannon would fake a burst of some sort to make the bunker trigger their retal, so then they back off and wait for it to end, then kill the bunker quickly. I suppose then it would be an obvious problem if the guardian could just keep retal up most of the time, making a clear opening for the burst difficult to gain.

And then of course balanced/sustain is encouraged to bring some sort of “o kitten” burst defense so they can get out of the glass cannon’s burst and turn around to make him explode like a wet paper bag.

Again, these are only a few thoughts I had after reading everyone’s posts.

If burst can take down a bunker than whats going to happen to all other other Spec? Burst>sustain.
Burst>bunker
Every one plays Burst.

Currently
Burst>sustain
sustain>bunker But takes way way too long to kill. So the Bunker ends up winning.

Just try taking down a Bunker with a necro. Ya you can do it but not before the other team shows up to kills you. And so the bunker wins.

Sounds like Mr. Peters doesn’t like it when he can’t 100b someone down instantly.

Angry Flying Squirrel.3041:

If burst can take down a bunker than whats going to happen to all other other Spec? Burst>sustain.
Burst>bunker
Every one plays Burst.

Currently
Burst>sustain
sustain>bunker But takes way way too long to kill. So the Bunker ends up winning.

Just try taking down a Bunker with a necro. Ya you can do it but not before the other team shows up to kills you. And so the bunker wins.

Well, glass cannon’s enemy is their own squishiness. If you can avoid their damage for a few seconds, make them waste their skills, a balanced should have enough damage to kill them. A bunker should not have enough damage to easily kill one, however. I’m only speaking about where I think the developers are trying to take the game’s meta, maybe not precisely where it is right now.

Edit: in anticipation of any possible “how do you avoid the burst” questions I had the thought: bunkers are all defensive skills; bursts are all damage skills; sustain/balanced is… balanced. some damage, some cc, some self defence. Too many people run without any anti-burst skills and then cry when they get killed and they can do nothing. Prepare for it.

milo.6942:

Angry Flying Squirrel.3041:

If burst can take down a bunker than whats going to happen to all other other Spec? Burst>sustain.
Burst>bunker
Every one plays Burst.

Currently
Burst>sustain
sustain>bunker But takes way way too long to kill. So the Bunker ends up winning.

Just try taking down a Bunker with a necro. Ya you can do it but not before the other team shows up to kills you. And so the bunker wins.

Well, glass cannon’s enemy is their own squishiness. If you can avoid their damage for a few seconds, make them waste their skills, a balanced should have enough damage to kill them. A bunker should not have enough damage to easily kill one, however. I’m only speaking about where I think the developers are trying to take the game’s meta, maybe not precisely where it is right now.

I would agree if the glass cannons damage was on longer CD. But when they are on very short or no CD like the current game is than we have a problem.