Swiftness should stack its intensity

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Kitt.2567

Kitt.2567

I am running Warhorn. I have been always maintained with swiftness with Warhorn and Battle Rage signet which its duration even go more than 2 min.

Comparing it to Sword’s 4th skill, torment. Torment stacks its intensity.
It is just unbalanced and this is what makes people not using Warhorn.

What happen if that torment war simply turn on Battle rage signet so become same speed as mine and chasing me while throwing stupid torment and immob shot etc…? As what I could do is just run at same speed as him and just being hit. soon Finally GG.
I know turning on only Battle rage has shorter duration than mine, however it is enough duration to go anywhere in pvp map becuz pvp map is simply smaller than WvW, so will be ANYWAY forced into a cornor. Just cannot run away even with warhorn, so useless. I even wonder why they even made this weapon?

Swiftness should stack its intensity up to maximum point around 66%, doubled.
And this will will allows us do some more tactics like, “hit and run”.

It won’t be just Warrior’s problem, like Ele or Engi.

Oh, I guess Aegis should be also, like 2 stacks will block 2 attacks.

Visit “http://www.twitch.tv/the_korean_gamer/profile” for best warrior builds!

(edited by Kitt.2567)

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Squishy.2135

Squishy.2135

I can see it now… warriors just flying across the map and swooping down on their prey!

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Rome.3192

Rome.3192

No.

Thief

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Lukin.4061

Lukin.4061

No.

This.

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Ralkuth.1456

Ralkuth.1456

lol 25 stacks of Swiftness… +825% movespeed?
Is this Ballistics we’re playing?
(Flashing Lights/Seizure Warning)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtlR3tsYb4I

5 useless class titles
Carrying enemy team since 2012
“Multiclass implies you can actually play the class” – a certain royalty

(edited by Ralkuth.1456)

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: x per fection x.2096

x per fection x.2096

This is a dumb thread with a dumb idea, if you’re losing to a condi war with a regular war then its a learn to play issue, not a change the entire game because i can’t win issue.

[Ark]Noober

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Kitt.2567

Kitt.2567

lol I have never said 825%, but 66% maximum at 25 stacks. at least making it be able to run away with some mobility skills becuz warhorn war is worse than cond war at dueling. bad in dueling, can’t run faster than cond war, what is good points and why it is designed for?

Visit “http://www.twitch.tv/the_korean_gamer/profile” for best warrior builds!

(edited by Kitt.2567)

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Nary Why Irk.8150

Nary Why Irk.8150

swiftness unlimited @gwesports

Attachments:

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Swim.6830

Swim.6830

I used to play The Matrix Online, where initially speed had no limit and you could stack like 230% on top of your speed. You basically ran faster than cars and the animations made it look really awkward as your character was bent at like 45 degrees towards the ground. Then they limited it to like 33%.

However if you stacked more speed and you got speed debuffs, the debuffs would reduce the overall . So if you stacked 100 speed (33% effective still) and got speed debuff from an enemy at 50%, you would still run at the 33% bonus. It was an active counter to non damaging conditions that reduced your speed.

Zwim Elementalist
Consigliere
The Dragoon Brotherhood

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Kitt.2567

Kitt.2567

Swim.6830 – Sorry, i am talking about this game not that game. I can understand but this game’s ploblem is that Torment war can also speed at 33%. that’s what i am talking about, as well as warhorn war is worse in fighting than torment war, therefore no advantage as compared to torment war. warhorn war and torment war has no difference in spvp small map cuz swiftness duration doesnt matter in small spvp map. so swiftness;s intensity is necessary, just like torment’s intensity. In guildwars 1, it was possible for thief classs to run at 50% but idk why they disabled it. If i can’t win, they had to AT LEAST make a way to run away from it. or just die at corner like mouse? cant’t win, cant’t cap, cant’t run away? I can do nothing but die? That’s my thought,.

If you know any good warhorn war in top100, plz tell me. I would contact him/her then to ask things. I guess NONE though,

Visit “http://www.twitch.tv/the_korean_gamer/profile” for best warrior builds!

(edited by Kitt.2567)

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: google.3709

google.3709

Kitt, go 20 into Tactics and take Quick Breathing! it makes warhorn OP

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Phaeton.9582

Phaeton.9582

What is this about warhorns and… Ugh

Can this be moved to the prof balance forums. It’s hurting me…


Phaatonn, London UK

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Kitt.2567

Kitt.2567

Oh yeah, but sword itself is strong enough without trait set like warhorn. so no balance. And also, even with that it takes time to convert so being damaged until doing that anyway. (also cannot remove stupid torment correctly cuz they keep applying conds) Torment and bleeing converted into boon are NOT even regeneration boon. BTW, it is OP? are you serious? Please tell me any top100 guy who use Warhorn if it is OP. If OP some1 should have been using this though.

Kitt, go 20 into Tactics and take Quick Breathing! it makes warhorn OP

Visit “http://www.twitch.tv/the_korean_gamer/profile” for best warrior builds!

Swiftness should stack its intensity

in PvP

Posted by: Hype.8032

Hype.8032

lol I can’t say succinctly enough how bad this idea is. Please go away.

Tualek & F I Monk / Thief —-- Tk E / Engineer
Highest Solo Queue Rank Achieved: 40
Highest solo-join Team Queue Rank Achieved: 198