Guild Wars 2

Durability runes are contributing to this absuradly tanky meta. Druids, chronomancers, revenants, reapers, tempests, and scrappers are abusing the fact that it IS broken to give an extra 5% boon duration, it provides both toughness AND vitality, as well as 3 VERY tanky buffs every 20 seconds. You do realize if you stack 5 people on a team with Durability runes (very likely scenario) Everyone is getting those buffs, Everyone is far tankier.

When you deleted minstrel I was not alright with it because at MAX you could only run 2 (I’m sure EU would have figured that out in a week or 2) but Durability runes? If you can might stack, smack it on.

There are many runes which give boon duration and a few of them give toughness AND vitality (Traveler, Durability, Leadership). Traveler is in PvP for a long time and newer was a problem. So I don’t think that it is necessary to take out Durability. But maybe the AoE part in this boons need to be reconsidered.

I called it almost month before:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/pvp/Runes-of-Durability/first#post5768058

I would suggest making that 20% boon duration increase for specific boon. +25% Regeneration duration for example.

That would bring them in line with Pack runes and nerf Viper Revenants, Chronos and Scrappers mostly.

To be honest, I was not even aware that it provided an additional 5% boon duration unintentionally. However, that being the case it is not so much of an issue that it is breaking the game in itself, or could even be called exploiting. The runes just happen to outperform most others due to the benefits provided by that 4th piece. Simply increasing the cd of this activation to about 30s and selfish boon application would be much more balanced in respect to the fact that it also gives an intended 20% boon duration increase. The fact that it provides both Toughness and Vitality is obsolete, as the additional toughness is negligible and the extra 1,250 health is hardly game breaking in conjunction with the poor scaling of toughness here. I will go so far as to say that I feel my scrapper benefits from this more than others as the Toughness provided can be amplified with Adaptive Armor for a marginally more survivable Marauder when combined prot durations have dissipated or are on cd. Again, when you give it a slight shave through increased proc cd and turn the party boon share into selfish application these issue become non-existent.

yepp, it’s absurd how strong the rune is….. and the undocumented +5% boon-duration has bugged me since it first came out, shows how little ANet cares about PvP if the by far most used rune in PvP isn’t even working as intended…. -.-°

cut the -5% that shouldn’t be there anyways and cut down on the vita it provides.

Cough don’t forget to remove celestial cough.

these runes are actually so good im taking them over dmg runes on my thief >.<. I mean that’s just weird, BUT the survivability it gives feels like it is too good not to take (it allows me to do more dmg because i can ride some, one smacking them with my shaft for longer)

The only real problem is that it gives the buffs to teammates so they are great for stacking on point. It would be enough of a nerf just to change the boons to the individual only and moderately buff duration.

Dristig.9678:

The only real problem is that it gives the buffs to teammates so they are great for stacking on point.

This. As I suggested in my own post this is the only real issue causing them to proliferate beyond control, especially with skills that share boons with other party members. Although, I feel that 20s is too short a cd for the quantity and quality of boons provided. Extending this to 30s is more than fair for what the individual is provided considering inherent boon duration increase.

Why is it that people immediately jump to calling for things to deleted?

Seriously this game’s meta is too unstable for such drastic changes to be justifiable.

Crinn.7864:

Why is it that people immediately jump to calling for things to deleted?

Seriously this game’s meta is too unstable for such drastic changes to be justifiable.

Because its unhealthy for the game’s build diversity.

On nearly every build I try to make I end up taking durability runes because they are by far the best rune for almost every build in the game unless you want to cleanse people with shouts. If you make any boons at all you’re practically gimping yourself by not running it.

Crinn.7864:

Why is it that people immediately jump to calling for things to deleted?

Seriously this game’s meta is too unstable for such drastic changes to be justifiable.

Simply put; solving a problem requires too much mental processing when you can just remove an annoyance altogether. Never mind if you can pull a sliver from your finger when amputation is clearly the superior option.

nearlight.3064:

Crinn.7864:

Why is it that people immediately jump to calling for things to deleted?

Seriously this game’s meta is too unstable for such drastic changes to be justifiable.

Because its unhealthy for the game’s build diversity.

On nearly every build I try to make I end up taking durability runes because they are by far the best rune for almost every build in the game unless you want to cleanse people with shouts. If you make any boons at all you’re practically gimping yourself by not running it.

The main point was that the meta is too unstable.

We haven’t had any major balance patches since HoT, yet despite that we’ve gone from Druid being considered most OP, to DH being considered the most OP, to reaper being considered the most OP, to revenant being considered the most OP, and now we’re complaining about bunker mesmers.
In a couple weeks people will have probably have forgotten all about mesmers, and it’ll be some new build that everyone is QQ’ing about.

This is why they shouldn’t be making such drastic changes on such short notice. They should only ever nerf things once it becomes absolutely certain that it’s dominant, and won’t be leaving the meta. Durability runes are a recent thing, it’s unclear if they will remain dominant.