Guild Wars 2

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we the devs can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

Second: This one is just a silly idea. Basically… what are you taught at a young age when you are on fire? Stop, Drop, and (Dodge) Roll! Dodge Roll could… I dunno remove 1-3 stacks of burning or something. I know their is already a trait that removes burning through dodge roll. Such a missed opportunity. But anyways, this was just a silly idea.

alemfi.5107:

First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

This is intended as discussion on how to make the conditions different, not how they function now. Right now no one builds condition builds for bleeding, b/c bleeding is just inferior to burning.

Also, according to the wiki:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bleeding
Bleeding has a .06 damage coefficient from Condition Damage.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Burning
Burning has a 0.155 damage coefficient from Condition damage.

So Burning is currently benefitting MORE from condition damage investment than Bleed. Bleeding just has REALLY LOW base damage, 22, as opposed to Burning’s 131.5.

This is too easy to stack burning, so nerf this and make it works like GW1 desease (contagious).

Silverthorn.8576:

This is too easy to stack burning, so nerf this and make it works like GW1 desease (contagious).

I have not played GW1, so I am unfamiliar with the concept of Disease. However based on your wording about Contagious, I assume it implies the the condition would propagate to nearby players. Was it possible for them to propagate the condition back? I feel like this would make the burning stacks get WAY out of control, however I am probably misunderstanding how the behavior is supposed to work. It would be interesting though. Since IRL, things on fire generally tend to set other things that are nearby on fire. That’s actually quite an interesting idea, I like it!

alemfi.5107:

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

This is intended as discussion on how to make the conditions different, not how they function now. Right now no one builds condition builds for bleeding, b/c bleeding is just inferior to burning.

Also, according to the wiki:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bleeding
Bleeding has a .06 damage coefficient from Condition Damage.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Burning
Burning has a 0.155 damage coefficient from Condition damage.

So Burning is currently benefitting MORE from condition damage investment than Bleed. Bleeding just has REALLY LOW base damage, 22, as opposed to Burning’s 131.5.

That would be true if we consider stack per stack reference but conditions skills can apply conditions in multiple stacks and durations. So the only ‘valid’ reference is the ratio between base damage and scaling.

What about burning is the only condition which can crit (the crit procs on application, not on each tick). This way it can remain as powerful as it is, but require full stat investment (condi damage, precision, power or ferocity depending on hybrid or full condi) to be strong.

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

This is intended as discussion on how to make the conditions different, not how they function now. Right now no one builds condition builds for bleeding, b/c bleeding is just inferior to burning.

Also, according to the wiki:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bleeding
Bleeding has a .06 damage coefficient from Condition Damage.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Burning
Burning has a 0.155 damage coefficient from Condition damage.

So Burning is currently benefitting MORE from condition damage investment than Bleed. Bleeding just has REALLY LOW base damage, 22, as opposed to Burning’s 131.5.

That would be true if we consider stack per stack reference but conditions skills can apply conditions in multiple stacks and durations. So the only ‘valid’ reference is the ratio between base damage and scaling.

And unfortunately our current meta has shown that it’s quite easy to stack relatively high amounts of burning. Numbers are something that can always be adjusted, granted for an MMO there are a LOT of numbers. I know that there existed plenty of builds in the past that were able to stack 25+ stacks of bleeding by themselves, so yes, bleed is definitely more accessible then than burning often capping around 12-15 stacks of burning solo (from what I’ve experimented with). The point still stands that these two conditions are simply not very unique compared to torment (DOT that is enhanced when punishing movement) and confusion (DOT that is enhanced when punishing many skill casts), or even Blind vs Confusion (good against one big attack, punishes several small attacks) and Aegis vs Retaliation (Good against one big hit, Good against several small hits), and that Burning is just a condition that is Bleeding’s “Big Brother”.

Silverkey.2078:

What about burning is the only condition which can crit (the crit procs on application, not on each tick). This way it can remain as powerful as it is, but require full stat investment (condi damage, precision, power or ferocity depending on hybrid or full condi) to be strong.

That would certainly differentiate the condition; however, it sounds like unique tech that isn’t currently supported in the game. Granted, I suppose the same could be said for the “Contagious” idea, above, but that one sounded really fitting for the idea of things on fire, haha.

I think it’s already different enough. Burning is a bursty condition that requires less condi damage investment. Bleeding is more of an attrition condition that can be reliably and easily applied. Or at least, that’s what it’s supposed to be, but as is burning is too easy to stack.
That’s not to say I dislike the suggestions here. I just don’t think they’re necessary.

The Wizland.8435:

I think it’s already different enough. Burning is a bursty condition that requires less condi damage investment. Bleeding is more of an attrition condition that can be reliably and easily applied. Or at least, that’s what it’s supposed to be, but as is burning is too easy to stack.
That’s not to say I dislike the suggestions here. I just don’t think they’re necessary.

That is a fair analysis. In fact, earlier yesterday morning, I decided to do a few tests to see exactly how high burning/bleeding could be stacked, and how much damage they would tick for. Due to my being slow with the keyboard, I missed out on a few stacks, however I hit 46 stacks of bleeding (could have been 52, but I forgot the trap) ticking for 4712 on my ranger, while on my guardian, I hit 15 (which could have been 17 or 18 if I was faster with my keyboard), and ticking for 6695. The bleeds appeared to be able to linger longer, so one could argue that given this information they are “balanced” between each other.

If bleeding is designed mostly to just be a cover condition, I personally could also be consider that interesting design, however, during the whole condition revamp, they changed the mechanics of condition removal from FIFO to random, making the notion of “covering” conditions less reliable.

@Alemfi
" they changed the mechanics of condition removal from FIFO to random, making the notion of “covering” conditions less reliable."

From the Wiki on Conditions

For generic condition removal, the most recently applied condition or conditions will be removed first.

Its only boon and condition conversion that is random as of June 23rd patch

Boon to condition conversion and condition to boon conversion has been standardized and is functionality changed. Skills that convert boons and conditions now randomly select from all boons and conditions on the target.

• Bleed- 1% healing reduction for every bleed stack.

or

• Burning- nerfed to be in line with bleeding. Spreads burning around like disease.

Sigmoid.7082:

@Alemfi
" they changed the mechanics of condition removal from FIFO to random, making the notion of “covering” conditions less reliable."

From the Wiki on Conditions

For generic condition removal, the most recently applied condition or conditions will be removed first.

Its only boon and condition conversion that is random as of June 23rd patch

Boon to condition conversion and condition to boon conversion has been standardized and is functionality changed. Skills that convert boons and conditions now randomly select from all boons and conditions on the target.

Woops thanks for the correction

well once upon a time they where different, burning had much higher base damage, but didnt stack on dmg only on time it lasted.
and bleeding stacked dmg not time…

i dont understand why that ever got changed though ??

Nyx.6532:

well once upon a time they where different, burning had much higher base damage, but didnt stack on dmg only on time it lasted.
and bleeding stacked dmg not time…

i dont understand why that ever got changed though ??

Because they have no idea what they are doing.

Nyx.6532:

well once upon a time they where different, burning had much higher base damage, but didnt stack on dmg only on time it lasted.
and bleeding stacked dmg not time…

i dont understand why that ever got changed though ??

To make conditions more consistent and easier to differentiate. Unfortunately the values themselves weren’t changed and they backpedalled on their initial statement of only needing 700 condition damage to do the damage we were doing before the Condition changes. Now you need like close to 2000. I sorta understand why they upped the values, because might is so ridiculously easy to stack, but they didn’t need to more than double the condition damage investment. If anything they need to make might harder to stack to cap. -_-

And so now burning is considered the only “meta” condition and everything else cover because burning does nearly 3 times the damage and be stacked relatively quickly.

I still enjoy condition damage, love it on my necro, but I hate it that Conditions are perceived as OP now because of the stupidness that is burning.