Guild Wars 2

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

Synergy is fine, a broken OP group passive is not.

Passive? Which part of it is passive?

It’s a passive proc, have you even played this game?

Wtf? Really? LOL!!!

Passive are things like +100 toughness/vitality. Things that continuously add effects without any conditions to trigger. To call a proc that occur by fulfilling certain conditions as passive is…, lol, you really made me laugh so hard.

I guess that explains why you “argument” lack depths and don’t sound logical, more like referencing what other people are saying.

If you don’t have to use a skill or ability for it to proc , then it’s passive. If it wasn’t “passive” then you could control it.

That will be called active skill, right? Proc itself means random occurrence, you can even google the meaning and it will all say the same thing

Check out this list here of “passive skills”

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/wizard/passive/

Just about every single one includes what you call “proc”.

“proc” is the effect you get from said passive skill, not the label for the type of skill/trait/rune whatever.

durability runes are definitely the meta and definitely really really strong. deserving of a nerf? idk.

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

Synergy is fine, a broken OP group passive is not.

Passive? Which part of it is passive?

It’s a passive proc, have you even played this game?

Wtf? Really? LOL!!!

Passive are things like +100 toughness/vitality. Things that continuously add effects without any conditions to trigger. To call a proc that occur by fulfilling certain conditions as passive is…, lol, you really made me laugh so hard.

I guess that explains why you “argument” lack depths and don’t sound logical, more like referencing what other people are saying.

If you don’t have to use a skill or ability for it to proc , then it’s passive. If it wasn’t “passive” then you could control it.

That will be called active skill, right? Proc itself means random occurrence, you can even google the meaning and it will all say the same thing

Check out this list here of “passive skills”

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/wizard/passive/

Just about every single one includes what you call “proc”.

“proc” is the effect you get from said passive skill, not the label for the type of skill/trait/rune whatever.

Those passive skills isn’t random, key word is random. Those skills occur 100% when you perform certain actions. You can control those passive because it occur 100% when you perform certain actions.

If passive proc means skills that happen 100% of the time when certain conditions are met, I can relate. But if passive proc means skills that occur randomly but because you are wearing it, you call it passive, it sounds really weird.

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

Synergy is fine, a broken OP group passive is not.

Passive? Which part of it is passive?

It’s a passive proc, have you even played this game?

Wtf? Really? LOL!!!

Passive are things like +100 toughness/vitality. Things that continuously add effects without any conditions to trigger. To call a proc that occur by fulfilling certain conditions as passive is…, lol, you really made me laugh so hard.

I guess that explains why you “argument” lack depths and don’t sound logical, more like referencing what other people are saying.

If you don’t have to use a skill or ability for it to proc , then it’s passive. If it wasn’t “passive” then you could control it.

That will be called active skill, right? Proc itself means random occurrence, you can even google the meaning and it will all say the same thing

Check out this list here of “passive skills”

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/wizard/passive/

Just about every single one includes what you call “proc”.

“proc” is the effect you get from said passive skill, not the label for the type of skill/trait/rune whatever.

Those passive skills isn’t random, key word is random. Those skills occur 100% when you perform certain actions. You can control those passive because it occur 100% when you perform certain actions.

If passive proc means skills that happen 100% of the time when certain conditions are met, I can relate. But if passive proc means skills that occur randomly but because you are wearing it, you call it passive, it sounds really weird.

passive procs can be related to rng or not.

take engi, the passive procs are all over the place:

• 33% bleed on crit — suffers from 2 rounds of rng, passive proc.
• napalm specialist procs 2 stacks of burn on crit, the crit part is rng but at least it has a 100% chance of happening when you crit instead of 33%.
• protection injection — passive proc on being cc’d. no rng.
• heal reset at 25% hp. no rng.

or thief:

• panic strike — immob at 50%, passive proc.
• stealth at 25% hp
• blind wall when downed

the game is full of these kind of things. and unfortunately, a lot of really strong and annoying traits are based on them in ways that are unavoidable in spite of the fact that the game has numerous methods to mitigate damage by outplaying an opponent.

No, the question here is the definition.

Many of you are saying are saying that passive proc = things you wear (skills/runes/sigil/traits/whatever) proc. But there is a logical redundancy here, of course you have to be wearing those things in the first place to proc. It is like saying black darkness.

SkyShroud.2865:

No, the question here is the definition.

Many of you are saying are saying that passive proc = things you wear (skills/runes/sigil/traits/whatever) proc. But there is a logical redundancy here, of course you have to be wearing those things in the first place to proc. It is like saying black darkness.

things you wear can have passive procs on them.
things you wear are not passive procs. things you wear are items/gear.

nightmare runes come to mind. the fear for the 6th bonus is a passive proc.

The rune is very powerful itself. The Area effect should be removed and only be self … Maybe you can add 1 or 2 seconds to its resistance as compensation ….

insanemaniac.2456:

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

dank.3680:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

SkyShroud.2865:

zinkz.7045:

Synergy is fine, a broken OP group passive is not.

Passive? Which part of it is passive?

It’s a passive proc, have you even played this game?

Wtf? Really? LOL!!!

Passive are things like +100 toughness/vitality. Things that continuously add effects without any conditions to trigger. To call a proc that occur by fulfilling certain conditions as passive is…, lol, you really made me laugh so hard.

I guess that explains why you “argument” lack depths and don’t sound logical, more like referencing what other people are saying.

If you don’t have to use a skill or ability for it to proc , then it’s passive. If it wasn’t “passive” then you could control it.

That will be called active skill, right? Proc itself means random occurrence, you can even google the meaning and it will all say the same thing

Check out this list here of “passive skills”

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/wizard/passive/

Just about every single one includes what you call “proc”.

“proc” is the effect you get from said passive skill, not the label for the type of skill/trait/rune whatever.

Those passive skills isn’t random, key word is random. Those skills occur 100% when you perform certain actions. You can control those passive because it occur 100% when you perform certain actions.

If passive proc means skills that happen 100% of the time when certain conditions are met, I can relate. But if passive proc means skills that occur randomly but because you are wearing it, you call it passive, it sounds really weird.

passive procs can be related to rng or not.

take engi, the passive procs are all over the place:

• 33% bleed on crit — suffers from 2 rounds of rng, passive proc.
• napalm specialist procs 2 stacks of burn on crit, the crit part is rng but at least it has a 100% chance of happening when you crit instead of 33%.
• protection injection — passive proc on being cc’d. no rng.
• heal reset at 25% hp. no rng.

or thief:

• panic strike — immob at 50%, passive proc.
• stealth at 25% hp
• blind wall when downed

the game is full of these kind of things. and unfortunately, a lot of really strong and annoying traits are based on them in ways that are unavoidable in spite of the fact that the game has numerous methods to mitigate damage by outplaying an opponent.

Although i agree with you, there is no RNG in this situation.
When you play in WvW, it’s not a matter of “if it will proc”, it’s only a matter of “when it will proc”. And when you get hit by 50 attacks per second in group situations (25+), then it will proc exactly when the cooldown is off, because the effect goes in cooldown once it has been activated and not every “X” secs based on “if one condition will be met or not”.

So, there is no RNG. Passive effect will proc, and you have no way to prevent it.
If they change the rune effect to be activated “on hit”, rather than “when hit”, then CCs (fears, interrupts, pulls) and chills/immobs/blinds can actually counterplay that, cause you can actively control the amount of hits a player lands, so as to activate the effect.

Still, it will be activated almost every time, due to the amount of hits even 1 player can land, since 25% activation when you land 30 hits with aoe and stuff, equals to 100% activation.

Karahol.9840:

Still, it will be activated almost every time, due to the amount of hits even 1 player can land, since 25% activation when you land 30 hits with aoe and stuff, equals to 100% activation.

Not true. It’s still a 25% activation at any given hit. What you’re referring to is that it’s statistically likely to happen, since one in four incoming attacks should proc the effect, and this effect is occurring more than seven times over, escalating probability substantially.

However, this doesn’t mean guarantee. By your logic, flipping a coin three times would always result in at least one differing heads/tails, but we all know that you can flip a coin three+ times and get identical results with the other side never coming up.

Theoretically, one could take a million hits and not proc the effect at 25%. The chances are absolutely minute to a point of it reaching virtually 100%, however there is no strict guarantee it will happen.

From a PvP perspective, this is also why I dislike random chances on things. Most competitive games do away with them as best as possible, often moving probability-based randomness to a consistent effect that ensures said probability, such as “every fourth hit” and so on. This enables both parties in an encounter to respond to the effects and tailor their gameplay to mitigate effectiveness or capitalize on things at very precise timing. This is also why I particularly dislike on-crit effects like fire/air sigils, etc. Removing that predictability removes a substantial amount of skill from competitive play.

I’ll settle the debate on proc definitions:

Long story short, it’s disputed, depending on where your history lies.

In one boat, you have the P rogrammed R andom OC urrance – which for obvious reasons is % chance for an effect. This definition is traced back to WoW, and pretty much only to WoW.

In the other, you have origins coming from a deviation of Proc ess, which alludes to programatically the special processes invoked when a set of conditions are met. This definition has origins back to text-based MUD’s from the 1980’s.

So if you’re a WoW player, you’ll probably be more familiar with the WoW-specific RNG aspect, while those who didn’t play WoW will likely take definitions from other sources.

DeceiverX.8361:

Karahol.9840:

Still, it will be activated almost every time, due to the amount of hits even 1 player can land, since 25% activation when you land 30 hits with aoe and stuff, equals to 100% activation.

Not true. It’s still a 25% activation at any given hit. What you’re referring to is that it’s statistically likely to happen, since one in four incoming attacks should proc the effect, and this effect is occurring more than seven times over, escalating probability substantially.

However, this doesn’t mean guarantee. By your logic, flipping a coin three times would always result in at least one differing heads/tails, but we all know that you can flip a coin three+ times and get identical results with the other side never coming up.

Theoretically, one could take a million hits and not proc the effect at 25%. The chances are absolutely minute to a point of it reaching virtually 100%, however there is no strict guarantee it will happen.

From a PvP perspective, this is also why I dislike random chances on things. Most competitive games do away with them as best as possible, often moving probability-based randomness to a consistent effect that ensures said probability, such as “every fourth hit” and so on. This enables both parties in an encounter to respond to the effects and tailor their gameplay to mitigate effectiveness or capitalize on things at very precise timing. This is also why I particularly dislike on-crit effects like fire/air sigils, etc. Removing that predictability removes a substantial amount of skill from competitive play.

When theory is disproven by practice and reality, no need to keep insisting on it. And i disagree that random effects take away skill. The more deterministic the model, the less skill it takes to cope with it.

Random effects do not reduce the amount of determinism in a given fight; they only add to non-determinism. Player skill in a given environment is not something which can be measured in a deterministic fashion, though. Further, non-determinism would only allow for objective analysis of skill when not ill-timed enough as to change the immediate future, and if it benefited or adversely affected all participating actors equally. This shared response would measure skill between both to non-determinism. Unfortunately, the former goal of not being “ill-timed” is not realistically possible in most scenarios, especially when in (and approaching) dynamic environments like GW2 combat is. If winning a fight hinges on randomness, then there is no point in fighting at all; all combat would then just be a roll of the dice, for then even the concept of builds and theory would be purposeless.

No, a fight outcome depends on various factors when the human element is involved, such as how those participating play. There are others, at hand as well. I recommend you do some research on AI and game theory surrounding Agents and Environments. You’ll realize quickly that raw non-determinism caused by the environment or beyond factors controllable by the Agent(s) is not at all essential or in the case of competitive environments and modern games, likely not even a good thing.

I can tell you now that a large number of the early competitive players left the game entirely because of passive procs like fire/air sigils swaying fights in favor of those who strictly didn’t deserve to win. Heck, even League of Legends several years ago reworked its entire critical hit system to not use strict random number generation as to ensure that the distribution of critical hits in any given spread remained consistent with the stat, as edge cases occurred which weren’t consistent with the stat and massively swung the game. Even though this didn’t happen overly-often, it did enough to warrant a pseudo-randomness replacement algorithm.

In fact, I was dueling a guildmember today who quite literally won one of the duels solely because of an air sigil proc. While I will not discredit his skill (as he is quite good and was likely going to win the fight regardless), the lack of half of a second response time where my health would have not been at zero would be enabled substantial counterplay efforts such as evading the next attack and healing, re-positioning, granting immunity, etc.

Boons and boons duration(concentration stat) is greatly under valued by A.net, the same way condi duration was pre- HOT. Look at sigil of concentration for example, its 450 worth of stats on weapons swap, imagine you get a bonus of 450 power on weapon swap… For ranger for example is easy to get 100% boon duration with just food/sigil/utility, NM trait line and … rune of durability. Premium boons like protection/quickness/resistance are too common, common boons like swiftness/regen/fury are almost native embedded with 100% duration up time on most builds.

This will make A.net future design process very problematic and they will have to do some kind of reduction to boons, in the form of duration limitations or quality. Perhaps they will change more boons to the stacking mechanic or go with boon duration to specific boons only or just ignore balance issues out pvp completely.

The most problematic stats wise is protection as damage reduction values got diminishing returns so long duration on this boon makes toughness an obsolete stat, which limits build diversity.

The list goes on…

The real way to get around resistance is to run a power build. If a group is power-heavy, then durability runes become average.

There are so many more things broken in this game that dura runes are way down on that list. Like way down. They’re strong(not OP) with a party all using them. If you think this is OP, you must not have ever come across Mallyx Rev with boon-share Mes. Run with a lot of boon corrupt in your group to counter, or run power builds. Condi loses effectiveness the more enemies you’re fighting anyhow. They’re best to use for roaming like always.

Before anet nerfs durability runes, I hope they fix the sigil of draining.

Osu.6307:

Before anet nerfs durability runes, I hope they fix the sigil of draining.

Whats wrong with that sigil?

LughLongArm.5460:

Boons and boons duration(concentration stat) is greatly under valued by A.net, the same way condi duration was pre- HOT. Look at sigil of concentration for example, its 450 worth of stats on weapons swap, imagine you get a bonus of 450 power on weapon swap… For ranger for example is easy to get 100% boon duration with just food/sigil/utility, NM trait line and … rune of durability. Premium boons like protection/quickness/resistance are too common, common boons like swiftness/regen/fury are almost native embedded with 100% duration up time on most builds.

This will make A.net future design process very problematic and they will have to do some kind of reduction to boons, in the form of duration limitations or quality. Perhaps they will change more boons to the stacking mechanic or go with boon duration to specific boons only or just ignore balance issues out pvp completely.

The most problematic stats wise is protection as damage reduction values got diminishing returns so long duration on this boon makes toughness an obsolete stat, which limits build diversity.

The list goes on…

The strange (well… not really) thing is that boon duration has long been a balance offender on many fronts. It’s been targeted by many nerfs over the years, and Anet seemed to know it was a dangerous stat to hand out. Think stat-trait decoupling, and 2-water 2-monk 2-traveler runes setups getting nerfed hard.

Note the past tense. Hate to be this guy but Anet either hasn’t got a clue what they’re doing anymore, or has run out of kittens to give. Maybe both. As you say, the list goes on…