Guild Wars 2

as I run full zerk I do get downd a few times in dungeons (no 1 is perfect) and run a lot of fractals so stacking sigils are not usefull to be as they are either lost during a boss fight or not enough trash to get it back.

so I just use 5% dmg and sigil of fire.

I can see how it will hurt ppl but they want it to balance out dmg and make it a choice rather then a luxary so we just have to get used to it.

every mmo has something like this happen to control direct dmg crit specs as it always ends up out of control in dmg terms

Rezzet.3614:

kits need to be buffed like

if player = lvl 79 or less kit= exotic-rare 2h weapon stats

if player = lvl 80 kit= ascended 2h weapon stats

or kit = weapon rarity +2h stats

and get rid of the 30% damage drop when sigils on kits was implemented

That’d be kinda unfair, rather I’d check whether the equipped weapon is Ascended.

I also want 4 sigils like the other classes and not only two like the ele :/

I don’t get your problem anyway, just keep a stacking sigil in your underwater weapon and you are free to swap your weapon out…

Rezzet.3614:

kits need to be buffed like

if player = lvl 79 or less kit= exotic-rare 2h weapon stats

if player = lvl 80 kit= ascended 2h weapon stats

or kit = weapon rarity +2h stats

and get rid of the 30% damage drop when sigils on kits was implemented

……

….Was it really 30%?
Going by the most basic and perfect example, the Sigil of Force, a Sigil should only have been expected to provide an increase of 5% damage.
Why, in the name of all that is good and sane, would they ever even consider dropping it 30%?

he’s talking about the 30% reduction in grenade autos which apparently to some means a 30% damage reduction to the entire grenade kit.

Manuhell.2759:

Zaviel.1245:

Manuhell.2759:

If it wasn’t intended, they would have changed it

They are. It was never intended, this is a bug fix and I welcome it. If you want Bloodlust just slot it in.

It isn’t a bug fix, especially since it was there since the start of the game and they never, ever did anything about it even if it was so widespread. We’re talking about 20 months here. And i can’t think of a single person infracted or banned for such “bug abusings”.
I can agree it may have been not intended at the start, but its use was widely accepted by then. Even the blog post refers to the change as them having “more strict rules”.

Anyway, i can only hope the “removing restrictions” post will be about us and eles getting that second weapon…

There is an event in the game that unlocks a vendor that sells the only source of Harpy Feathers in the game. That event has been bugged for over a year now preventing access to the vendor despite many many players reporting this bug over the past year.

Turrets and Minions have had bug issues since release, which are finally being addressed.

Point is, claiming that something isn’t a bug or an unintended effect simply because it hasn’t been addressed in so long really isn’t a valid point when we’re talking about Anet.

Manuhell.2759:

Zaviel.1245:

Manuhell.2759:

If it wasn’t intended, they would have changed it

They are. It was never intended, this is a bug fix and I welcome it. If you want Bloodlust just slot it in.

It isn’t a bug fix, especially since it was there since the start of the game and they never, ever did anything about it even if it was so widespread. We’re talking about 20 months here. And i can’t think of a single person infracted or banned for such “bug abusings”.
I can agree it may have been not intended at the start, but its use was widely accepted by then. Even the blog post refers to the change as them having “more strict rules”.

You’re a software developer at Anet, 20 months ago, responsible for sigil programming, among other duties. After the game launches, you notice a widespread tactic of building up 25 stacks off a stacking sigil and then replacing the weapon with one with a different sigil. “That’s not what we intended,” you think to yourself. You make a ticket in the bug tracker, but after discussing it with your peers you give it a low priority as all players are affected equally and it doesn’t really mess up the power balance that badly. Plus, you took a look at the code, and making it so the buff drops if the weapon is removed turns out to be trickier than you thought it’d be. It’d take some serious dedicated time, and it just isn’t worth it for the impact the issue has. Punishing people for abusing the bug isn’t even considered. It doesn’t have a huge impact, and tracking whether people are using sigil stacks without the sigil equipped would take an even bigger code change than just fixing the issue would.

The months roll by and you continue to fix higher priority bugs. Between fixing major bugs and developing living story content, you never do find time to fix that issue with the stacking sigils. The ticket tracking the bug still has a pretty low priority, and every time you think you’re about to find time to fix it a new, higher priority bug gets put in front of it.

Finally, March of 2014 rolls around, and your boss announces that part of the feature patch in April will be an overhaul of the sigil system. You bring up the stacking sigil issue, and are told to add the ticket to the list of tasks to complete for the overhaul. Finally, after 20 months, that ticket is going to be addressed. It’s lumped in with the sigil overhaul, so other bugs won’t get in its way. Someone with more of a mind for marketing decides it shouldn’t be called a “bug” publicly. The issue’s been ignored for so long, it’s practically a feature at this point. Better to say Anet has decided to “more strictly apply sigil rules.” You don’t really care yourself, it’s a matter of semantics. All that matters is that you finally have time to fix the problem, let the PR guys decide how to tell the players about the change.

Later, you check the forums, and see some player saying that it couldn’t possibly be a bug if it took them 20 months to address it. You shake your head, pull up the bug ticket, and get to work.

We tend to be able to use on-swap more effectively though, so I guess it balances out.

emikochan.8504:

We tend to be able to use on-swap more effectively though, so I guess it balances out.

The advantage we have really isn’t all that great due to the cd on those sigils, especially when you factor warriors into that equation. Nonetheless, it’s not really that big of an issue.

glehmann.9586:

Manuhell.2759:

Zaviel.1245:

Manuhell.2759:

If it wasn’t intended, they would have changed it

They are. It was never intended, this is a bug fix and I welcome it. If you want Bloodlust just slot it in.

It isn’t a bug fix, especially since it was there since the start of the game and they never, ever did anything about it even if it was so widespread. We’re talking about 20 months here. And i can’t think of a single person infracted or banned for such “bug abusings”.
I can agree it may have been not intended at the start, but its use was widely accepted by then. Even the blog post refers to the change as them having “more strict rules”.

You’re a software developer at Anet, 20 months ago, responsible for sigil programming, among other duties. After the game launches, you notice a widespread tactic of building up 25 stacks off a stacking sigil and then replacing the weapon with one with a different sigil. “That’s not what we intended,” you think to yourself. You make a ticket in the bug tracker, but after discussing it with your peers you give it a low priority as all players are affected equally and it doesn’t really mess up the power balance that badly. Plus, you took a look at the code, and making it so the buff drops if the weapon is removed turns out to be trickier than you thought it’d be. It’d take some serious dedicated time, and it just isn’t worth it for the impact the issue has. Punishing people for abusing the bug isn’t even considered. It doesn’t have a huge impact, and tracking whether people are using sigil stacks without the sigil equipped would take an even bigger code change than just fixing the issue would.

The months roll by and you continue to fix higher priority bugs. Between fixing major bugs and developing living story content, you never do find time to fix that issue with the stacking sigils. The ticket tracking the bug still has a pretty low priority, and every time you think you’re about to find time to fix it a new, higher priority bug gets put in front of it.

Finally, March of 2014 rolls around, and your boss announces that part of the feature patch in April will be an overhaul of the sigil system. You bring up the stacking sigil issue, and are told to add the ticket to the list of tasks to complete for the overhaul. Finally, after 20 months, that ticket is going to be addressed. It’s lumped in with the sigil overhaul, so other bugs won’t get in its way. Someone with more of a mind for marketing decides it shouldn’t be called a “bug” publicly. The issue’s been ignored for so long, it’s practically a feature at this point. Better to say Anet has decided to “more strictly apply sigil rules.” You don’t really care yourself, it’s a matter of semantics. All that matters is that you finally have time to fix the problem, let the PR guys decide how to tell the players about the change.

Later, you check the forums, and see some player saying that it couldn’t possibly be a bug if it took them 20 months to address it. You shake your head, pull up the bug ticket, and get to work.

I wish I had more than +1 to give for this.