Guild Wars 2

CriSPeH.8512:

^
I didnt intend to sound mean or really direct my answer at you personally cuz I know alot of ppl have to same view.
And I apologize for the last remark since it was pretty kittenish.

But it just really bothers me that the Devs themselves seem to balance certain things in this 1 for 1 type way but other things are given a pass because they are just something unique to the profession.

Engineers are running out of things that are unique to the profession and having one of the best Stunbreakers (minor accomplishment) is about to be another one gone.
Soon we will just have the Gift of Opportunity which we will bestow on our enemies each time we shrink down and tell them to count to 3.

Use your healing turret before you shrink. That will save you.

google.3709:

Phineas Poe.3018:

Think about it: 4 seconds of Burning every 10 seconds. Flame Jet burns for 1 second at the end of every 2.25 second channel.

Together, that’s 8 seconds of Burning every 10 seconds. It’s not permanent by itself anymore, but the help of Blowtorch, Incendiary Ammo, Air Blast, and Napalm should be more than sufficient to sustain Burning damage on targets to take advantage of Flame Jet’s 10% damage increase.

I’ve noticed everyone talking about the 4s burning but no one seem to have notice that it’s a condition. which duration can be increased, potentially keeping it 100% uptime for all you blowtorch/FT lovers :P

I am pretty sure you can’t go past 100% on any condition duration for any given condition event, so 8 seconds would be max on this with traits, food, runes, sigils, etc. At least, I think I read that on this very forum about 2 months ago, when I was working on my Dr. Freeze build.

If you had a secondary method for burning, then yes, 100% uptime is possible. Incendiary ammo is one, the flame turret toolbelt skill is another, and I believe there are a few more available. One would have to build around that specific focus, and then hope that with multiple applications, opponents would run out of Condition Removal.

Zenguy.6421:

CriSPeH.8512:

How was Elixir S and exploit?

Are we supposed to have completely equal skills in every area with other professions?
If thts the case I can think of some other classes skills that should be brought down/up to ours.

Should the Ranger Minor Trait Natural Vigor be moved up to a GM like Adrenaline Implant or vise versa?
That is an argument that has already been made and the defense was that because everything else was different with the profession there was a reason why one is better than the other.

I can think of alot of things that Ele’s have over Engineers that would warrant us being able to use Utility Skills while under Elixir S.
Like someone else already said maybe our downed #2 needs to get switched to drink Elixir S.

Otherwise any arguements about how its just not fair we have a skill that is better than other ppls skill is just BS. Keep feeding the Devs stupid decisions!

Good point!
You caught me making the same mistake the Devs seem to be making of looking simplistically at the skill. I’d just assumed Elixir S was meant to be an escape skill only and therefore doing anything else with it was an exploit. – My bad!

As you imply, the skill should be looked at in the context of the overall class. In which case, why wouldn’t Eng’s build some extra utility into the skill? Other classes have survival skills that allow them other actions while they’re active (e.g Ele’s Obsidian Flesh instant cast 5s invulnerabilty) So, why not Eng’s?

So much this. If we want to roll bunker, and slot the skill with less room than other professions, we should have access to 3 seconds of heal, or run, or drop supply crate… This isn’t a game breaking skill. This is par for the course if we were talking about other classes.

GuilguiS.2738:

My only concern with Incendiary powder is it’s use with the FT because it was basically a necessary trait. If they are nerfing that they should make the FT burn oportunities.

EDIT: Now that i’ve stopped to think about it i guess this change will be kinda good. Even if FT misses a lot we can still get that 4s burn if we crit once and give it 2 more seconds with air blast. I can see a good future for FT builds.

As a condition engi who uses rifle instead of flamethrower I much prefer the new IncPowder.

Zaviel.1245:

As a condition engi who uses rifle

What?

Zaviel.1245:

GuilguiS.2738:

My only concern with Incendiary powder is it’s use with the FT because it was basically a necessary trait. If they are nerfing that they should make the FT burn oportunities.

EDIT: Now that i’ve stopped to think about it i guess this change will be kinda good. Even if FT misses a lot we can still get that 4s burn if we crit once and give it 2 more seconds with air blast. I can see a good future for FT builds.

As a condition engi who uses rifle instead of flamethrower I much prefer the new IncPowder.

Do share mate

Zaviel.1245:

As a condition engi who uses rifle instead of flamethrower I much prefer the new IncPowder.

I’m guessing rampager’s armor and you rely on bleeds from firearms traitline?

The new version of Incendiary powder is better if your crit rate is worse than once every 1.3s – though even then, the longer duration/cooldown makes it more vulnerable to condition removal.
If you’re crit’ing more often than about once every 1.3s, you’re worse off than before with Incendiary powder.

Once again a nerf aimed at the Grenade Kit has a bigger impact on other kits, in this case the Flamethrower. (Burning duration from Incendiary Powder drops approx 40% for FT#1. For grenades the drop in duration is only 10% at 30% crit, or 30% at 50% crit, and even with 100% crit the dro kitten till lower at 35% duration.) With on-crit effects all getting CDs, the benefits of long cast channelled multi-attacks like FT#1 have all but disappeared – about all that 2.25s channel is good for is occasionally stacking bleeding (Sharpshooter) and maybe vulnerability (Precise Sights). Time to rework FT#1, again?

bleeding, vulnerability, might stacks (sigil of strength) or more bleed (sigil of earth) or more dmg (sigil of air) or health (sigil of leeching), or, MORE FIRE! (fire sigil).

the change to IP does not, in the grand scheme of things, overly diminish the output of the flamethrower. IP was a dmg increase to the FT builds, not a “must have” trait.

With FT#1 + Incendiary Ammo = 12 seconds of burning every 6.75 seconds. or, broken down into separate attacks to combat fast cleansers, 4 seconds of burning every 2.25 seconds. adding IP on top of that will add 4 more seconds twice per 12 second IP cycle. Or, 2 cycles of 8 seconds of burning being cleansed and one cycle of 4… for a grand total of … around 12 seconds of burning. So, at the end of it all, the bottom line is that perma burn is not an issue. The burning tick is irrelevant unless you’ve build a high condi FT instead of a high power FT.

The likely scenario will be:

cycle 1 :: 4 (IP) + 4 (IP) + 1 (full cycle) + 3 (IA) = 12 seconds @ 2.25; cleansed.
cycle 2 :: 4 (IP) + 1 (full cycle) + 3 (IA) = 8 seconds @ 4.5.
cycle 3 :: 4 (IP) +1 (full cycle) + 3 (IA) = up to 13.75** @ 6.75; but a cleanse will occur somewhere during your third cycle.

**don’t forget time lapses, so even though you are adding more burn, it is still ticking away slowly.
Adding Air Blast in to the rotation only adds more burn.

the only reason you need longevity out of burning is for the 10% dmg increase on FT#1, and since we have so many different ways to apply burning, we have no shortage of dmg buff in that regard.

The IP change only means we have to be more driven to keep the burning up than just spraying fire willy nilly into the melee.

Its a shame the balance team seems so out of touch.

We need much faster iterations on balance patches. Especially if such changes are going to be so small and not real redesigns of the broken concepts and skills.

Casia.4281:

Its a shame the balance team seems so out of touch.

We need much faster iterations on balance patches. Especially if such changes are going to be so small and not real redesigns of the broken concepts and skills.

I almost always agree with all the posts you make but in some cases, small can be good. For example, removing kit refinement was probably not the best way they could have handled the 100nades issue.

In most cases I agree 100%. No amount of incremental damage increases will make turrets viable if they continue to shoot gates and clones and wolves instead of people in WvW.