Guild Wars 2

Preamble:
I have created this thread pursuant to the comments made by Ostricheggs in his debate with viewers in the Guildwars2PvPTV Twitch channel in which assorted viewers debated with Ostricheggs the usefulness of the trait Incendiary Powder, its power in 1v1s vs pet/AI heavy classes, and its balance. I am opening this discussion in the hope that it will attract some commentary on traits like Incendiary Powder, and other RNG crit-procs that the Engineer is privy to in the hopes that the discussion engendered can lead to ideas to move the Engineer forward in terms of balance.

For the debate itself, the conversation starts at around 1:13:00 with HGH. Ostricheggs discusses various topics including his build (he runs P/S HGH/Nades and P/S HT/Nade/BK – both builds utilise Rabid Amulet); various nerfs that have happened to Engineer in the past (HGH survivability among others); and his stance on where the Engineer stands in terms of balance today.

Anyway, I’m sure Ostricheggs can probably articulate far better than I can whether Incendiary Powder is balanced in terms of SPvP. In his opinion it is:

• It is the only trait that is making Engineers strong enough to compete in the current meta (with respect to Necromancers fulfilling the same role of AOE Condition cleave)
• Without Incendiary Powder many Engineer builds would largely be crippled of its Condition pressure
• Recent nerfs to Engineer survivability have reduced build variety in SPvP
• Because of its current implementation, it is strong in 1v1s, but tapers significantly against multiple targets / AI classes

However, several viewers were of the opinion that:

• As a passive crit-proc there is little counterplay
• It is too strong for its RNG nature

It is important to note one point that Ostricheggs made as the stream wound down, which I believe to be highly important to any conversation regarding Incendiary powder changes: (Keep in mind that everything below is paraphrased from several statements)
“If Incendiary Powder were ever changed or removed, Engineer would have to receive such a plethora of changes thakittens current position in balance would become highly volatile”

So I put the questions to you now, fellow Engineers.

• Do you believe that the current implementation of Incendiary Powder is overpowered?
• If so, what changes could be made to keep the Engineer as it stands in the balance of things?
• If not, what would make Ostricheggs make the claim that Incendiary Powder the trait that keeps Engineers relevant, and should this be changed?
• Does Engineer as a class require changes in certain aspects before it can be considered “meta” with a greater variety of builds? If so, which aspects should be changed?
• What areas of the Engineer do you feel are weak at the moment? Ostricheggs mentioned that Engineer survivability has been nerfed – do you agree with his sentiment?
• Where do you stand in terms of Engineer balance? OP, UP, balanced right now?

For discussion purposes, here is a list of traits for the Engineer that involves RNG:

Shrapnel – Explosions have a 15% chance to apply 1 stack of Bleeding for 12 seconds

Incendiary Powder – Critical hits have a 100% chance to inflict Burning for 4 seconds. Internal cooldown of 10 seconds

Sharpshooter – Critical hits have a 30% chance to apply 1 stack of Bleeding for 3 seconds

Target the Weak – Gain 10% critical chance against foes with less than 50% health

Infused Precision – Critical hits have a 50% chance to grant Swiftness for 5 seconds. 5 seconds Internal Cooldown

Precise Sights – Critical hits have a 50% chance to apply Vulnerability

Go for the Eyes – Critical hits with the Rifle have a 50% chance to apply Blind for 5 seconds. 10 seconds Internal Cooldown

Transmute – 8% chance to convert incoming Conditions into Boons

Acidic Coating – When struck with a melee attack, gain a 50% chance to Blind the attacker for 5 seconds. 10 seconds Internal Cooldown

Scope – Gain 10% critical chance against targets more than 600 units away.

Great topic for discussion. Hopefully the devs will think as critically on the subject as players…I fear they may shy away from changing anything significant, however. I’m assuming we’re speaking from a strictly tPvP perspective here—

I think the only on-crit procs really seeing much use are IP, sharpshooter, and transmute, with IP being by far the most important. I actually don’t think the problem is the RNG in this case, since the trait is essentially to get 1 extra burn every 10-11 seconds.

I do think it’s a problem that against pet-heavy professions, you’re likely to waste your burn (since practically every engineer attack worth using is AoE). Another problem is that burn is just ridiculously good. There’s no such thing anymore as a condition build without burn.

—I don’t think the current IP is overpowered—but only because there are now even more overpowered builds overshadowing that.
—The best thing for engineers would be a reduction in the condition-meta, either through buffs to cleansing or nerfs to condition application.
—IP certainly keeps engineers relevant in competing with necros and rangers for condition spam. I wouldn’t mind seeing things shift away from condition spam in general, though, and I think engineers have a lot of other things besides condition spam to offer.
—Engineer survivability has taken massive nerfs since launch (juggernaut, smoke bomb, super elixir, elixir S, and others), but I think it’s still pretty good. We still have ridiculous healing, cc, and blocks.
—I think engineers are balanced right now. They’re not the best condition bomber or bunker, but they’re pretty decent at both at the same time. I feel engineers also have more viable niche builds than other professions (I currently play rifle engineer, no IP).

I never saw IP as overpowered on an engineer largely because the engineer has so many other sources of burning that IP can become redundant.

I main the turret engineer myself, and the rocket turret is capable of sustaining a near permanent burn on multiple opponents. The flame turret from the supply crate accomplishes this as well. Put them together and any opponent is nearly overloaded with quickly reapplied burns, so cleanse is of little effect.

There’s always the blowtorch and the fire bomb for additional high duration burning. Although I haven’t been in high end PVP like Ostricheggs is, so those alternate options might be so vastly inferior to the shield that they aren’t worth it.

Maybe make them apply on the next attack after toolbelt use and give them an effect like signets when used
IP, Acidic Coating, and Go for the Eyes won’t need ICDs since they are applied less often unless you have rifle turret and 30pts in tools.
They will be as strong 1v1 as they are in a group.
Plus both the engi and the target will know when the attack has an extra effect

How about changing the so-called powerful crit procs to something like how ranger Opening Strikes is, but this time it’s a cyclic passive? Say, gain a buff that grants burn for <4 seconds for any skill cast with an ICD? That way, engineer offensive procs are predicatable, and only the defensive boons triggered are of the RNG on-crit nature.

NevirSayDie.6235:

I do think it’s a problem that against pet-heavy professions, you’re likely to waste your burn (since practically every engineer attack worth using is AoE). Another problem is that burn is just ridiculously good. There’s no such thing anymore as a condition build without burn.
—The best thing for engineers would be a reduction in the condition-meta, either through buffs to cleansing or nerfs to condition application.
—IP certainly keeps engineers relevant in competing with necros and rangers for condition spam. I wouldn’t mind seeing things shift away from condition spam in general, though, and I think engineers have a lot of other things besides condition spam to offer.
—Engineer survivability has taken massive nerfs since launch (juggernaut, smoke bomb, super elixir, elixir S, and others), but I think it’s still pretty good. We still have ridiculous healing, cc, and blocks.
—I think engineers are balanced right now. They’re not the best condition bomber or bunker, but they’re pretty decent at both at the same time. I feel engineers also have more viable niche builds than other professions (I currently play rifle engineer, no IP).

I’ll have to agree with you on the point that there’s no good condition specs without Burn these days. I have seen the rise of many classes that previously did not have a condition role into one that does. Now, this is a good thing because it brings more classes and builds into the meta, however – all of the new builds that have arisen – Longbow burn warrior, Condition Ranger through Sun Spirit – contribute massively to the condition AOE balance issue.

One thing that Ostricheggs did mention was particularly striking -

conditions that proc while applying other conditions are extremely strong.

We as Engineers running, say, Grenades, have been largely reliant upon things like Vulnerability, Bleed, Freeze and Blind or Poison to cover the burns from Incendiary Powder/Blow Torch/Incendiary Ammo TB use.

For one, it generates a lot of “Cover” conditions that exploit the “Last In, First Out” (LIFO) condition system to “Cover” heavy DPS conditions like Burning with cover conditions like Vulnerability. For another, this kind of consistent reapplication of conditions – even on auto-attacks – swiftly overwhelms the cleansing capability of many classes. The only classes that can keep up are – Ranger and Guardian – each of which have a passive condition cleanse trait every 10 seconds in addition to their other tools for condition management. It’s also contributed to many builds now turning to Lyssa runes as an additional tool – the 6 set bonus grants a full condi clear and all boons on Elite activation.

So now we have passive condition cleanse being used to counter passive condition application. This may have been what players like Helseth and others have been complaining about – that the game has become too much about buildcrafting rather than active use of abilities. Where the presence of a single trait can define a duel far more than cooldown management, expeditious dodging or strong gameplay mechanics.

So here now is another question.

• Ostricheggs has mentioned, along with you, NevirSayDie, that Incendiary Powder has a weakness against high amounts of summons bodyblocking the IP proc. Would you agree that this mechanic simply further encourages high AI builds like Minion Master Necro or Spirit Rangers – builds that some have commented to be low skill ceiling and therefore should be low reward in the past? If not, do you think that Incendiary Powder should be changed somehow to make it “fairer” in true 1v1 scenarios free of summons?

• You mentioned the following – The best thing for engineers would be a reduction in the condition-meta, either through buffs to cleansing or nerfs to condition application. Would you not agree that buffs to either aspect would further erode the Engineer’s role in Condition cleave? What nerfs should Engineer receive and what buffs should it get in return for the loss in Condition pressure?

• Should we as the Engineer class continue to propagate the current state of the game (through AOE condition spam)? This refers mainly to proccing cover conditions on our primary DPS condition, Burning.

• If not, what changes are needed to turn Engineers away from this role? Keep in mind that Ostricheggs thinks that Engineers are well balanced in the current state of the game, and that any changes to Incendiary Powder will make Engineer highly volatile in terms of balance once again.

• If so, what do you have as a response to players of other classes? The other class competing for the same role, Necromancer, also relies heavily on procs applying conditions with other conditions. What counterplay exists to procs in your experience?

Firstly crit is not a true RNG because you control how much you have, so its not completely random. If you accept this being the case then incendiary powder is also not RNG as it has 100% chance.

1) Incendiary Powder is not overpowered, or it would be killing everything. If you were to not trait IP and run with a pistol and shield…well you can check out the damage for yourself, but ill tell you its extremely poor. The worst basic attack in the game as far as the classes i have played are concerned.

2)-

3) He said it kept us relevant i would assume he meant without the IP trait out damage just goes out the window.

4) I think we only have one spec for the meta? Bunker engineer? To be honest we tend to be ignored when people talk about it.

5) Honestly, I often can’t tell. Depends what spec i am running how i do vs any class.

Incendiary Powder + Superior Sigil of Intelligence (100% crit after weapon swap) works awesome. You are able to controll Incendiary Powder with this very good. And no other crit chance needed…

MonMalthias.4763:

• Ostricheggs has mentioned, along with you, NevirSayDie, that Incendiary Powder has a weakness against high amounts of summons bodyblocking the IP proc. Would you agree that this mechanic simply further encourages high AI builds like Minion Master Necro or Spirit Rangers – builds that some have commented to be low skill ceiling and therefore should be low reward in the past? If not, do you think that Incendiary Powder should be changed somehow to make it “fairer” in true 1v1 scenarios free of summons?

Yes, it encourages spirit rangers and minion masters. A simple solution could be to remove the 5-target AoE cap, at least in tournaments. The counter to screen pollution should logically be AoE; as it is now, it’s the opposite. I’m not extremely worried about 1v1 balance, although it’s certainly an issue as well. Engineers are already pretty good duelers, though.

MonMalthias.4763:

• You mentioned the following – The best thing for engineers would be a reduction in the condition-meta, either through buffs to cleansing or nerfs to condition application. Would you not agree that buffs to either aspect would further erode the Engineer’s role in Condition cleave? What nerfs should Engineer receive and what buffs should it get in return for the loss in Condition pressure?

I meant that condition bombing in general could stand to be a bit less effective. If that means that engineers need some passive condition application nerfed, so be it—although engineers are no longer the #1 condition bombers. In return, engineers could get another buff to flamethrower, cleave on toolkit, and working turrets; we could stand to get a bit of our survivability back—let’s say a 5-second CD reduction on elixir C.

MonMalthias.4763:

• Should we as the Engineer class continue to propagate the current state of the game (through AOE condition spam)? This refers mainly to proccing cover conditions on our primary DPS condition, Burning.

Condition application and management is a unique mechanic of GW2. I don’t think it’s bad; I find it very fun, especially on the receiving end. RPG combat is about choices—like when you have five conditions on your bar and two cleanses off cooldown. Do I wait for that vulnerability stack to wear off? The bleed stack is covered, I’ll wait until it gets refreshed and then wipe the whole thing…

In other words, there’s nothing wrong with playing conditions if you enjoy that. I prefer to play direct damage but it’s fun either way.

MonMalthias.4763:

• If not, what changes are needed to turn Engineers away from this role? Keep in mind that Ostricheggs thinks that Engineers are well balanced in the current state of the game, and that any changes to Incendiary Powder will make Engineer highly volatile in terms of balance once again.

I would agree that engineers are currently well-balanced. This is mostly because our most damaging skills are difficult to land, so a skilled engineer will do well while a newb engineer will get rolled, no matter the build. This is not the case for all professions. I agree that a change to IP would make engineer balance very fragile indeed.

MonMalthias.4763:

• If so, what do you have as a response to players of other classes? The other class competing for the same role, Necromancer, also relies heavily on procs applying conditions with other conditions. What counterplay exists to procs in your experience?

CC and predictive dodges. If a necro lands mark of blood and chill on you, good luck digging yourself out of that hole. Necro is pretty much the top profession at the moment; their condition specs were conceived as the best bleed stackers, but then Anet realized that no condition build could succeed without burn. Add in yet another damaging condition at exactly the same time and you get a menace.

Rangers have always been difficult to balance. Rangers have low direct damage coefficients to make up for their bonus pet damage, but condition damage doesn’t have that balance check, of course.

After reading through everything, I honestly think one of the best solutions may be a flat reduction in burn damage or duration. I also wouldn’t mind seeing vulnerability go away completely in PvP, since no one uses it as a debuff and it’s basically just a cover, but that’s a little extreme. A slight buff to cleansing skills across professions—let’s say the warrior warhorn/mesmer torch trait removes two conditions, or cooldowns on cleanses get lowered by a few seconds—would be another way to address the same issue. We don’t need all of those to happen; condition bombing is strong right now, but probably only one or two small changes are needed to correct it.

Burning

@NevirSayDie:
I agree that Burning is too strong right now. Even though it is – theoretically – the lowest scaling Condition Damage DPS, it still has massive threat because of the way it was originally formulated – high base damage, high intensity, low duration – has been subverted by the %Condition Duration stat and Runes and Traits that allow for consistent, persistent Burning application.

I actually see the Dhuumfire patch as the culmination of a design failure of Arenanet to take into account the base damage of burning and the overall placement of it in traits.

(0.25 * Condition Damage) + (4 * Level) + 8 damage per second (328 base damage + 0.25CD @80)

The formula here grants Burning a very handsome 328 DPS before any bonus Condition Damage is applied. This gives Burning extremely high base damage. Compare this with Bleeding with base damage of 43 (7.7 times the base damage of Bleed).

Using Ostricheggs’s Bomb/Nade build as an example , we see that with a bonus Condition Damage of 1156 before Might Stacks the potential for Burning is a hefty 617 DPS – on par with some Autoattacks of some classes.

With many traits that give bonuses to Burning in the Power/Condition Damage line – after all, it was intended to be a “bonus” amount of DPS to Power classes to give them some sustained damage after their burst – the problem is compounded. Incendiary Powder alone without using any +Condition Duration Runes at 30 Explosives grants Burning at 5.2 Seconds every 10 Seconds (Rounded down to 5 for ticks don’t go to fractions of a second).

With the Dhuumfire patch Necros and Warriors, with Rangers and Engineers before them, brought Burning into the forefront as a prime source of DPS after condi-burst. Necro’s Bleed stacks could, in theory, out-dps Burning, if stacks were high enough. However, as the graph shows, as the amount of Condition damage scales up, Burning still outscales Bleeding up to the point of 13 Stacks of Bleeding (!!!) at 1100+ Condition Damage. I think at this point it should be obvious that obtaining and maintaining 13 stacks of Bleeding is unrealistic.

Part of the reason is the ludicrous base damage at level 80. Another is although Burning scales better with Duration than Condition Damage at low levels, investment into Condition Damage still yields excessive benefit at high levels of Condition damage.

Arenanet realised this and gave Burning to Necros to more effectively DPS down their target through conditions. What they neglected to realise was that the Burning Condition itself was potent enough to supplant Bleeding as the prime source of Condition DPS.

Essentially the Dhuumfire patch was a band-aid solution to a wider problem. I think that they were right to give Necros Burning, but the Burning condition itself should have had its base damage and scaling reduced.

As for Engineer and Incendiary Powder, I think Super Riceman’s suggestion has merit:

Maybe make them apply on the next attack after toolbelt use and give them an effect like signets when used
IP, Acidic Coating, and Go for the Eyes won’t need ICDs since they are applied less often unless you have rifle turret and 30pts in tools.
They will be as strong 1v1 as they are in a group.
Plus both the engi and the target will know when the attack has an extra effect

Too little traits right now exploit our actual profession mechanic – the Tool Belt instead relying on Crit procs and other gimmicks. If Incendiary Powder were ever nerfed further, the Tool Belt should be the first place to consider moving some of our procs.

MonMalthias.4763:

With the Dhuumfire patch Necros and Warriors, with Rangers and Engineers before them, brought Burning into the forefront as a prime source of DPS after condi-burst. Necro’s Bleed stacks could, in theory, out-dps Burning, if stacks were high enough. However, as the graph shows, as the amount of Condition damage scales up, Burning still outscales Bleeding up to the point of 13 Stacks of Bleeding (!!!) at 1100+ Condition Damage. I think at this point it should be obvious that obtaining and maintaining 13 stacks of Bleeding is unrealistic.

Part of the reason is the ludicrous base damage at level 80. Another is although Burning scales better with Duration than Condition Damage at low levels, investment into Condition Damage still yields excessive benefit at high levels of Condition damage.

This section and your chart are basically all wrong.

At 1100 condition damage, burning ticks for 603. Bleeding will tick for 97. It only takes 6.2 stacks of bleeding before the bleeds are stronger than the burning. 13 stacks of bleeding will hit for more than double the damage per tick of burning.

You seem to be only including the base damage in each additional bleeding stack, and ignoring the scaling on all but the first.

On crit procs are critical to the balance of the game from a sheer numbers standpoint, but the implementation is a problem in many cases.

Crit procs are needed in order to push condition classes into other stats besides raw condition damage.  If you removed all of the crit based procs from the game, you’ll see every single condition class running around in Condi/Tough/Vit gear (assuming it becomes available in PvP) because they already get very little damage from power and subsequently crits on that power based damage.  The on crit procs push people into Rabid or Rampager gear sets to ensure that they actually get Incendiary Ammo or Dhuumfire procs, and other similar effects like Sharpshooter.

The problem is the way those procs are designed currently, and the burning damage design in general.  Currently a 5.2 second burn roughly every 10 seconds equates to a 50% burning uptime on a single target.  The issue with burning is that the packet size for burns is pretty large, so even a single tick of burning does a decent level of damage.  This makes balancing burn procs very challenging.  If you increase the cooldown, you’ll still have a 5 second chunk of burning to contend with whenever it procs, and in most cases for both engineers and necros, numerous cover conditions to prevent removal.

The issue with proccing such a powerful condition on crit is that it basically can’t be avoided.  You can’t dodge/blind/block every single attack, so as soon as an attack crits you, you’ve basically got 5 seconds of burning to contend with as well.  This is probably way to strong for a randomly procced effect to be delivered in a single hit.  The problem from a balance standpoint is that if you reduce the duration of the burn, you have to also reduce the cooldown to make the trait still worthwhile.  The net effect would basically be 2 seconds every 5 instead of 4 every 10.  This creates a different problem because now you’ve just made the re-application of the effect much more common, and basically made removal nearly meaningless against it.

I think that in general, crit procs are good to drive additional condition damage scaling, but the implementation of them is very problematic especially for burning because of the forced packet size of the conditions.  They work reasonably well for bleeding based procs, but the mechanics of removal and application make them problematic in that setup as well.

There are multiple ways you can clean up some of these types of things, but neutering burn damage is probably not a very good way to do it.  It’s already pretty weak in PvE due to the way that it stacks, and reducing the damage it does will only make it worse (unless you decide to make it stack in intensity like bleeding).

I’ve proposed before a change to the way conditions work in the game that basically divorces the damage from the condition type, and allows the type of condition to basically act as a throttling mechanism for the damage.  This would allow you to add some appropriately sized damage numbers to effects like these without being forced to work in 600-ish damage chunks.  It would theoretically also allow you to create other ways to scale condition damage with other offensive stats (like “Add 10% of attack damage as bleeding on crit”) which would force people to invest in offensive stats if they want to do top level damage.

At the end of the day, you need something to force condition damage dealers to take other offensive stats, but the mechanics of the game make it difficult to make those effects balanced currently.

Don’t you dare nerf us until you fix the kittenload of bugs and buff our turrets and gadgets.

Knox.8962:

Crit procs are needed in order to push condition classes into other stats besides raw condition damage.  If you removed all of the crit based procs from the game, you’ll see every single condition class running around in Condi/Tough/Vit gear (assuming it becomes available in PvP) because they already get very little damage from power and subsequently crits on that power based damage.  The on crit procs push people into Rabid or Rampager gear sets to ensure that they actually get Incendiary Ammo or Dhuumfire procs, and other similar effects like Sharpshooter

I totally agree with this. With condition damage/toughness/vitality armor coming in next patch, I hope Anet’s approach is to start improving crit procs and making precision more appealing.
Problem with current burn procs is, that for example Terror necro with just rabid weapons and +5% crit sigil has around 25% crit chance, which is enough for proccing Dhuumfire.

I think IP is fine as it is. There’s an interesting trade off vs. shrapnel if you’re using grenades or bombs, but one can simply adjust to the scenario that they’re facing.

I guess I wouldn’t think it too harsh if they made IP a master level trait and threw something else down to the adept tier (i.e. enhance performance), but I think it’s good where it is now.

It’s good to have some condition procs from crits because precision would have no place in a condition build otherwise. Also, this means they can make those proc abilities more powerful overall since there’s a precondition to having them trigger.

Knox.8962:

This section and your chart are basically all wrong.

At 1100 condition damage, burning ticks for 603. Bleeding will tick for 97. It only takes 6.2 stacks of bleeding before the bleeds are stronger than the burning. 13 stacks of bleeding will hit for more than double the damage per tick of burning.

You seem to be only including the base damage in each additional bleeding stack, and ignoring the scaling on all but the first.

Crit procs are needed in order to push condition classes into other stats besides raw condition damage.  If you removed all of the crit based procs from the game, you’ll see every single condition class running around in Condi/Tough/Vit gear (assuming it becomes available in PvP) because they already get very little damage from power and subsequently crits on that power based damage.  The on crit procs push people into Rabid or Rampager gear sets to ensure that they actually get Incendiary Ammo or Dhuumfire procs, and other similar effects like Sharpshooter.

The issue with proccing such a powerful condition on crit is that it basically can’t be avoided.  You can’t dodge/blind/block every single attack, so as soon as an attack crits you, you’ve basically got 5 seconds of burning to contend with as well.  This is probably way to strong for a randomly procced effect to be delivered in a single hit.  The problem from a balance standpoint is that if you reduce the duration of the burn, you have to also reduce the cooldown to make the trait still worthwhile.  The net effect would basically be 2 seconds every 5 instead of 4 every 10.  This creates a different problem because now you’ve just made the re-application of the effect much more common, and basically made removal nearly meaningless against it.

I think that in general, crit procs are good to drive additional condition damage scaling, but the implementation of them is very problematic especially for burning because of the forced packet size of the conditions.  They work reasonably well for bleeding based procs, but the mechanics of removal and application make them problematic in that setup as well.

There are multiple ways you can clean up some of these types of things, but neutering burn damage is probably not a very good way to do it.  It’s already pretty weak in PvE due to the way that it stacks, and reducing the damage it does will only make it worse (unless you decide to make it stack in intensity like bleeding).

At the end of the day, you need something to force condition damage dealers to take other offensive stats, but the mechanics of the game make it difficult to make those effects balanced currently.

@Knox:
You’re completely right. I shouldn’t make charts when I’m tired and sleep deprived. Looking back on the chart today I was facepalming at the magnitude of my error. I knew that I’d heard that “6 bleeds is better than Burning” from somewhere, and having the chart refute that despite my gamesense should have keyed me off that something was wrong.

What a difference a pair of brackets makes.

So yes, 6 Bleeds does begin to exceed Burning damage at 1200+ Condition damage; although if you have lower then the number of stacks you require increase.

I agree that there must be some sort of stat diversification required to make Condition damage work, and Precision is just one of those ways to do so. I think Attack damage scaling for Conditions might work; however, this would simply “force” Condition users to turn to Carrion or Rampager’s Amulet and stats – the preferred stat combo would change, but not the basic problem.

One idea that I had was by making individual condition “stacks” scale better with condition damage, but nerf all condition application durations across the board. Burns could then be an “unprecedented” 2-3 seconds after a lot of +Condition Duration traits and runes, but hit a lot harder. Necromancers could stack up to an “unprecedented” 8 stacks of Bleed in a combo of Weapon Skills and Utilities that only lasts for 4 seconds, but has the potential to take off over 50% of an opponent’s health if not cleansed.

Similarly, the Engineer could use a combination of Pistol 1, Incendiary Ammo and Rocket Kick to deliver a 4 second burn – that can 50% someone from full if left unchecked.

The idea here is to make Condition application a lot more “bursty” – short duration, high intensity, requires co-ordination from team-mates. Right now the way Conditions work is that you don’t really have incentive to invest into +Condition Duration unless the traits are already there laid out for you.

(Doubleposting because of word limit and there’s a lot I want to reply to)

VIVorcha.7853:

Don’t you dare nerf us until you fix the kittenload of bugs and buff our turrets and gadgets.

The purpose of this thread is not to discuss nerfs to the Engineer, but to address the way Critical-hit procs are affecting the class design and its place in balance in terms of other professions. Right now it is possible to apply massive pressure in WvW and PvP entirely off the back of a single RNG trait that could proc off any skill use.

In the context of having a competitive game, this makes PvP balance a lot more tenuous as you now have RNG entering the mix.
In the context of build crafting, having RNG procs simply means the following:
If you have something RNG, players simply won’t use it or take it into account when buildcrafting and instead use something reliable. I have said this in the past, as have others.

Now, as for fixing and finishing the class – I have made multiple threads addressing Turrets, Gadgets, mainhand weapons, the Mortar elite and various Junk traits of the Engineer. Threads have come up time and time again regarding these issues and if you go through my posting history then you will see that I have the same aim as you – bringing things up in the forum so that it can be addressed by Arenanet.

It is no secret that Arenanet has been glacially slow in bringing all utilities and weapons and traits for all classes up to scratch. I play multiple classes myself and I can tell you that Elementalist, Mesmer, Warrior, Ranger, and yes, even Guardian have their own “junk” traits, weapons and utilities. Hell, I would say that Elementalist has it even worse because you have 2 subpar weapons (Focus, Staff, out of 4), 3 sets of utilities (Conjures, Glyphs, Signets), 1 elite (Tornado), and 2 entire trait lines (Fire, Earth) that are significantly worse to use.

These issues have been seemingly sidestepped in favour of monthly “Living Story” releases that provide temporary content in lieu of finishing each class and making all dungeons something more than just a DPS race.

So in the end I think you will see that I want the same thing as you do – a balanced game, with fun permanent content, with competitive PvP and WvW.

Shrapnel – Explosions have a 15% chance to apply 1 stack of Bleeding for 12 seconds

Incendiary Powder – Critical hits have a 100% chance to inflict Burning for 4 seconds. Internal cooldown of 10 seconds

Sharpshooter – Critical hits have a 30% chance to apply 1 stack of Bleeding for 3 seconds

Infused Precision – Critical hits have a 50% chance to grant Swiftness for 5 seconds. 5 seconds Internal Cooldown

Precise Sights – Critical hits have a 50% chance to apply Vulnerability

Go for the Eyes – Critical hits with the Rifle have a 50% chance to apply Blind for 5 seconds. 10 seconds Internal Cooldown

I’d just like to bring up the list of Crit-procs for the Engineer again as I feel that a little too much of the conversation has centered around Incendiary Powder in lieu of discussion of Engineer’s other Crit-procs.

For the record, I think that Incendiary Powder is balanced in the context of PvE, WvW and PvP.

That said, RNG has never sat well with me and whilst I think that diversification of stats is required to make Condition Damage not OP, using Crit-procs to address the issue is wrong

Now, I recognise that not all traits can be totally balanced for all arenas for the game – nor can skills. The Warrior healing update turned Healing Signet into something monstrously OP – whilst reinforcing reliance on Signet passives, for example

But I do think that some Crit-procs for the Engineer can be addressed to make it:

1. More reliable – and therefore making it more attractive to take in builds
2. Less passive – forcing the player to make playstyle choices based around his/ choice in traits
3. More counterplay-able – with an active choice changing playstyle, enemies can play around it to make the game deeper mechanically, instead of using RNG for complexity
4. With deeper choices, there is less of a optimal choice for traits – leading to greater build variation

I’ll start off with one of the least seen crit-procs used for the Engineer as an example – and a fix for which I’ve proposed in my other thread.
Go for the Eyes – Critical hits with the Rifle have a 50% chance to apply Blind for 5 seconds. 10 seconds Internal Cooldown

Instead:

Blunderbuss, Overcharged Shot and Jump Shot apply Blind for 5 seconds.

I feel that this change would take away some of the RNG of the Engineer. At the same time, it emphasises the utility side of the Rifle for the Engineer. Being situated in the Master Tier, this would also force a sacrifice between damage and CDR and active defense for Rifle Engineers – as traits should be doing in the first place. It would also give Rifle Engineers some close range active defense – something that Pistol Shield users take for granted, but which should also exist as an option for Rifle.

It’s changes like this that I feel would ultimately lead to a deeper engagement in terms of buildcrafting for the Engineer rather than what it is now – 30/5/0/20/15 Grenadier or 0/30/0/10/30 SD or whatever else floats your boat. There are clearly optimal choices in traits for the Engineer right now, including RNG ones like Incendiary Powder. And I feel that addressing at least some of these issues could lead to a better Engineer experience.

Blunderbuss, Overcharged Shot and Jump Shot apply Blind for 5 seconds.

Not a good change considering most of the time those abilities are used in chain, something like
Netshot>Blunderbuss>Overcharge shot> Jumpshot

As I said, it is something other than RNG.

I agree with you in that Blind doesn’t stack right now, and taking Go for the Eyes and chaining Rifle skills would be counter to using the trait effectively. But it does force the player to spread the skills out. One application I thought of for this change was against melee classes, for example.

The Rifle combo is especially perilous against Melee because you’re bringing yourself into their range as a class with low access to Stability – they can easily counter-CC and start their own burst combo. Having 3 Blinds on demand would force Rifle Engineers taking the trait to using the 3,4,5 skills smartly instead of chaining them for burst.

So the questions are:

• How would you change my proposed change – or would you rather Go for the Eyes stay RNG as it is?
• Do you think other RNG Traits deserve changes for better reliability? If not, what would you change instead about the lesser used traits to make them more palatable?
• Do you think that Engineer is improved in gameplay with RNG procs? If so, how do you counterplay against such procs?

MonMalthias.4763:

I actually see the Dhuumfire patch as the culmination of a design failure of Arenanet to take into account the base damage of burning and the overall placement of it in traits.

This is so true.

On another note: I tried to edit my original post to say that crit procs were useful to force precision into condition damage builds, but I must have run out of room or something. However, even that design choice isn’t working at the moment, since rangers don’t need it and necros/engineers just need a bit of precision to proc burn. The rest of the procs are negligible in comparison.

I’m not sure that condition procs as basically free, un-counterable damage is necessarily bad. I’ve just never seen a game where that type of damage is so high. This is the only game I’ve played where DoT damage has its own stat and ignores armor and hits really hard. Somewhere in there, something is going to have to change.

Regarding RNG: In general, reducing RNG is good. I don’t think this is true RNG, though—I’d say it’s just a free blind every 10-11 seconds. The problem is the “free” part, not the RNG part. Same goes with burn proc, condition meta, etc.

How would you change my proposed change – or would you rather Go for the Eyes stay RNG as it is?

Neither i would scrap the talent completely. You don’t try to fix something that doens’t work if its obviously design flawed. You replace it. The proposed fix would have punished players taking full advantage of a situation.

Do you think other RNG Traits deserve changes for better reliability? If not, what would you change instead about the lesser used traits to make them more palatable?

Not when you make something that was useful and make it totally useless. Bad changes are worse than RNG because they are just nerf’s.

Do you think that Engineer is improved in gameplay with RNG procs? If so, how do you counterplay against such procs?

I would 100 times rather have procs than abilities that restricted play style. There’s no counter play to loads of thing’s in the game. There is no counter play against loads of things in the game, for instance…stealth. Wheres this idea come from you can counter everything? you clearly can’t.

The problem with Necro in particular is more about how key abilities are essentially unavoidable.
You cannot avoid marks, they are ranged and there is no warning when one is comming. Same for Doom, its an instant-fear.

I think procs from precision, especially condition procs, are actually a good thing. It means a condition build can scale with more then just Condition damage and has a reason to pick up a stat like Precision.

I also dont feel Burn is overpowered. It ticks hard, but it stacks in duration. I can stack a very long burn on an enemy thanks to 100% cond. duration and several abilities. But whats the point? The DPS doesnt actually get better. Stacking it in long durations isnt all that useful.
In that respect Bleed is much stronger, you can actually stack for intense damage and put out some burst.

f.e. a 25stack of Bleed will tick over 2.6k per second. Burn ticks for 700. Sure Burn can be higher damage overall, but it needs to tick for much longer.

Unlike skills, rng in traits does make sense in most cases.
The “on crit” traits are there to give more importance to the precision stat – if it weren’t for those, its use would be limited only to power builds. With on-crit traits, instead, it makes sense to have some precision even in a condition build.
But it can also be a way to give limited bonuses – like with shrapnel. By putting small bleeds with long durations it forces the player to attack repeatedly with explosives to maintain/increase those stacks. Something you can’t do with a large stack+internal cooldown – one could inflict that, and then switch to some other weapon.

I feel that Incendiary Powder should go on the attack after toolbelt. Burning is pretty good but the enemy has no way of telling if your attack will crit. If it is given a signet like effect the player and their target have a way to know that the trait will trigger so both can react to it accordingly.

Some of them like Sharpshooter should stay on crit so that condi users use another stat but like w/ IP there should be some way to indicate to the player and target when it will trigger. It would help w/ learning the traits and help players counter it since there is an indication of whats causing the extra bleed.

Since Go for the Eyes already has an ICD I think it should affect other things like flame thrower and rifle turret (if they allow it to crit) so its not too niche to be useful but still requires a dif stat. Or they could just make it trigger after toolbelt use.

TLDR: If the traits stay on crit there should be some visual/audio effect to show it will trigger

Infused Precision – Critical hits have a 50% chance to grant Swiftness for 5 seconds. 5 seconds Internal Cooldown

I’ll take a swing at this.

Your next hit after moving x units grants swiftness for 5sec (where x is balanced around 100% uptime).

Super Riceman.8702:

I feel that Incendiary Powder should go on the attack after toolbelt. Burning is pretty good but the enemy has no way of telling if your attack will crit. If it is given a signet like effect the player and their target have a way to know that the trait will trigger so both can react to it accordingly.

Some of them like Sharpshooter should stay on crit so that condi users use another stat but like w/ IP there should be some way to indicate to the player and target when it will trigger. It would help w/ learning the traits and help players counter it since there is an indication of whats causing the extra bleed.

Since Go for the Eyes already has an ICD I think it should affect other things like flame thrower and rifle turret (if they allow it to crit) so its not too niche to be useful but still requires a dif stat. Or they could just make it trigger after toolbelt use.

TLDR: If the traits stay on crit there should be some visual/audio effect to show it will trigger

I doubt they can do that – i would assume that the game calculate such things when you’ve already hit the enemy. At most they could put some indication that a such a trait can trigger (as in “it isn’t in cooldown”), probably via the UI.
Still, it would mean you would have to check the UI for that player repeatedly…as in, “playing the UI”.

MonMalthias.4763:

• Do you think that Engineer is improved in gameplay with RNG procs? If so, how do you counterplay against such procs?

There is clear counterplay to all conditions in the form of condition removal/melandru runes, certain foods in WvW, support builds with condition removal, etc…

If the current Meta is heavy condition then you need to adjust your build to account for that, almost every class can have very good condition removal on a relatively short cooldown IF they decide to spec for it. Many classes can apply that condition removal to others as well.

Conan.8046:

How would you change my proposed change – or would you rather Go for the Eyes stay RNG as it is?

Neither i would scrap the talent completely. You don’t try to fix something that doens’t work if its obviously design flawed. You replace it. The proposed fix would have punished players taking full advantage of a situation.

What would you replace Go for the Eyes with given that you believe that it is fundamentally flawed in design?

Also, I cannot quite grasp what you’re trying to say when you mention that my proposed fix would “punished players taking full advantage of a situation.” Does this mean that taking Go for the Eyes punishes players trying to burst? I suppose it does, yes. But it changes the playstyle of Rifle and adds an active defense component through Blind application and is reliable – both of which add to the usefulness of a trait.

I’m happy to receive any alternative propositions – Go for the Eyes has never been popular anyway – the only reference I have found for it is as an alternative trait when running 30 Firearms in his BoBomber burst build. .

Do you think other RNG Traits deserve changes for better reliability? If not, what would you change instead about the lesser used traits to make them more palatable?
Not when you make something that was usually totally useless. Bad changes are worse than RNG because they are just nerf’s.

Okay. So what suggestions do you have?

Do you think that Engineer is improved in gameplay with RNG procs? If so, how do you counterplay against such procs?
I would 100 times rather have procs than abilities that restricted play style. There’s no counter play to loads of thing’s in the game. There is no counter play against loads of things in the game, for instance…stealth. Wheres this idea come from you can counter everything? you clearly can’t.

The reason why I want everything for the Engineer to be reliable is this:
People don’t take a trait when they cannot count on it in times of need.

Incendiary Powder’s change from 33%, 2 seconds every 3 seconds to 100% 4 seconds every 10 seconds is an example of one such tweak to something RNG that turned something from “bonus DPS” to “100% required for Engineer condi-burst”. Even at relatively low Crit%, with the number of skills Engineer has and with relatively short activation times, Incendiary Powder procs are pretty much guaranteed to proc upon ICD. This is an example of a crit-proc done right, because it turns a fight into something that you can measure by metronome and something as an opponent, you can play around.

Right now a lot of crit-procs for Engineer are RNG. Simple as that. There’s no way for yourself as the Engineer to play around them – they just “come up” sometimes, like Go for the Eyes , and it’s a nice little “bonus”.

Similarly, there’s no way for the opponent to play around it either. They just try to fight you in melee, load up a skill, and randomly get Blinded. There’s no depth here, no counterplay. The proc doesn’t enrich Engineer’s gameplay and it doesn’t add mechanical or strategic depth – it just “happens”.

That’s why I want more reliability to certain traits for the Engineer.

amiable.4823:

MonMalthias.4763:

• Do you think that Engineer is improved in gameplay with RNG procs? If so, how do you counterplay against such procs?

There is clear counterplay to all conditions in the form of condition removal/melandru runes, certain foods in WvW, support builds with condition removal, etc…

If the current Meta is heavy condition then you need to adjust your build to account for that, almost every class can have very good condition removal on a relatively short cooldown IF they decide to spec for it. Many classes can apply that condition removal to others as well.

@Amiable:
I don’t see where you’re going with your post. I also don’t think you’ve read the OP.

Your answer essentially boils down to – “In a condi meta, bring more condi removal and counterbuild against condis”

Well that’s great and all, but it fails to address the topic at discussion.

Right now condi-burst is a thing – where you load up the opponent with as many DPS conditions as are possible (Burning, Bleed stacks 6+) through RNG crit-procs, condi-loading autos, and utilities that inflict condis – then cover with “junk” conditions like Torment (Necromancer, Thief, Mesmer, Warrior); Vulnerability (Engineer with 25+ Explosives); Weakness (Necromancer, Mesmer); Poison (Engineer, Thief, Necromancer) – then play defensively until the opponent dies of DOTs.

The issue being discussed is not “bring condi removal in a condi meta”.

The issue here is that many condition applying skills also proc other conditions ; typically through RNG Crit-procs.
Traits, sigils and yes, even Runes (Nightmare, the worst offender) exist to turn even a single auto-attack into Bleed/Burn/Poison/Vulnerability/Whatever.

It leads to:

- Random dodges, because you don’t know when an opponent’s ICDs are up – See: NevirSayDie’s points about fighting Necro Staff marks – dodge pre-emptively (Visually unscoutable procs lead to uncertainties of play and erodes the tactical use of the dodge mechanic in lieu of dodging whenever, because you’re bound to dodge something)

- Skill spam – hey, if X trait procs off RNG surely rolling the dice more often will make it come up, right? Especially egregious with Necromancers, but also present in Engineers

- An increase in the complexity of the game whilst decreasing depth . The game becomes more “spammy” and more about casting on cooldown rather than intelligent, measured play.

- Obtuseness of play. When you have died to Spirit Ranger procs and have gone “wtf happened to my last 5k HP?” you’ll understand what this means. Basically, players don’t know why they die and/or what they die to – neither of which is conducive to fun. It leads to QQ threads and forum toxicity – where is the fun in that?

- No counterplay. What incentive is there to become mechanically proficient if you are playing against the RNG? Just spam away and hope for the best that your spam beats your opponent’s spam. It lowers skillcap to rely on passives – look at the entire Ranger profession and shudder.

The purpose of this thread is to explore various ways we can change certain traits for the Engineer such that:
- They are no longer predicated by RNG and thus more reliable
- Without RNG to hold a mechanic back (due to risk of consistent reapplication), traits can be changed to be more situational and therefore more powerful
- By making traits more situational, trait choices can predicate new playstyle choices: more builds are possible
- Having a reliable situational trigger deepens tactical depth by allowing counterplay. Counterplay reinforces and rewards mechanical skill

just for the record… scope and target the weak are technically NOT RNG based as they provide a GUARANTEE that your crit will be increased… and no i do not count crit towards the “RNG procs” theme of this thread as that would mean all of 1-30 of the firearms traitline full stop would have to be discussed providing 10 points of precision each (crit chance)

anyway as far as incedary powder goes i fail to see how its “required” as a condition build can just maintain burning 100% of the time without it anyway… actually making it rather useless in some cases as opposed to required… however any cond build that doesnt use burn skills for some reason make a very powerful trait for only 10 points.

MonMalthias.4763:

The purpose of this thread is to explore various ways we can change certain traits for the Engineer such that:
- They are no longer predicated by RNG and thus more reliable
- Without RNG to hold a mechanic back (due to risk of consistent reapplication), traits can be changed to be more situational and therefore more powerful
- By making traits more situational, trait choices can predicate new playstyle choices: more builds are possible
- Having a reliable situational trigger deepens tactical depth by allowing counterplay. Counterplay reinforces and rewards mechanical skill

I was answering your question. The RNG we are discussing here is the application of conditions upon crit mechanic. I was just pointing out that there is clear counterplay to that because the damage is not frontloaded and by definition there is at least sometime to react. If the problem is condition spam (which this effectively is) a player can defeat it using condition removal mechanisms.

You don’t like RNG, I get it. Most good players hate RNG because they want to know what their keypress does, every single time, it’s what makes things like Elixer X, U and many of the toolbelt elixir skills (non-traited) impractical in serious play. It makes it difficult to really excel with the class. Hoewever I think the IP example you use really isn’t the best example of this, because as you point out it is reltively consistent pressure that an opponent can understand and expect (they will most likely be getting a 5 second burn every 10 seconds). That understanding allows a counter.

@amiable:
As I have mentioned earlier in the thread, I eventually came to the conclusion that IP should stay in its current implementation, lest Engineer’s place in balance become highly volatile.

I do feel that other crit procs could do with some reworking though.

• Go For the Eyes : I’ve mentioned before that I feel that loading the blinds into the Weapon skills would make it at least tolerable enough to take.
  As it is, it’s an RNG Sun Spirit . Calculable uptime assuming 40% critical chance for Go for the Eyes is 1/0.8 (Hip shot auto) * 0.4 * 0.5 * 5 = 1.25 seconds of Blind on average per 10 second ICD.
  Added to the fact that you can’t control it – you can’t clutch Blind which is the entire purpose of Blinds – and you get an RNG proc that people only take because it probably covers Burning.

• Precise Sights :
  I feel that Precise Sights is balanced as it stands, but it finds use largely in 2 builds: Grenadier builds to guarantee the 25 stacks of Vulnerability in Dungeon DPS, and in Flamethrower builds geared towards eking out that little bit of extra damage from FT1.
  Yet it doesn’t really offer much aside from increased DPS for the party – something that a lot of crit-procs for the Engineer are especially guilty of. In PvP, Vulnerability is favoured largely as a condition cover. Individual stacks are largely negligible – it’s only when you have 10+ stacks on you that you begin to worry. It’s arguably why classes like Mesmer have a much better design with regards to Vulnerability with Dazzling and Illusion of Vulnerability .
  I feel that the current implementation of Precise Sights should be altered in some way to promote clutch play rather than be some boring DPS increaser.

• Infused Precision
  With a good enough crit chance (40% +), or running the Flamethrower, Infused Precision offers combat mobility at 100% uptime. Coupled with Invigorating Speed it also gives you permanent Vigor.
  With the appropriate trait synergies Infused Precision is good for combat mobility, yet it suffers from again, a lack of interactivity. It’s just there, and the sad thing is that it seems to be the case for a lot of Engineer traits.

• Sharpshooter
  Sharpshooter is used in condi-Grenadier builds like that of Ostrich Eggs and combined with Incendiary Powder to provide, once again, a little bonus DPS and a cover condition for Burning. It doesn’t reward risky play, and it doesn’t reward smart play. Once again, it’s just there. Half of a Sigil of Agony to give a boring boost to DPS if you put 25+ into Firearms.

• Shrapnel
  A DPS booster for the hybrid Grenadier engineer.
  The 15% chance is too low for Bomb Kit, and tuned to give 2 (Grenades) * 1/0.5 (GK1 attack speed) * 0.15 = 0.6 stacks of bleed per second for 12*1.1 (Base condi duration with trait) seconds on average.
  It averages at 7.2 stacks of Bleed before Grenadier or 3*1/0.5*0.15*12*1.3 = 14.04 stacks of bleed with Grenadier before other modifiers.
  Again, this is a boring DPS booster that is stronger for GK spamming DPS builds for dungeons.

Together, these crit-proc traits compete with other Engineer traits in various lines (most egregiously with the Firearms line), to simply provide a boring DPS boost. There’s no clutch potential here. Procs are just “there” with the exception of Infused Precision.

I feel that Engineer could be much better designed if traits like these were replaced by others that:

• Reward risky play, i.e. entering sub 600 range
• Reward clutch moments, i.e. offering clutch Blinds or CC
• Don’t just increase DPS or provide cover conditions for Burning as we have enough of those on Weapon Skills like Pistol already.