### [WvW] Boon Duration Grenadier?

Sigil of Bloodlust needs to be Sigil of Cruelty. You get more damage out of 250 ferocity than 250 strength.

Shaped Charge is better than Aim Assisted Rocket hit over hit if using explosives.

Where is your stability coming from to make Mass Momentum worthwhile? I don’t see any. I would take Rapid Regeneration instead. You’ll live longer and have easier access to swiftness. The 10% toughness to power isn’t worth it.

That’s all I can think of without completely making it my own.

(edited by DGraves.3720)

Sigil of Bloodlust needs to be Sigil of Cruelty. You get more damage out of 250 ferocity than 250 strength.

Shaped Charge is better than Aim Assisted Rocket hit over hit if using explosives.

Where is your stability coming from to make Mass Momentum worthwhile? I don’t see any. I would take Rapid Regeneration instead. You’ll live longer and have easier access to swiftness. The 10% toughness to power isn’t worth it.

That’s all I can think of without completely making it my own.

off the top of my head, bloodlust and cruelty should be about the same in his build.

shaped charge does nothing when condis get cleansed, rocket bursts and nades proc it quick.

would agree on mass momentum… if he had any super speed at all. but he does have toss b. its a good cover for the stab since it refreshes might. prolly doesnt need recovery matrix. perfectly weighted could be a better choice, giving more stab without really hurting prot uptime when it matters.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

Sigil of Bloodlust needs to be Sigil of Cruelty. You get more damage out of 250 ferocity than 250 strength.

Shaped Charge is better than Aim Assisted Rocket hit over hit if using explosives.

Where is your stability coming from to make Mass Momentum worthwhile? I don’t see any. I would take Rapid Regeneration instead. You’ll live longer and have easier access to swiftness. The 10% toughness to power isn’t worth it.

That’s all I can think of without completely making it my own.

off the top of my head, bloodlust and cruelty should be about the same in his build.

Nowhere near. The ferocity is significantly better because it exemplifies every current point increasing it’s value by 16% (250/15 rounded down). This matters a lot when you start handling coefficients.

shaped charge does nothing when condis get cleansed, rocket bursts and nades proc it quick.

Grenades in just two attacks will go from +3% to +24% since the vulnerability and the explosion itself pushes all three individual attacks up as it’s 7% per grenade. The rocket doesn’t attack anywhere nearly as quickly though I do agree if it does go off it will be a strong contender for burst. In WvW sustained damage tends to work better overall when not alone.

would agree on mass momentum… if he had any super speed at all. but he does have toss b. its a good cover for the stab since it refreshes might. prolly doesnt need recovery matrix. perfectly weighted could be a better choice, giving more stab without really hurting prot uptime when it matters.

It’s the lack of stability that concerns me. It’s usefulness is extremely limited and his timing has to be impeccable to make the might worthwhile. Even then it’s only 7 stacks; that isn’t really game changing. As for recovery matrix that’s something I left alone as personal choice.

Shaped Charge is better than Aim Assisted Rocket hit over hit if using explosives.

That’s all I can think of without completely making it my own.

off the top of my head, bloodlust and cruelty should be about the same in his build.

Nowhere near. The ferocity is significantly better because it exemplifies every current point increasing it’s value by 16% (250/15 rounded down). This matters a lot when you start handling coefficients.

shaped charge does nothing when condis get cleansed, rocket bursts and nades proc it quick.

Grenades in just two attacks will go from +3% to +24% since the vulnerability and the explosion itself pushes all three individual attacks up as it’s 7% per grenade. The rocket doesn’t attack anywhere nearly as quickly though I do agree if it does go off it will be a strong contender for burst. In WvW sustained damage tends to work better overall when not alone.

would agree on mass momentum… if he had any super speed at all. but he does have toss b. its a good cover for the stab since it refreshes might. prolly doesnt need recovery matrix. perfectly weighted could be a better choice, giving more stab without really hurting prot uptime when it matters.

It’s the lack of stability that concerns me. It’s usefulness is extremely limited and his timing has to be impeccable to make the might worthwhile. Even then it’s only 7 stacks; that isn’t really game changing. As for recovery matrix that’s something I left alone as personal choice.

dont forget that cruelty gets blunted by only having 76% crit chance. its not 16%. its closer to 12%, and against boon strip more like 8%.

nades on the 2nd attack will be at +10%. 3 vuln, 7% from shaped. not 24%. this is not how this multiplier works. you do not get 3×7% from hitting 3 times. you get 7%. thats around 100-200 damage per nade. rocket does 1k or 2k in 1 hit every 10 secs. under quickness, nades with shaped charge will give you like 500 more dps than rocket. without quickness, its a wash. vuln is also gonna be the first thing cleansed every time.

this build should easily maintain 15ish might, tossing b on cd will simply push it to near 25 for ~50% of the time.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

Where do you plan on using this? Roaming? Zerging?

This isn’t a good build for roaming, since mobility is key (getting to a point fast is key, so that if the tower or wherever the commander needs you to check out is in trouble, you have time to report it), and you’ve only got a 59% swiftness uptime, which isn’t a whole lot, and the boons provided by elixir b (and its tool belt) are valuable in a fight. And chances are, you’ll encounter enemies when the boons run out and the elixir is on cool down. Using swiftness from elixir gun 2 isn’t a good idea, since it requires a target, and will put you in combat.

If you’re using it for zerging, it would work; not perfect, but it would work. The Condi cleanse from EG 3, 4, 5, healing from EG 5 and healing turret, and blast finisher from EG 4 are good in a zerg of any size. The lightning field from hammer 5 is great for blasting swiftness.

As for the elite, I usually take sneak gyro. The stealth helps when stomping (enemies can’t hit what they can’t see), and provides a nice daze when it gets destroyed. Also, with elixir x, you’ve got a 50% chance of getting rampage, 50% chance of getting tornado, and 100% chance of getting the one you don’t want. Having the moa is nice, but situational at best. Also, it can be somewhat wasted if you’re in it, and you get hit below 25% health and self regulating defenses is off CD. Either of the other two traits would work better.

Thanks for the feedback.

I changed the Scrapper minor back to Perfectly Weighted for the extra Stability and MM synergy. Still using Air/Bloodlust since there wasn’t any clear consensus on Cruelty.

I use the build for roaming solo or with a Guardian wingman. I used to use Sneak Gyro, but I didn’t often find it useful and get more out of anti-Necro moa with Rampage or the quick Might/Stability/cleanse/blind/knockback Tornado offers.

This build does have 100% Swiftness, as Hammer 5+HT deto+Acid Bomb+Elixir B when running to camps is already 17+17+19=53 seconds of Swiftness on a 24 second cooldown, enough to hit the cap in 2 or 3 reps— before combat.

I’m still getting familiar with the build, and while it’s not as boon-heavy as the FT variant, it feels more effectively simply because of how much stronger and safer grenades are (better damage, Cripple/Chill, 900 range AoE).

dont forget that cruelty gets blunted by only having 76% crit chance. its not 16%. its closer to 12%, and against boon strip more like 8%.

At 8% takeaway in ferocity it would be base 158% per crit at say a true 76% of the time for ease. So in equivalency we just take the power and divide it by the critical effect so just 250 / .58 as the power equivalent. After that point the power becomes less and less effective for every point of power beyond that number.

For instance 250 power is 10% of 2,500 but 2,500 * .58 * .76 = 1,102 which is 4 times greater. The flat increase isn’t as good. Obviously this is just these two sigils against one another though and definitely not using Assassin’s armor which would raise the cap higher.

nades on the 2nd attack will be at +10%. 3 vuln, 7% from shaped. not 24%. this is not how this multiplier works. you do not get 3×7% from hitting 3 times. you get 7%. thats around 100-200 damage per nade. rocket does 1k or 2k in 1 hit every 10 secs. under quickness, nades with shaped charge will give you like 500 more dps than rocket. without quickness, its a wash. vuln is also gonna be the first thing cleansed every time.

Each salvo is 3 separate attacks as I understand it so I simply did what you did and expanded it without the middle step, but I think we are in agreement, it’s (.07x + .03) where x is the number of grenades that hits the target in the salvo, so if it’s one it’s 10%, 2 it’s 17% and if 3 it’s 24% total.

I could be wrong and the salvo itself be just “one attack”. If I am wrong I apologize.

this build should easily maintain 15ish might, tossing b on cd will simply push it to near 25 for ~50% of the time.

I agree with that. But what of the stability?

dont forget that cruelty gets blunted by only having 76% crit chance. its not 16%. its closer to 12%, and against boon strip more like 8%.

At 8% takeaway in ferocity it would be base 158% per crit at say a true 76% of the time for ease. So in equivalency we just take the power and divide it by the critical effect so just 250 / .58 as the power equivalent. After that point the power becomes less and less effective for every point of power beyond that number.

For instance 250 power is 10% of 2,500 but 2,500 * .58 * .76 = 1,102 which is 4 times greater. The flat increase isn’t as good. Obviously this is just these two sigils against one another though and definitely not using Assassin’s armor which would raise the cap higher.

nades on the 2nd attack will be at +10%. 3 vuln, 7% from shaped. not 24%. this is not how this multiplier works. you do not get 3×7% from hitting 3 times. you get 7%. thats around 100-200 damage per nade. rocket does 1k or 2k in 1 hit every 10 secs. under quickness, nades with shaped charge will give you like 500 more dps than rocket. without quickness, its a wash. vuln is also gonna be the first thing cleansed every time.

Each salvo is 3 separate attacks as I understand it so I simply did what you did and expanded it without the middle step, but I think we are in agreement, it’s (.07x + .03) where x is the number of grenades that hits the target in the salvo, so if it’s one it’s 10%, 2 it’s 17% and if 3 it’s 24% total.

I could be wrong and the salvo itself be just “one attack”. If I am wrong I apologize.

this build should easily maintain 15ish might, tossing b on cd will simply push it to near 25 for ~50% of the time.

I agree with that. But what of the stability?

idk what youre talking about with cruelty.

250 extra power @ 2500 is gonna give 10% yes. 250 power @ 3000 is gonna give about 8%.

16% crit damage @ 194% base @ 100% crit rate gives about 16% damage. @ 76% rate it gives about 12% damage. @ 56% rate it gives about 8% damage.

im not sure on nades. but what i do know is it isnt additive.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

idk what youre talking about with cruelty.

250 extra power @ 2500 is gonna give 10% yes. 250 power @ 3000 is gonna give about 8%.

16% crit damage @ 194% base @ 100% crit rate gives about 16% damage. @ 76% rate it gives about 12% damage. @ 56% rate it gives about 8% damage.

im not sure on nades. but what i do know is it isnt additive.

Power and Ferocity both have base numbers, you have a base of 1000 power and though it isn’t stated a base of 750 ferocity (critical hits automatically do 150% @ zero additional ferocity) so sheet ferocity isn’t 8% in this case, its 8% + 150%, or your “real/hidden” ferocity.

250 power added to base power is 1,250. Simple.

150% + 8% of 1,000 is 1,580 *or* 1000 × 1.5 + 1000 × 1.08. Simple.

The adjustment for precision has to incorporate the entire 158%. Because it’s a percentage in this form it’s native to power (each point of power is worth 58% more or 1.58) rather than converting twice through ferocity and then through power.

But it can be done however you see fit, I guess.

I just tested this on my Engineer using only one trait line in PvP taking only the trait in question, and the forced 10% increase to damage. Averaged out a volley and came out to 8% for each grenade. It’s additive. Or at least so the game is telling me.

idk what youre talking about with cruelty.

250 extra power @ 2500 is gonna give 10% yes. 250 power @ 3000 is gonna give about 8%.

16% crit damage @ 194% base @ 100% crit rate gives about 16% damage. @ 76% rate it gives about 12% damage. @ 56% rate it gives about 8% damage.

im not sure on nades. but what i do know is it isnt additive.

Power and Ferocity both have base numbers, you have a base of 1000 power and though it isn’t stated a base of 750 ferocity (critical hits automatically do 150% @ zero additional ferocity) so sheet ferocity isn’t 8% in this case, its 8% + 150%, or your “real/hidden” ferocity.

250 power added to base power is 1,250. Simple.

150% + 8% of 1,000 is 1,580or1000 × 1.5 + 1000 × 1.08. Simple.The adjustment for precision has to incorporate the entire 158%. Because it’s a percentage in this form it’s native to power (each point of power is worth 58% more or 1.58) rather than converting twice through ferocity and then through power.

But it can be done however you see fit, I guess.

I just tested this on my Engineer using only one trait line in PvP taking only the trait in question, and the forced 10% increase to damage. Averaged out a volley and came out to 8% for each grenade. It’s additive. Or at least so the game is telling me.

i believe you are miscomprehending the figures i wrote down. what i am doing is converting to relative overall dps increase. not looking for breakpoints or trying to say something about how much power is how much ferocity or what the starting points are because the starting points dont matter.

grenades: since its unlikely that each hits at the same instant then yes 2 of the 3 on the first volley should get the 7%, so the first does base, the second +8%, and the 3rd +9%. the second volley should get +10%, +11%, and +12%. this does not mean you are doing 33% more damage, it means youre doing 11% more damage. that is what i am saying is not additive. because that is what you were doing wrong when you said that the second volley gets +24% damage a couple posts ago.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

i believe you are miscomprehending the figures i wrote down. what i am doing is converting to relative overall dps increase. not looking for breakpoints or trying to say something about how much power is how much ferocity or what the starting points are

because the starting points dont matter.

Since ferocity is a ratio increase (read as: percentage) the base does matter. It’s multiplicative.

grenades: since its unlikely that each hits at the same instant then yes 2 of the 3 on the first volley should get the 7%, so the first does base, the second +8%, and the 3rd +9%. the second volley should get +10%, +11%, and +12%. this does not mean you are doing 33% more damage, it means youre doing 11% more damage. that is what i am saying is not additive. because that is what you were doing wrong when you said that the second volley gets +24% damage a couple posts ago.

If the bonus applies to every explosion it’s simply additive. In your first volley example for instance using real easy numbers:

G1: base 100

G2: base *(1.01 + 1.07) = 108

G3: base *(1.02 +1.07) = 109

If taking a volley at zero distance (what I did, standing on the golem) they all hit at the same time so it’s:

Salvo 1: base 100 * 3 / 3

Salvo 2: base*(1.03 + 1.07)*3 / 3

If taken in your spread:

G4 = 110

G5 = 111

G6 = 112

Your difference is better than mine from base but not between salvos. My difference bigger between salvos but lower than yours from base since every iteration of yours gets a cumulative bonus of +1% while mine get a flat bonus presuming the worst (that they all hit at the same time).

In short, I hope the game works your way, since from base, you get 57 more pts of damage and I only got 24. Still, grenades 2 + 3 bonus = 17% and grenads 4 + 5 + 6 = 33% so it’s actually higher than the 11% you calculated because it’s cumulative and not a singular attack like say, bombs.

Bah. I’mma leave this alone. You’re right. Let’s call it day.

i believe you are miscomprehending the figures i wrote down. what i am doing is converting to relative overall dps increase. not looking for breakpoints or trying to say something about how much power is how much ferocity or what the starting points are

because the starting points dont matter.Since ferocity is a ratio increase (read as: percentage) the base does matter. It’s multiplicative.

grenades: since its unlikely that each hits at the same instant then yes 2 of the 3 on the first volley should get the 7%, so the first does base, the second +8%, and the 3rd +9%. the second volley should get +10%, +11%, and +12%. this does not mean you are doing 33% more damage, it means youre doing 11% more damage. that is what i am saying is not additive. because that is what you were doing wrong when you said that the second volley gets +24% damage a couple posts ago.

If the bonus applies to every explosion it’s simply additive. In your first volley example for instance using real easy numbers:

G1: base 100

G2: base *(1.01 + 1.07) = 108

G3: base *(1.02 +1.07) = 109If taking a volley at zero distance (what I did, standing on the golem) they all hit at the same time so it’s:

Salvo 1: base 100 * 3 / 3

Salvo 2: base*(1.03 + 1.07)*3 / 3If taken in your spread:

G4 = 110

G5 = 111

G6 = 112Your difference is better than mine from base but not between salvos. My difference bigger between salvos but lower than yours from base since every iteration of yours gets a cumulative bonus of +1% while mine get a flat bonus presuming the worst (that they all hit at the same time).

In short, I hope the game works your way, since from base, you get 57 more pts of damage and I only got 24. Still, grenades 2 + 3 bonus = 17% and grenads 4 + 5 + 6 = 33% so it’s actually higher than the 11% you calculated because it’s cumulative and not a singular attack like say, bombs.

Bah. I’mma leave this alone. You’re right. Let’s call it day.

ok, got it: the problem is that you are doing (1.03 + 1.07) when you should be doing (1.03 + .07).

but youre still incorrectly adding the percents. stop saying its 17% and 33% because that is wrong. the correct values are 6.666% and 11%.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

(edited by insanemaniac.2456)

i believe you are miscomprehending the figures i wrote down. what i am doing is converting to relative overall dps increase. not looking for breakpoints or trying to say something about how much power is how much ferocity or what the starting points are

because the starting points dont matter.Since ferocity is a ratio increase (read as: percentage) the base does matter. It’s multiplicative.

If the bonus applies to every explosion it’s simply additive. In your first volley example for instance using real easy numbers:

G1: base 100

G2: base *(1.01 + 1.07) = 108

G3: base *(1.02 +1.07) = 109If taking a volley at zero distance (what I did, standing on the golem) they all hit at the same time so it’s:

Salvo 1: base 100 * 3 / 3

Salvo 2: base*(1.03 + 1.07)*3 / 3If taken in your spread:

G4 = 110

G5 = 111

G6 = 112Your difference is better than mine from base but not between salvos. My difference bigger between salvos but lower than yours from base since every iteration of yours gets a cumulative bonus of +1% while mine get a flat bonus presuming the worst (that they all hit at the same time).

In short, I hope the game works your way, since from base, you get 57 more pts of damage and I only got 24. Still, grenades 2 + 3 bonus = 17% and grenads 4 + 5 + 6 = 33% so it’s actually higher than the 11% you calculated because it’s cumulative and not a singular attack like say, bombs.

Bah. I’mma leave this alone. You’re right. Let’s call it day.

ok, got it: the problem is that you are doing (1.03 + 1.07) when you should be doing (1.03 + .07).

but youre still incorrectly adding the percents. stop saying its 17% and 33% because that is wrong. the correct values are 6.666% and 11%.

I believe you are correct about the parenthesis and that is definitely a typo on my part them but it is distributed correctly. I originally wrote it out distributed [ ( base x 1.01 ) + ( base x 1.07 ) ] and foolishly just combined the two in my head and distributed as though it were a function to shorten it. Otherwise it would be much higher than 1.08 since it’s actually a doubling function (which would be even more awesome!) but nevermind.

Sorry for the typo.

Now I want to know how you are coming up with 6 and 11%. That is of more importance.

sure!

lets say a nade does 100 damage, for simplicity.

nade 1 does 100

nade 2 does 108

nade 3 does 109

overall, youve done 317 damage. had there been no vuln or shaped charge, you would have done 300.

317 / 300 = 1.06666 → 6.666% more damage

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

sure!

lets say a nade does 100 damage, for simplicity.

nade 1 does 100

nade 2 does 108

nade 3 does 109overall, youve done 317 damage. had there been no vuln or shaped charge, you would have done 300.

317 / 300 = 1.06666 -> 6.666% more damage

Oh, I see, okay; we’re doing this differently but coming out with about the same answer with the some variation. I personally would work it in single-instance behavior against it’s base particularly because of it’s cumulative nature so that it plays out as a logarithm (each iteration has diminishing returns and caps out) but your method should come out the same at the end.

My method would be 100 * 1.32 ( 25 stacks + 7%) * 3 which is 396.

Your method would come out as 300 * 1.32 ( 25 stacks + 7% ) which is 396.

Your line is just straight while mine is curved. No difference. I’m glad we got to the bottom of that. This is why numbers are such funny things.

there is a difference. you arent normalizing the bonus damage, or youre adding it across grenades, or something. idk which. but the way ive detailed is the correct way, up to differences in methodology, which is what youre trying to say youve done but havent.

there is no logarithm here. averages have asymptotes which is prolly the behavior youre referring to, but we arent exponentiating anything.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

there is a difference. you arent normalizing the bonus damage, or youre adding it across grenades, or something. idk which. but the way ive detailed is the correct way, up to differences in methodology, which is what youre trying to say youve done but havent.

there is no logarithm here. averages have asymptotes which is prolly the behavior youre referring to, but we arent exponentiating anything.

It’s fully provable.

My method gives a 24% increase at salvo 2 at 3 vulnerability *but* that burst never happens again and has diminishing returns on the following salvos until it hits the 32%. This is because it works off the previous base, so salvo 1 is base 300, salvo 2 would be 372 which is comprised of 63 from the bonus and 9 from the vulnerability. This becomes the new base, so the next salvo works against that one and so forth and so on forming a logarithmic curve or “diminishing returns”. There is no asymptote since 32% is the max of the range.

Your method just uses a straight line presuming that no two grenades strike at the same time and spreading the 1% along all grenades until the 32%.

Your method *only* works if no two grenades strike at the same time disrupting the pattern and creating a deviation, and my method works by normalizing it so as to account for all three as striking at the same time but rapidly adjusting between 0 and 32.

There is no “perfect” model for this so it’s not something to lose sleep over. We are, in fact, both correct. It happens.

idk what youre saying now.

volley 1 – 0 vuln before, 3 vuln after – 100, 108, 109 damage

volley 2 – 3 vuln before, 6 vuln after – 110, 111, 112 damage

volley 3 – 6 vuln before, 9 vuln after – 113, 114, 115 damage

and so on.

volley 1 will do 106.66% of base damage.

volley 2 will do 111% of base damage.

volley 3 will do 114% of base damage.

idk where you are getting 24% additional damage on volley 2 from, but i can only guess that youre taking the shaped charge bonus and adding it 3 times, because nothing else would make any sense. but that is wrong.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

idk what youre saying now.

volley 1 – 0 vuln before, 3 vuln after – 100, 108, 109 damage

volley 2 – 3 vuln before, 6 vuln after – 110, 111, 112 damage

volley 3 – 6 vuln before, 9 vuln after – 113, 114, 115 damageand so on.

volley 1 will do 106.66% of base damage.

volley 2 will do 111% of base damage.

volley 3 will do 114% of base damage.idk where you are getting 24% additional damage on volley 2 from, but i can only guess that youre taking the shaped charge bonus and adding it 3 times, because nothing else would make any sense. but that is wrong.

What happens if all the grenades hit at the same time?

then it would be

volley 1 – 0 vuln before, 3 vuln after – 100, 100, 100 damage

volley 2 – 3 vuln before, 6 vuln after – 110, 110, 110 damage

volley 3 – 6 vuln before, 9 vuln after – 113, 113, 113 damage

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

then it would be

volley 1 – 0 vuln before, 3 vuln after – 100, 100, 100 damage

volley 2 – 3 vuln before, 6 vuln after – 110, 110, 110 damage

volley 3 – 6 vuln before, 9 vuln after – 113, 113, 113 damage

Hence diminishing returns. 330 / 300 – > 339 / 330 – > 348 / 339 – > etc. though I thought you said they were additive, but whatever.

hmm. it makes more sense to me to divide by 300 each time, not by the previous volley. why are you taking the previous volley?

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

hmm. it makes more sense to me to divide by 300 each time, not by the previous volley. why are you taking the previous volley?

hmm. it makes more sense to me to divide by 300 each time, not by the previous volley. why are you taking the previous volley?

The reason is to create an incremental understanding of what’s actually happening. If you take it against the base every time you’re not including the salvos between, for instance 348 / 300 = 116% more *than your first volley* but this is actually the 4th volley so it doesn’t accurately depict what happened in the second thus producing a line. In reality there was a huge pick-up in the 2nd volley of 10% from 0% and a small increase of just 3% overall in the 3rd and in the 4th.

A line normalizes this but doesn’t depict that shift correctly.

graph the points then. connect the dots. of course it depicts the shift correctly, accurately, and precisely.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

graph the points then. connect the dots. of course it depicts the shift correctly, accurately, and precisely.

As I said it only is accurate if every grenade explodes after another every time. Enough of this topic; it’s boring discussing how lines work. If you find one method preferable over another so long as it comes out the same I do not care. I am only concerned with your end results.

graph the points then. connect the dots. of course it depicts the shift correctly, accurately, and precisely.

As I said it only is accurate if every grenade explodes after another every time. Enough of this topic; it’s boring discussing how lines work. If you find one method preferable over another so long as it comes out the same I do not care. I am only concerned with your end results.

you should prolly be concerned with our methods since yours has errors.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

As I said it only is accurate if every grenade explodes after another every time. Enough of this topic; it’s boring discussing how lines work. If you find one method preferable over another so long as it comes out the same I do not care. I am only concerned with your end results.

you should prolly be concerned with our methods since yours has errors.

If it makes you feel better.

No wonder this game is in such a state of disarray.

you should prolly be concerned with our methods since yours has errors.

If it makes you feel better.

No wonder this game is in such a state of disarray.

says the guy who consistently shows he cant math, thread after thread after thread.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

you should prolly be concerned with our methods since yours has errors.

If it makes you feel better.

No wonder this game is in such a state of disarray.

says the guy who consistently shows he cant math, thread after thread after thread.

The thing is I am actually able to explain through more complex notions than you can. For instance have you ever actually thrown your grenades against a golem at the longest distances possible? No.

How can I tell? Because when I logged on to do it there were times, just reading the combat log, you could tell that the grenades had “hit” before the application of vulnerability took hold. This means that your model that at least one stack of vulnerability must exist and therefore you can just start a line, going up by 1, starting at 8 is pretty much unrealistic.

I’ve known since I began this conversation. I am trying to be cordial. Even that doesn’t work with you people. You are so convinced of how correct you are but you actually don’t understand half the things I’m saying (which was obvious when you asked why you would take the new base for action over action to produce real comparative data versus just a base or when you said that the formula was 1.01 + .07 when in fact it is as I had it as 3(1.01 + 1.07) because you multiply as distribution first which I typed out and then “apologized for the typo” so we could move on since it’s sixth grade stuff) and that is okay.

I’m more concerned with the outputs you guys produce than whether you agree with my methods partially because there’s still a on of myths and questions not even asked and unchallenged concepts that, as I challenge them, seem to not add up even on the sheet DPS and definitely not in the game.

I mean I actually sat there in the PvP theatre and did it, predicted the outcomes, got them, and walked away a happy skylark over about 60 trials. You … just went sequentially because it’s something you understand. I don’t think at any point during my testing I ever had a volley where at least two grenades didn’t hit at the same time though.

Now I really am leaving. We’ll meet again on the battlefield of math! Or not.

You guys really went at it… is there even any consensus on the build itself? Feels like you argued over 30 posts for one sigil and one trait and forgot the point of it all.

Would the maths change any if I was running Accuracy/Cruelty instead? I’m still running Perfectly Weighted + Aim-Assisted Rocket + Air/Bloodlust since it went on without any agreement and an up-front burst is going to be more reliable for roaming.

eh

Math™ by DGraves.

accuracy for you is slightly worse than bloodlust or cruelty, and at lower dps’s air really shines. without thinking about it for long enough, id stick with air, but it wont be a huge difference in any case.

head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions

The idea is to grab the essentials for Grenade Kit and Applied Force while still maintaining the minimum necessary defenses from traits. Elixir B, Super Elixir and Acid Bomb are our common sources of Might; in addition, 60% of all crits, Toss B, our stun break and both elites also offer Might for AP access.

Pros:

-has grenades

-doesn’t have FT

-70% Boon Duration without Leadership runes, Commander/exotic equipment or Platinum Doubloons

-high Protection uptime from your heal and runes

-passive 50% Quickness uptime on grenades and in Rampage form

-reliable 15+ Might with Prot, Fury, Retal, Swiftness after popping elixirs (Might maintained with food)Cons:

-awful condition cleansing with no answer to corruption

-propensity to spam elixirs for 10 Might/QuicknessQuestions:

-Is this build reasonably viable or is it just a gimmick?

-If so, what are the better ways to build a Grenade Scrapper?

-Are there any utility swaps I should consider to make the build more stable?Thanks much to all that read and reply.

I used the Boot’s Bad Builds “One Man Army” build and started modifying from there. Now I get that you don’t want to use FT and Juggernaut (which is what his build is), although I don’t understand the rationale, but that is okay. I could not afford the Runes of Leadership either, mostly because I cannot get the recipe (darn Dragon’s Stand meta events!) and started with Platinum Doubloons. What I found was a problem with the build was speed between combats. Although Boot’s was right that you will stack 45+ seconds of Swiftness after a big combat, that still is not great for WvW or open world PvE (my main venues).

If speed out of combat is an issue with you, Runes of Traveler give you 15% Boon Duration (5% less than your runes), but gives you permanent +25% Movement Speed. You can offset the loss of Boon Duration by putting in 2-3 Platinum Doubloons in your trinkets. This solved the issues I was seeing with Boot’s build.

Not sure why you are against putting in PDs though.