[Idea]Clones dont overwrite phantasms PvEonly
Personally, I’m not in favour of it.
Phantasm builds are about damage, with utility and support being sacrificed for those sweet, sweet phatasm attacks. Loss of sword 3 mobility, running the risk of overwrites with sword 4, loss of might from GS2, all choices you need to make.
Scepter, and it’s traits are all about clone generation (it’s our only weapon without a phantasm after all). Maybe you should look at Shatter as an alternative if you want to play Scepter?
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
Personally, I’m not in favour of it.
Phantasm builds are about damage, with utility and support being sacrificed for those sweet, sweet phatasm attacks. Loss of sword 3 mobility, running the risk of overwrites with sword 4, loss of might from GS2, all choices you need to make.
Scepter, and it’s traits are all about clone generation (it’s our only weapon without a phantasm after all). Maybe you should look at Shatter as an alternative if you want to play Scepter?
Riddled with holes…
“choices you need to make” is a terrible justification for a detrimental mechanic. And we have no evidence at all that there’s any kind of power gain to compensate for that flaw in our design. Previously, clone death traits made it feasible to work with. Those were removed, but the bad mechanic remains. Your reasoning here is flawed and baseless.
Sword also doesn’t have a phantasm.
Scepter only has one trait, and there’s no indication that it is meant to have anything to do with clone generation.
Maybe you need to learn the class better before you try to defend one of its biggest flaws?
@OP: I don’t think any of the reasons to keep the current state of affairs in PvP hold water. Make this change in all formats.
Riddled with holes…
“choices you need to make” is a terrible justification for a detrimental mechanic.
That would only hold true if it were detrimental, instead of being an alternative.
There is only one situation where a clone generating skill outside of Scepter is a DPS gain, instead of a utility/defense choice, which is Mirror Blade at <600 range. All the other clone generators are from blocks/blinks.
By choosing to use scepter over sword, you choose to gain range and all its benefits, at the cost of significant QoL impact to managing phantasms, or sacrificing personal DPS, to not be stood within melee range of your target.
And we have no evidence at all that there’s any kind of power gain to compensate for that flaw in our design.
You are conflating having-multiple-playstyle-options-that-don’t-synergise-well-in-all-combinations" with “flaw”.
Previously, clone death traits made it feasible to work with. Those were removed, but the bad mechanic remains. Your reasoning here is flawed and baseless.
Sure, we don’t have clone death traits, but we still have shatters, and while replacing clones isn’t exactly helpful, it’s not overly harmful either. Replacing phantasms with clones = bad, replacing clones with clones = meh
Sword also doesn’t have a phantasm.
My iSwordsman disagrees with you. Sure, it’s only available in the offhand.
Scepter only has one trait, and there’s no indication that it is meant to have anything to do with clone generation.
15% increased attack speed and 20% CD reduction? Speeding up Ether Clone cycles, and making Illusory Counter available more often? If it’s not intending to improve clone generation, it does a pretty good job by mistake.
Maybe you need to learn the class better before you try to defend one of its biggest flaws?
We have bigger issues than phantasms and clones mutually overriding. Particularly given Chronophantasia offers a viable fix for some situations.
That would only hold true if it were detrimental, instead of being an alternative.
The only cases where a clone overwriting a phantasm is better are extremely marginal, and there is no “alternative play style” that has enough of those marginal cases to make better use of it. Clones overwriting phantasms is an almost-universal cost in power, as there is essentially nothing a clone can do that an already-existing phantasm cannot.
This is not “an alternative”, it is a weakness.
There is only one situation where a clone generating skill outside of Scepter is a DPS gain, instead of a utility/defense choice, which is Mirror Blade at <600 range. All the other clone generators are from blocks/blinks.
There are 4 mainhand weapons with a clone generating skill. Of those, 2 do damage and 2 do not. The one offhand weapon that generates a clone (sword OH) does damage when it does so.
So 3/5 clone-generating weapon skills do damage.
Your count wasn’t just slanted, it wasn’t even correct.
By choosing to use scepter over sword, you choose to gain range and all its benefits, at the cost of significant QoL impact to managing phantasms, or sacrificing personal DPS, to not be stood within melee range of your target.
Scepter is already a strong dps loss over sword (true even before the recent 10% buff to sword). Giving up dps IS the cost of using range over melee across nearly all classes. This extra cost is not justified.
You are conflating having-multiple-playstyle-options-that-don’t-synergise-well-in-all-combinations" with “flaw”.
See above. The possible benefits of the current rule allowing clones to overwrite phantasms are so marginal that they may as well not be a consideration (as we discussed before). Further, as I said above, none of those marginal benefits can be consolidated in such a way as to create an “alternative playstyle” that benefits from it.
It is most certainly a flaw. If the flaw is intentional, then it is a cost with no commensurate benefit. If the flaw is unintentional, it should be rectified.
Sure, we don’t have clone death traits, but we still have shatters, and while replacing clones isn’t exactly helpful, it’s not overly harmful either. Replacing phantasms with clones = bad, replacing clones with clones = meh
Yes, and there lies the problem. Any build that uses phantasms is penalized by using one of our two mainhand weapon, but not compensated for that cost. Scepter is slow, unwieldy, does less damage than sword, and has less utility (blurred frenzy >> illusionary counter). Furthermore, it was originally formulated in an environment with clone death traits. If it was balanced then, then it is surely underpowered now. And there is abundant indication that it wasn’t balanced then either.
My iSwordsman disagrees with you. Sure, it’s only available in the offhand.
:rolleyes:
15% increased attack speed and 20% CD reduction? Speeding up Ether Clone cycles, and making Illusory Counter available more often? If it’s not intending to improve clone generation, it does a pretty good job by mistake.
Yes, that last part. CD Reduction is standard on weapon traits, believing it was designed to increase clone generation is ridiculous. That’s certainly a side-effect, albeit a small one (CD reduction doesn’t affect AA).
Attack speed was almost certainly a reaction to the common complaint that scepter is slow as hell. Indeed, attack speed pops up in traits for multiple classes. Are you suggesting that it was meant to improve their clone generation? On the contrary, the attack speed is surely meant as its own reward, and the clone increase is a side-effect.
We have bigger issues than phantasms and clones mutually overriding. Particularly given Chronophantasia offers a viable fix for some situations.
Chronophantasma actually makes it worse, kittentering your 3 phantasms doesn’t immediately open room for a clone, so you have to wait until you’ve shattered twice before you can afford to pop another clone.
The only possible reason to prefer the current rule is if you believe that phantasm builds should not be able to use the scepter as a primary weapon.
That means you also believe that phantasm builds should not be able to be fully ranged, as pistol/torch are offhand only, and staff is clearly not a dps weapon.
But what reason have you given for that belief?
Vague references to “alternate playstyles”.
Okay, put your money where your mouth is. Show me a build that would be benefited unfairly by a change to this rule. If you think a phantasm build would become too strong, show me the math.
I created a topic about this 2~ weeks ago.
Clones should definitely not overwrite phantasms.
(get’em, Alpha!)
The only cases where a clone overwriting a phantasm is better are extremely marginal, and there is no “alternative play style” that has enough of those marginal cases to make better use of it. Clones overwriting phantasms is an almost-universal cost in power, as there is essentially nothing a clone can do that an already-existing phantasm cannot.
This is not “an alternative”, it is a weakness.
You are looking at it wrong. Aside from scepter AA, generating a clone is paired with a utility action. The cost you need to consider is the teleport, or block, or vuln stack, compared to losing a phantasm.
Yes, you lose phantasm damage, but you shouldn’t be using those abilities on CD anyway.
There are 4 mainhand weapons with a clone generating skill. Of those, 2 do damage and 2 do not. The one offhand weapon that generates a clone (sword OH) does damage when it does so.
So 3/5 clone-generating weapon skills do damage.
Your count wasn’t just slanted, it wasn’t even correct.
Scepter AA/3 (Ether Clone)- Generates clone
Scepter 2 (Illusionary Counter)- Deals more damage than AA, applies Torment, and generates clone… if it blocks an attack. You aren’t just losing a phantasm, you are doing damage, applying conditions, and most importantly, blocking an attack. While it’s an outgoing damage increase, it requires incoming damage, and mitigates it. It’s not as simple as being detrimental.
Staff 2 (Phase Retreat) – Generates clone, on teleport – no reason to use unless you need to teleport, then you need to choose if the teleport is worth the phantasm.
Sword 3 (Illusionary Leap) – Again, choice between mobility/control and phantasm.
Sword 4 (Illusionary Riposte) – see Illusionary Counter.
Greatsword 2 (Mirror Blade) – The only other damaging ability that generates a clone… except it’s a DPS loss compared to AA if you are over 600 range (and if you aren’t, GS probably isn’t the weapon you need there and then). You lose out on 3might/vuln, but that’s pretty minor in the grand scheme of things.
Scepter is already a strong dps loss over sword (true even before the recent 10% buff to sword). Giving up dps IS the cost of using range over melee across nearly all classes. This extra cost is not justified.
It’s only an extra cost in Phantasm builds. Shatter/condi builds can work well with scepter.
See above. The possible benefits of the current rule allowing clones to overwrite phantasms are so marginal that they may as well not be a consideration (as we discussed before). Further, as I said above, none of those marginal benefits can be consolidated in such a way as to create an “alternative playstyle” that benefits from it.
It is most certainly a flaw. If the flaw is intentional, then it is a cost with no commensurate benefit. If the flaw is unintentional, it should be rectified.
I’m going to roll the rest up into this one response, because it summarises things nicely:
Mesmer is not Phantasm builds alone
Being able to sustain 3 iSwordsmen, while chaining Illusionary Counter/Riposte/Echo of Memory/Deja Vu would be, to be frank, obscene.
Even swapping iSwordsmen for iAvengers is a joke.
Using a build like…
I… wouldn’t like to think how long you could chain blocks and blurs for.
I got down to 7.5 seconds out of every 30, without using Distortion and not accounting for Alacrity, where Blur or Block isn’t up. And that 30 second block ends with everything available to do it all again.
With swapping Lost Time to Chronophantasia, you can get it lower by Distortioning once.
Signet of the Ether, and Mimic both give you 100% uptime.
Even just with Alacrity, you could approach or even break 100% uptime on Blur and Block, while your phantasms do their work.
Obviously, it’s got weaknesses, and you’d wind up using 2 iAvengers, and an iSwordsman/Duellists, moving to 3 iAvengers, rather than 3 iSwordsmen/Duellists but still, that’s a lot of damage going out with some obscene defenses.
Chronophantasma actually makes it worse, kittentering your 3 phantasms doesn’t immediately open room for a clone, so you have to wait until you’ve shattered twice before you can afford to pop another clone.
I was thinking more along the lines of “oh no, I accidentally cloned and dropped a Phantasm, however will I… oh wait, shatter, two phantasms and a free spot to re-summon.”
It’s not perfect, sure, but its better than having to nix all three illusions to fix one Clone
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
It’s only an extra cost in Phantasm builds. Shatter/condi builds can work well with scepter.
The current rule is not a detriment to those particular builds, so they aren’t relevant. Changing the rule won’t benefit them, and it won’t harm them, so that’s a meaningless point.
Being able to sustain 3 iSwordsmen, while chaining Illusionary Counter/Riposte/Echo of Memory/Deja Vu would be, to be frank, obscene.
Assertion without facts in evidence. I disagree that the damage on any such build would be unusually high, so show me the math.
Even swapping iSwordsmen for iAvengers is a joke.
iAvenger dps is a joke. How do you imagine this build you’re formulating is doing damage?
Using a build like…
I… wouldn’t like to think how long you could chain blocks and blurs for.
This was done. Pyro (Fay) has been testing it out, and has found it makes for a very solid bunker…but not an op one. Why not op? As he explained it yesterday, that window of no mitigation makes all the difference. A guardian bunker has to be whittled down, a chrono bunker has to be bursted on the right timing, and it all seems to even out atm, and that’s just in pvp.
In pve (which is all the OP is asking for), what are you accomplishing with your immortal build? Gimping your dps for more blocks than you’ll ever need?
I got down to 7.5 seconds out of every 30, without using Distortion and not accounting for Alacrity, where Blur or Block isn’t up. And that 30 second block ends with everything available to do it all again.
With swapping Lost Time to Chronophantasia, you can get it lower by Distortioning once.
With Alacrity, you could approach or even break 100% uptime on Blur and Block, while your phantasms do their work.Obviously, it’s got weaknesses, and you’d wind up using 2 iAvengers, and an iSwordsman/Duellists, moving to 3 iAvengers, rather than 3 iSwordsmen/Duellists but still, that’s a lot of damage going out with some obscene defenses.
All of this is possible at present, and changing the rule won’t suddenly make it OP.
Again, if you think it will be too strong, show me the math. I am confident that you cannot.
I was thinking more along the lines of “oh no, I accidentally cloned and dropped a Phantasm, however will I… oh wait, shatter, two phantasms and a free spot to re-summon.”
It’s not perfect, sure, but its better than having to nix all three illusions to fix one Clone
You’ve still failed to provide a good reasoning for why we should have to accept that. “It’s harder” is not a good reason. “It’s too strong” has no evidence behind it. You’re continuing to assert that it “should” be the way it is, but there’s no philosophical reason why phantasms and clone abilities should be at odds.
Only power can decide this, and you’ve provided no convincing evidence of such.
Numbers time!
Using my mesmer’s current gear, in a 30 second window, with 3 iSwordsmen, it will put out 58470 units of damage (pre-stats and buffs). Using the bunker rotation, assuming no clones are generated, but the retaliation attacks still trigger (the scenario where clones don’t override Phantasms) it will put out 29993 (one iSwordsman, and 2 iAvengers, AA during bunker gaps).
This equates to 51% of full, glass DPS.
Certainly not a lot, but compared to the potential quadrupling of our life expectancy (only taking direct hits for 7.5 of those 30 seconds), it comes out as an buff of 104% in the ratio of Outgoing:Incoming damage. (that’s not a 4% increase, that’s double plus change)
This drops to 40% of glass DPS and a 60% buff after 30 seconds, and the iSwordsman swaps to iAvenger.
The worst case scenario, where you don’t trigger retaliation, and do nothing during bunker breaks is 30% glass DPS
The rotation used is:
Echo -> Deja Vu -> Illusionary Counter -> Illusionary Riposte -> Blurred Speed -> 4s gap -> Illusionary Counter -> 3.5s gap -> Blurred Speed -> Illusionary Riposte.
I can’t decide for you if this is a build that you would want to be viable.
Personally, I’m happy to take the QoL hit to manage my phantasms to keep this out of viability.
Edit: Just done the maths with Alacrity, and the rotation changes actually nerfs the damage by about 2% because of the increase in contribution from Echo/Deja Vu.
The increase in O/I is increased to a 449% buff though
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
I was thinking more along the lines of “oh no, I accidentally cloned and dropped a Phantasm, however will I… oh wait, shatter, two phantasms and a free spot to re-summon.”
It’s not perfect, sure, but its better than having to nix all three illusions to fix one Clone
Not sure what you mean with that last sentence. If you have two phantasms and one clone, and then summon a phantasm, it will ALWAYS overwrite the clone, and not one of the other phantasms.
Edit: Actually, if you have three illusions and at least one of them is a clone, any new summon will always overwrite a clone. Only if you have three phantasms, phantasms will be overwritten (even by clones). Which imo shouldn’t be the case. Mesmer DPS isn’t that high compared to other classes iirc (even with 3 phantasms), so why should we lose some of that DPS if we want to use some of our weapon-skills? No other class gets a DPS-debuff for x seconds if they use some of their weapon-skills. And they likely already have higher DPS than Mesmers to begin with. DPS that doesn’t need a ramp-up either.
(edited by Saturn.6591)
Numbers time!
Using my mesmer’s current gear, in a 30 second window, with 3 iSwordsmen, it will put out 58470 units of damage (pre-stats and buffs). Using the bunker rotation, assuming no clones are generated, but the retaliation attacks still trigger (the scenario where clones don’t override Phantasms) it will put out 29993 (one iSwordsman, and 2 iAvengers, AA during bunker gaps).
This equates to 51% of full, glass DPS.
58,470/30 = 1949 dps.
Since Lava Font alone does around 10k dps under the same conditions (17k+ buffed), I’m not sure how you think this is significant.
The bunker build by your numbers is doing a paltry 999 dps. I do more damage than that with the burns from the staff AA on my condi build.
Certainly not a lot, but compared to the potential quadrupling of our life expectancy (only taking direct hits for 7.5 of those 30 seconds), it comes out as an buff of 104% in the ratio of Outgoing:Incoming damage. (that’s not a 4% increase, that’s double plus change)
How often are you dying in pve as it is?
I can’t decide for you if this is a build that you would want to be viable.
Personally, I’m happy to take the QoL hit to manage my phantasms to keep this out of viability.
Edit: should point out that the only gain the OP’s change would make to this build is 3 phantasms instead of 2. You did the math for all three, and assumed that would make your case. Neglecting the actual numbers you presented, you would need to compare them to the same build under the current regime to make your case.
That said,
The damage numbers you quoted are so pitiful that they made the case against your complaint better than I could have.
/thread.
(edited by AlphatheWhite.9351)
Numbers time!
Using my mesmer’s current gear, in a 30 second window, with 3 iSwordsmen, it will put out 58470 units of damage (pre-stats and buffs). Using the bunker rotation, assuming no clones are generated, but the retaliation attacks still trigger (the scenario where clones don’t override Phantasms) it will put out 29993 (one iSwordsman, and 2 iAvengers, AA during bunker gaps).
This equates to 51% of full, glass DPS.
58,470/30 = 1949 dps.
Since Lava Font alone does around 10k dps under the same conditions (17k+ buffed), I’m not sure how you think this is significant.
The bunker build by your numbers is doing a paltry 999 dps. I do more damage than that with the burns from the staff AA on my condi build.Certainly not a lot, but compared to the potential quadrupling of our life expectancy (only taking direct hits for 7.5 of those 30 seconds), it comes out as an buff of 104% in the ratio of Outgoing:Incoming damage. (that’s not a 4% increase, that’s double plus change)
How often are you dying in pve as it is?
I can’t decide for you if this is a build that you would want to be viable.
Personally, I’m happy to take the QoL hit to manage my phantasms to keep this out of viability.Edit: should point out that the only gain the OP’s change would make to this build is 3 phantasms instead of 2. You did the math for all three, and assumed that would make your case. Neglecting the actual numbers you presented, you would need to compare them to the same build under the current regime to make your case.
That said,
The damage numbers you quoted are so pitiful that they made the case against your complaint better than I could have.
/thread.
Uh… you do realise I was using tooltip numbers only, right? Like I clearly stated?
Because doing statistically significant testing to get actual numbers at this time of night is… not going to happen?
Also, just realised I was level synced down… new numbers incoming…
Uh… you do realise I was using tooltip numbers only, right? Like I clearly stated?
Because doing statistically significant testing to get actual numbers at this time of night is… not going to happen?
Also, just realised I was level synced down… new numbers incoming…
Dude, you quoted low-level numbers, and then continued talking as though they were self-evidently high.
It’s clear you have no yardstick by which to compare to decide if something is OP or not.
Accurate numbers will help, but you just made it clear you came into this discussion without even knowing what would be overpowered or not.
Frankly, I can’t even remember the last time I looked at my tooltips, let alone considered what they are in relation to tangible damage output.
What about you?
I’ll confess I did it without checking actual damage figures, because, that’s the cool thing about proportional analysis – it doesn’t matter what the actual figures are, it’s what they are in relation to each other that matter. It’s why I looked at proportional analysis to an accepted build/rotation rather than an absolute, so I didn’t need to spend hours accounting for accurate DPS figures per ability based on any given loadout.
I’ve run the maths again with my somewhat uninspiring Exotic Valk gear, and used http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vhAQRArc8encfClphtfCmfCEgiFcjyMDylRqMAWtfpuVn1dF-ThRBABXt/o8DP9P5dSAA4JPQp6PmpEMAwBwv9tv9tv/+7vP/8zP/8z73f/93f/tUARs0C-e to come up with, super-glass zerk-only figures, and wound up with exactly the same proportional result, to within 1% each way.
My figures rock in at 98k total damage, theoretical max is 125k. (Lava Field at max gear rocks in at 61k tooltipped damage over 30s)
Our pre-HoT meta build, in comparison to one using clone-generators to bunker with impunity, does a little under twice the DPS, no matter what level you are, or what gear you have.
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
Frankly, I can’t even remember the last time I looked at my tooltips, let alone considered what they are in relation to tangible damage output.
As a frequenter of the forum, I often check the dps numbers produced by others, and produce such numbers myself. I do so because claiming something is too powerful (or too weak), as you did, is meaningless without the math to back it up.
I’ll confess I did it without checking actual damage figures, because, that’s the cool thing about proportional analysis – it doesn’t matter what the actual figures are, it’s what they are in relation to each other that matter. It’s why I looked at proportional analysis to an accepted build/rotation rather than an absolute, so I didn’t need to spend hours accounting for accurate DPS figures per ability based on any given loadout.
It doesn’t matter what the actual figures are relative to other mesmer builds, it’s what they are in relation to the current dps leaders, and equivalent dps in similar roles.
I’ve run the maths again with my somewhat uninspiring Exotic Valk gear, and used http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/?vhAQNAseRncfClphtfCmfCEgiFcjyMDylRqMAWtfpuVn1dF-TJBHABAcKAaZ/hsLDMwTAAA to come up with, super-glass zerk-only figures, and wound up with exactly the same proportional result, to within 1% each way.
My figures rock in at 98k total damage, theoretical max is 125k. (Lava Field at max gear rocks in at 61k tooltipped damage over 30s)
Our pre-HoT meta build, in comparison to one using clone-generators to bunker with impunity, does a little under twice the DPS, no matter what level you are, or what gear you have.
Something is still dramatically wrong with your numbers. That works out to 3200 dps, or 4166 dps max. I do more than that with bleeds alone on my condi staff build in regular play. It’s too low.
Your numbers on Lava Font are much too low, as well.
Having computed full, detailed rotation numbers myself a week or so ago for a full glass 3 iSwordsmen build and Lava Font, I found that the Mesmer was doing closer to 7k dps versus the Lava Font’s 10kish. With full group buffs, that took the mesmer to around 12-13k dps, and the Lava Font to around 17k dps. Adding the rest of the elementalist’s kit just makes the mesmer look like a child competing with adults.
Edit: should point out that the only gain the OP’s change would make to this build is 3 phantasms instead of 2. You did the math for all three, and assumed that would make your case. Neglecting the actual numbers you presented, you would need to compare them to the same build under the current regime to make your case.
.
Oh, and just to address this bit, the reason that I haven’t attempted this build in the current regime is because you’d push two Phantasms out for clones between the 9th and 13 seconds, and the final one would go after 20, assuming the blocks are triggered. If they aren’t the phantasms last longer, but retaliation DPS drops out.
The whole thing that makes this build even remotely a concern in my mind is that a third of the mitigation comes from using abilities that lead to sacrificing phantasms in the current environment. (Echo/Deja Vu are another third, and Blurred Speed makes up the rest)
It doesn’t matter what the actual figures are relative to other mesmer builds, it’s what they are in relation to the current dps leaders, and equivalent dps in similar roles.
Ah, now we are having two different conversations.
You have two areas to compare:
1. Forcing players in a class into one particular playstyle, or build, as it has significant advantages over another.
2. Where the build(s) for any particular class fit within the overall metagame.
Our issues in 2 aside, my concern in this thread has always been around mesmers in and of themselves, rather than where we stand in the meta. Which is a different thing entirely.
Something is still dramatically wrong with your numbers. That works out to 3200 dps, or 4166 dps max. I do more than that with bleeds alone on my condi staff build in regular play. It’s too low.
Your numbers on Lava Font are much too low, as well.Having computed full, detailed rotation numbers myself a week or so ago for a full glass 3 iSwordsmen build and Lava Font, I found that the Mesmer was doing closer to 7k dps versus the Lava Font’s 10kish. With full group buffs, that took the mesmer to around 12-13k dps, and the Lava Font to around 17k dps. Adding the rest of the elementalist’s kit just makes the mesmer look like a child competing with adults.
Interesting – I’ve even plugged my gear into the calculator and got the same output on tooltips (minus 3 damage on Blurred Speed, for some reason)
Did your tests include a full Might stack by any chance?
That would bring my theoretical max to 7290.5 DPS
That sounds like scaling very wildly differs for Lava Font compared to our abilities, and that I’ve missed something out of my modelling assumptions.
Do you still have the numbers, to test if I’m doing something wrong with my assumptions about scaling with boons?
Ideally I’d need:
Sword AA chain damage
Blurred Speed Damage
Riposte (if you have it)
iSwordsman damage.
Lava Font ticks (as a control)
I’ll plug those into my model and see what I get
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
Yeah that would be awesome change, would make me to go back to leveling and playing mesmer, i stopped cause of that kittened useless illusions in pve blocking use of gs 2/sword3 skill after summoning 3 phantasms. Phantasms should override illusions, but illusions SHOULD NOT override phantasms, if u want summon illusions simply u can shatter phantasms.
Ah, now we are having two different conversations.
You have two areas to compare:
1. Forcing players in a class into one particular playstyle, or build, as it has significant advantages over another.
2. Where the build(s) for any particular class fit within the overall metagame.
Our issues in 2 aside, my concern in this thread has always been around mesmers in and of themselves, rather than where we stand in the meta. Which is a different thing entirely.
See, the question of comparing mesmer to mesmer isn’t relevant when asking what’s too powerful or not. All that matters is how capabilities rate in context of the entire game. If a change like this makes a particular build more powerful than other mesmer builds, but not more powerful than other classes, that’s not an issue with the change, it’s an issue with all the other mesmer builds.
Regarding the numbers, I’m sure I have the mesmer numbers on a google doc somewhere. I’ll look them up tomorrow, maybe.
The Lava Font numbers were in an excel doc, so that’ll be harder to track down.
See, the question of comparing mesmer to mesmer isn’t relevant when asking what’s too powerful or not. All that matters is how capabilities rate in context of the entire game. If a change like this makes a particular build more powerful than other mesmer builds, but not more powerful than other classes, that’s not an issue with the change, it’s an issue with all the other mesmer builds.
I don’t see it as being that simple, particularly if we are looking at a fix that doesn’t even bring us a spec that is up to par, while (potentially) radically changing the internal class balance.
If we were talking about just adding a ton of damage to one weapon, sure, your position is correct, but I don’t see bringing in a change that doesn’t fix things, even if it makes QoL slightly better to be benefical, if it causes problems elsewhere.
Regarding the numbers, I’m sure I have the mesmer numbers on a google doc somewhere. I’ll look them up tomorrow, maybe.
The Lava Font numbers were in an excel doc, so that’ll be harder to track down.
I’ve pushed all the numbers into it that I can, and I can get our figures up to about 10k DPS, with perfect Fury, Vulnerability and Might uptime, Quickness would push it further.
Not only is that still underestimating your figures, Lava Font comes in at 4.25k DPS using the same maths.
(edited by Dhamp.9385)
I don’t see it as being that simple, particularly if we are looking at a fix that doesn’t even bring us a spec that is up to par, while (potentially) radically changing the internal class balance.
Seriously overstating your case. As I said earlier, Pyro (Fay) has already created a version of the hyper-defensive build you are talking about while still maintaining some semblance of damage, and it didn’t require this change to accomplish.
If we were talking about just adding a ton of damage to one weapon, sure, your position is correct, but I don’t see bringing in a change that doesn’t fix things, even if it makes QoL slightly better to be benefical, if it causes problems elsewhere.
Except the only substantive problem you’ve raised is that a particular build will be able to put out more dps than it normally can, which is functionally equivalent to raising dps. And you still haven’t made a good case that those damage numbers are particularly concerning.
Not only is that still underestimating your figures, Lava Font comes in at 4.25k DPS using the same maths.
If I had to guess, I’d suggest you might be forgetting the duration increase from Persisting Flames.