Guild Wars 2

Since I love mesmer so much, I decided to give yet another try on my old build. Two recent changes have made it a bit more viable:

1. The slight nerfing of shatter mesmer
2. The buff to the scepter (well, bug fix actually)

Sc+pistol/sw+focus

http://intothemists.com/calc/?build=-R3SFc;0VPk41y6cVF71;9;4TVW;0056236048;4Usl6S;1jwmAjwmA0s

This build has none of the following:

1. No PU
2. No shatters
3. No interrupts

Unfortunately I had to give up Chaos for two reasons:

1. No good GM traits. They’re all either shatter, PU, or interrupts
2. Duelist’s Discipline’s requires interrupts to work. We don’t interrupt in this build

In place of Chaos, we have to take illusions for the lower CDs on phant skills. This comes with two awesome unexpected bonuses:

1. We get scepter speed increase
2. We get to increase confusion duration from scepter

Playstyle:

The scepter #3 skill hits like a laser. I try and get it off twice for each swap to sc/pistal since the CD is just below 10 sec. I mean wow – with it, I’ve been able to down many, many classes. It’s just so fast that people don’t even realize it’s on them. I’ve seen thieves autoattack themselves to death in seconds. I’ve even seen normally tanky eles just die with this one skill alone.

We got lots of reflects with our focus. I can use this against shatter mesmers opening with mirror blade. (P.S. Just learned that mirror blade is unblockable/unreflectable, so that’s out…) But we also get a lot of damage surprisingly from focus #5. For some reason, illusionary lead has become less smooth since the patch so I have to work extra hard at pulling it off. But the idea is to immobilize your opponent inside a warden. Lots of bleeds, and he hits nicely.

(Here’s where I miss my "10% of toughness gets converted into condi damage from the Chaos line) :‘( . With that, I could maybe swap out undead runes for traveler’s since I feel so slooooooow….

Undead runes give us surprising condi damage, especially since we have decent toughness that also gets converted.

One other side benefit. Evading gives a phantasmal defender with retaliation. That means if you then get a lot of hits, the opponent will get plenty of retaliation on himself. Useful against guardians…sometimes half the screen is covered with yellow retaliation damage markers.

Still playing around with some traits, but I find it fun. At least I’m able to play mesmer without shattering, stealthing, or interrupting.

Actually one big reason for me building this way is to deal with high lag. I have a ping rate of around 340ms which means I can’t afford to be glass and I can basically never interrupt anything on purpose. This build just allows me to go through my rotations without really thinking too much and it’s quite effective.

Just like before

bhagwad.4281:

Unfortunately I had to give up Chaos for two reasons:

1. No good GM traits. They’re all either shatter, PU, or interrupts
2. Duelist’s Discipline’s requires interrupts to work. We don’t interrupt in this build

What does Duelist’s Discipline have to do with Chaos?

AlphatheWhite.9351:

bhagwad.4281:

Unfortunately I had to give up Chaos for two reasons:

1. No good GM traits. They’re all either shatter, PU, or interrupts
2. Duelist’s Discipline’s requires interrupts to work. We don’t interrupt in this build

What does Duelist’s Discipline have to do with Chaos?

Since I can’t rely on Duelists’s discipline to lower the CD of my pistol skills, I need CD reduction from another source – namely the illusions line. Since I have to take dueling and inspiration, the inclusion of illusions means I can’t take chaos

Yeah, I should have made that more clear!

Good luck reflecting mirror blade…

It’s unblockable.

Fay.2357:

Good luck reflecting mirror blade…

It’s unblockable.

Ouch. That sucks .

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Yeah, exactly. Just like backstab.

In fact Thieves have been telling players to learn2dodge for YEARS.

Ross Biddle.2367:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Yeah, exactly. Just like backstab.

In fact Thieves have been telling players to learn2dodge for YEARS.

Exactly. And that is why people find it so cheesy. But to be fair, you can usually dodge a regular backstab if you’ve already engaged the thief. Otherwise for long stealth skills there are huge tells like circles on the ground giving you counterplay.

But this is not a thief thread – the point is that the GP was saying that the damage is telegraphed. I say working as intended no?

Why even bother playing mesmer when you are actively playing against the class itself?

Iavra.8510:

Why even bother playing mesmer when you are actively playing against the class itself?

That’s an interesting point. The thing is, I’ve been playing a “no shatter” mesmer for 3 years – that’s a long time to get used to a style of play and investment in a character. If we had started out with the game we had today, I probably would have played a different class or maybe even enjoyed shattering. I don’t know at this point.

But after all this time, I can’t imagine playing a mesmer any other way. The latest patch fundamentally screwed over phantasm builds both directly and indirectly. Now I play on other classes as well, it’s just that mes has been my main for like ever.

The thing is that mesmers have two defining class mechanics, that are in some ways in opposition to each other.

1. Phantasms and clones. Mesmers are all about summoning illusions to assist them. Clones were originally intended to give defensive benefit, but they are just too stupid to be useful that way in pvp. Phantasms are largely meant to be an offensive benefit. Either way though, illusions define a playstyle, and phantasm play and management is one way of playing dps mesmer. Many people have enjoyed it in the past, and many people would surely enjoy it in the future if Anet would support it.

2. Shatters. In some ways, shatters are a necessary outgrowth of illusions. The nature of illusions demands a way to get rid of them if you like, and the concept of shatters takes that and makes it into a positive mechanic. Shattering removes the persistent benefits of illusions, though.

Anet is on record saying that not enough people shatter. They’re crazy, because that was never true, but eh. The real issue is that they’ve taken it so far that they are pretending nobody does or should enjoy a low-shatter playstyle. This isn’t true, but they’re going there anyway.

The unfortunate offshoot of that is a never-ending stream of sheep who insist that shatter is the main class mechanic of mesmers (nevermind the illusions that make the shatters a thing in the first place, or the phantasms that occupy a skill slot on every single weapon set), and certainly the only one worthy of consideration, because Anet said so.
They didn’t say so, of course, but they implied it, and made changes that seem to reflect it. Same thing, right?

Well, technically shatters are F1-F4 (F5) and thus the class mechanic

Bhagwad, I’ll give this build a spin this weekend and let ya know what I think.

Did you get the opportunity to try Chronomancer? Or more specifically Chronophantasma? I feel this is the single best trait for Phantasm builds atm, even if it is a pseudo-shatter trait. It allows you to micromanage your phantasms in a really interesting way and milk even more damage/utility from them via shatters.

@Alpha: I don’t think anet is against phantasm builds. I think (due to traits like Persistence of Memory and Chronophantasma) that they want people who play phantasm to still find rewards from shattering, but don’t know how to do that in a way that does t also boost shatter-heavy builds.

Chaos Archangel.5071:

Bhagwad, I’ll give this build a spin this weekend and let ya know what I think.

Did you get the opportunity to try Chronomancer? Or more specifically Chronophantasma? I feel this is the single best trait for Phantasm builds atm, even if it is a pseudo-shatter trait. It allows you to micromanage your phantasms in a really interesting way and milk even more damage/utility from them via shatters.

@Alpha: I don’t think anet is against phantasm builds. I think (due to traits like Persistence of Memory and Chronophantasma) that they want people who play phantasm to still find rewards from shattering, but don’t know how to do that in a way that does t also boost shatter-heavy builds.

Haven’t gotten around to purchasing HoT yet… (I know, I know. It’s inevitable).

Iavra.8510:

Well, technically shatters are F1-F4 (F5) and thus the class mechanic

This is exactly the kind of mindless response I’m talking about, even from people who generally exhibit normal levels of critical thinking. Shame on you, lavra, I know you know better.

“Well, technically steal is F1 and thus the class mechanic”
Q: Is this really true for thieves?
A: Hell No. Steal is one class mechanic. Initiative is another, and probably much more important.

“the” implies singular, as though there aren’t others, or that “the” mechanic makes other mechanics just kind of secondary.

It’s not true that shatter is “the” class mechanic. It is “a” class mechanic, and definitely one of the primary class mechanics.

Oooo got ’em.

/constructive

I don’t know any other class that has actively tried to play without their F skills in the way people could ignore them on Mesmer in the past. I think that was the bigger joke hence Anet encouraging everyone to use them now.

Do you never use F3 or F4 either?

Curunen.8729:

I don’t know any other class that has actively tried to play without their F skills in the way people could ignore them on Mesmer in the past. I think that was the bigger joke hence Anet encouraging everyone to use them now.

Do you never use F3 or F4 either?

To be fair, I don’t know another class where using F skills interferes so much with using another class mechanic.

The closest I can think of is turrets on engineers. And in that case, you do have engineers slotting turrets just for the toolbelt skill and not the turret.

And when turret engineer was a thing, you’d drop a turret and ignore the f-skills until the turret was about to die anyway, which is pretty much what a phant mesmer does.

However you all wish to debate shatter being the profession mechanic, it’s defined by Anet as the profession’s “unique” class mechanic, as are every other profession’s F* skills above their skill bar. Playing without the “unique” mechanic gimps the player immensely right off the bat, seeing to it that one of the major things (and a huge one at that) that uniquely define the mesmer class and fighting style is being ignored.

As for the build, I personally use sc/f to great effect, sometimes with malicious sorcery/sometimes ineptitude and always warden’s feedback. It provides excellent utility for my team who understand how to play around the utility it provides.

Fact is though, still choosing to play without shatters in this post-patch state of the game puts one at such a massive disadvantage against literally every class/build. Every single illusion that gets destroyed (either by an opponent, or generating an illusion when there are three already out) is now completely wasted when you could have at least tried to get a shatter off. Sure you have the corner cases of using illusions to body block, etc – I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about paying no heed to illusions on the field and just spamming/allowing them to die. Pre-patch this was OK to some degree depending on your trait spread. Post-patch this is just bad play.

Even with chronophantasma, the idea behind it is not to promote pre-patch phantasm build playstyles; it’s to bridge the gap between pre-patch and post-patch styles, trying to get the most of your phantasms with the intention of introducing a shatter style in the mix. It’s supposed to be a balance, where shattering becomes required for one to be successful – or at least operate at peak efficiency – with the class. There just isn’t any way around it.

I do sympathize with the OP and will say if this build (assuming no shattering) is fun for you and makes you feel successful/efficient on mesmer, more power to you. It’s just not something I feel any mesmer could take seriously if they want to be the best they can with the class.

EDIT: My perspective is purely PvP.

If the main reason you abstain from shatter and interrupts in your ping, I can tell you I play with a 300ms ping with a FPS ranging from 10 to 15. And that definitely is a burden, but it does not prevent anything. You can play easily a condi-shatter because it is very forgiving with a rabid armor. And you can also play glass cannon build, although it is sometimes frustrating. I am currently on a glass cannon interrupt build. With CS, this is still awfully forgiving

Now I can understand the mindset of “non-shatter” because I had it in the beginning. After leveling in PvE, you know how weak shatters are and how strong a living phantasm is. But that’s the twist, by reducing the amount of HP of your phantasm in PvP (they can have different PvE/PvP balance when they want…) a-net clearly made them unreliable for sustained damage. I spent most of my early PvP days trying to make a phantasm build work despite what people were saying. But progressively, I learned to enjoy some shatters for peak damage or for utilities (F3/F4). And before I knew it, I was playing a shatter style on my phantasm build.

I think the switch was on roaming WvW, when I was using my clone-death build but spent my time shattering and I realized I might as well put a shatter build.

As for interrupts, whether you want it or not, all your weapon sets have interrupts skills, you may as well use them.

AlphatheWhite.9351:

Curunen.8729:

I don’t know any other class that has actively tried to play without their F skills in the way people could ignore them on Mesmer in the past. I think that was the bigger joke hence Anet encouraging everyone to use them now.

Do you never use F3 or F4 either?

To be fair, I don’t know another class where using F skills interferes so much with using another class mechanic.

The closest I can think of is turrets on engineers. And in that case, you do have engineers slotting turrets just for the toolbelt skill and not the turret.

And when turret engineer was a thing, you’d drop a turret and ignore the f-skills until the turret was about to die anyway, which is pretty much what a phant mesmer does.

In the current model I think it has most in common with warrior mechanics – illusions are kind of like adrenaline except they also have physical presence, then shatters are like warrior F1 burst skills.

I believe given our F skills are designed to blow up our resource, we should have had baseline IP from the start of the game – that way this whole artificial distinction between “phantasm builds” and “shatter builds” would never have happened. I fully appreciate it’s hard to get used to the new system given how it used to be.

However I believe if Anet really intended “phantasms/clone management” and “shattering” to be separate playstyles, then our F skills should have purely been illusion generation skills. I can see it is a strange situation at the moment for players who uses to play pure illusion damage builds (phantasms or clone conditions) and pretty much ignore F1 and F2 existed.

However when it comes to F3 and F4, I believe everyone not using these in pvp whether pre patch or post patch is at a massive disadvantage and gimping themselves for no good reason. Sure in PvE you could ignore F3, but in pvp, even without IP F3 was and is crucial for optimal play.

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Just… no. You can hide mesmers’ skill animations through blinking, portals and stealth. Shattering yourself within melee range is also an untelegraphed source of damage.

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Matty.1953:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

I can’t see how that falls under the definition of scrub at all…

Ross Biddle.2367:

Matty.1953:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

I can’t see how that falls under the definition of scrub at all…

Because, according to who is it supposed to be that way? A ‘scrub’ places false constraints on what they can or cannot do (there’s a famous definition of the word on the internet somewhere)

Matty.1953:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Just… no. You can hide mesmers’ skill animations through blinking, portals and stealth. Shattering yourself within melee range is also an untelegraphed source of damage.

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Sigh. I’m getting tired of this “scrub” nonsense. It’s not a logical argument – just an attempt at ad-hominem.

Using this illogical name calling, any complaint about the game falls into “scrub territory”. Burning is too high? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how high burning should be. CS is too strong? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how often mesmers should stun.

Remember that this is a game with frequent balance patches. And that means, very often the complaints are valid because the damage or other mechanic was unintended.

I’ve seen this “scrub” argument used by people without thinking to shut down any valid discussion. It’s time to call people out on it.

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Just… no. You can hide mesmers’ skill animations through blinking, portals and stealth. Shattering yourself within melee range is also an untelegraphed source of damage.

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Sigh. I’m getting tired of this “scrub” nonsense. It’s not a logical argument – just an attempt at ad-hominem.

Using this illogical name calling, any complaint about the game falls into “scrub territory”. Burning is too high? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how high burning should be. CS is too strong? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how often mesmers should stun.

Remember that this is a game with frequent balance patches. And that means, very often the complaints are valid because the damage or other mechanic was unintended.

I’ve seen this “scrub” argument used by people without thinking to shut down any valid discussion. It’s time to call people out on it.

Dude, you have repeatedly ignored my (and others) point that scrub thinking has nothing to do with dev balance, and keep bringing that tired old inaccurate point back in, but you’re still wrong!

Game balance is the domain of the devs, and that has zilch to do with being a scrub! That’s RossBiddle’s point, that your refusal to use shatters isn’t because you think shatters are cheap, or OP, or whatever, you simply enjoy a different style of play and are doing your best to come up with optimal ways to play it…and advocate for dev support if you find that you can’t.

• Devs changing balance isn’t scrub thinking any more than Congressmen changing the law is criminal thinking.
• Advocating for devs changing balance isn’t scrub thinking any more than voting for Congressmen who will change the law you don’t like is criminal thinking.

THEY ARE COMPLETELY SEPARATE

The only time scrub thinking interacts with balance changes or balance advocacy is when changes were made in response to scrubs, and not in response to real balance issues. Sirlin has another great article on that topic too if you look around his blog, but that’s a subsidiary issue. A dev making a change isn’t being a scrub unless he personally made the change because of his own scrub thinking.

So per your point, calling burning damage too high is NOT relevant to the use of the term scrub, because it’s advocacy for balance, not a refusal to play the game as it is.

Lastly, your repeated insistence that arguments are ad hominem falls prey to the same error you are declaiming.
“Who says ad hominem is a bad thing? It’s just a name, you can’t just go around calling things ad hominem and dismissing them outright!”
Your logic in this fight is internally inconsistent, without even needing to cite specific fallacies.

As far as ad hominem itself, it’s a common misuse of ad hominem to label any derogatory label as ad hominem. Ad hominem is only a fallacy if the label used is not relevant, not appropriately applied, or not indicative of true good/bad relative to the discussion at hand.

Scrub thinking is bad because it hides the true depth of play available in a game for reasons not relevant to the value of the game itself. That’s Sirlin’s point, that people who rise above scrub thinking are playing on a level beyond what a scrub can imagine, because the scrub locked themselves out of that level of play voluntarily.
But then the scrub declares their advocacy for this or that balance change, ignorant of the fact that it’s not in fact unbalanced.

True imbalance exists, but scrub thinking obscures where that imbalance really lies, because they refuse to operate at that level of play.

So we label people scrubs to invoke that entire, complex discussion, rather than having it AGAIN every. kitten. time.

AlphatheWhite.9351:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

bhagwad.4281:

Matty.1953:

To willfully neglect all of your profession mechanics means you’re relying on weapon and utility skills alone. Setting aside the implications of this in terms of survivability, this means all your damage comes from weapon skills — your damage is seriously telegraphed. There’s no way you’re killing a skilled player with that, I’m sorry.

Well to be fair, damage is supposed to be telegraphed in some way or the other. And it’s not as if shatters are not telegraphed. In fact, mesmer players are constantly telling other players to “learn2dodge” etc etc right?

Just… no. You can hide mesmers’ skill animations through blinking, portals and stealth. Shattering yourself within melee range is also an untelegraphed source of damage.

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Sigh. I’m getting tired of this “scrub” nonsense. It’s not a logical argument – just an attempt at ad-hominem.

Using this illogical name calling, any complaint about the game falls into “scrub territory”. Burning is too high? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how high burning should be. CS is too strong? Oh, you’re placing an artificial constraint on how often mesmers should stun.

Remember that this is a game with frequent balance patches. And that means, very often the complaints are valid because the damage or other mechanic was unintended.

I’ve seen this “scrub” argument used by people without thinking to shut down any valid discussion. It’s time to call people out on it.

Dude, you have repeatedly ignored my (and others) point that scrub thinking has nothing to do with dev balance, and keep bringing that tired old inaccurate point back in, but you’re still wrong!

Game balance is the domain of the devs, and that has zilch to do with being a scrub! That’s RossBiddle’s point, that your refusal to use shatters isn’t because you think shatters are cheap, or OP, or whatever, you simply enjoy a different style of play and are doing your best to come up with optimal ways to play it…and advocate for dev support if you find that you can’t.

• Devs changing balance isn’t scrub thinking any more than Congressmen changing the law is criminal thinking.
• Advocating for devs changing balance isn’t scrub thinking any more than voting for Congressmen who will change the law you don’t like is criminal thinking.

THEY ARE COMPLETELY SEPARATE

The only time scrub thinking interacts with balance changes or balance advocacy is when changes were made in response to scrubs, and not in response to real balance issues. Sirlin has another great article on that topic too if you look around his blog, but that’s a subsidiary issue. A dev making a change isn’t being a scrub unless he personally made the change because of his own scrub thinking.

So per your point, calling burning damage too high is NOT relevant to the use of the term scrub, because it’s advocacy for balance, not a refusal to play the game as it is.

Lastly, your repeated insistence that arguments are ad hominem falls prey to the same error you are declaiming.
“Who says ad hominem is a bad thing? It’s just a name, you can’t just go around calling things ad hominem and dismissing them outright!”
Your logic in this fight is internally inconsistent, without even needing to cite specific fallacies.

As far as ad hominem itself, it’s a common misuse of ad hominem to label any derogatory label as ad hominem. Ad hominem is only a fallacy if the label used is not relevant, not appropriately applied, or not indicative of true good/bad relative to the discussion at hand.

Scrub thinking is bad because it hides the true depth of play available in a game for reasons not relevant to the value of the game itself. That’s Sirlin’s point, that people who rise above scrub thinking are playing on a level beyond what a scrub can imagine, because the scrub locked themselves out of that level of play voluntarily.
But then the scrub declares their advocacy for this or that balance change, ignorant of the fact that it’s not in fact unbalanced.

True imbalance exists, but scrub thinking obscures where that imbalance really lies, because they refuse to operate at that level of play.

So we label people scrubs to invoke that entire, complex discussion, rather than having it AGAIN every. kitten. time.

The judge of what is and isn’t balanced is the prerogative of the devs and the devs alone. Hence, if anyone has the right to use the word “scrub”, it’s a dev because we have no way of knowing what is intended and what is unintended. A forum user utilizing “scrub” is meaningless.

I think I need to write a separate post about this.

And in this case, the ad-hominem fallacy is perfectly relevant because calling someone a “scrub” merely applies a label without explaining what that label is good or bad. It does nothing for the argument itself.

Calling for a nerf to burning CAN be a refusal to play the game as is. Because the game as is, has a burning damage value that some consider too high. What does “too high” mean? It means they think it’s unfair. And lots of people do not like to do things that are unfair. Hence, they are scrubs for not utilizing the best and most efficient means to win.

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

Nice post OP. I was wondering if the scepter trait was really worth it or not…

In terms of the “debate” here, it’s very silly to say that using Shatter has always been the best method in terms of builds for Mesmers. PvE Mesmer says hello. From a PvP perspective, let us please not forget that not too long ago clone death builds were a thing which rarely used shatters either (those builds were only decent in low-mid tier though). Bottom line is until recently, using our class mechanic has been counter-intuitive in a lot of situations, hence why we are the only profession where there are builds designed not to use it.

It goes without saying that as of right now, using our class mechanic is the most optimal way to play highly depending on your MMR and opponents.

I’d made a pretty long post on the subject of fun and maximising build efficiency for the sake of winning but the kittening forum decided to eat it… >:(

I can’t be kittened to retype it so I’ll try a tl;dr version.

- primary in game goals are a compromise between playing to win and playing to have fun.
- you can only control your own build choice based on the two parameters stated above.
- other players can do whatever they like in the confines of the game

Example – I find using PU, Scepter+Torch in condition play to be extremely boring – I’d rather go and do paperwork than play like this. Hence my preference for Sword/torch and no PU. However the fact that other players can choose this trait and weapon combo is their choice in the compromise between"playing for fun" and “playing to win”. I do not criticise them because I decided to choose a “weaker” build that strikes the balance for me between fun and winning.

Curunen.8729:

I’d made a pretty long post on the subject of fun and maximising build efficiency for the sake of winning but the kittening forum decided to eat it… >:(

I can’t be kittened to retype it so I’ll try a tl;dr version.

- primary in game goals are a compromise between playing to win and playing to have fun.
- you can only control your own build choice based on the two parameters stated above.
- other players can do whatever they like in the confines of the game

Example – I find using PU, Scepter+Torch in condition play to be extremely boring – I’d rather go and do paperwork than play like this. Hence my preference for Sword/torch and no PU. However the fact that other players can choose this trait and weapon combo is their choice in the compromise between"playing for fun" and “playing to win”. I do not criticise them because I decided to choose a “weaker” build that strikes the balance for me between fun and winning.

Yes! YES! Finally someone got it right! Give this man a medal!
edit: although to some, “playing to win” may be equivalent to “playing for fun” – guess you could classify people by how far they can move-away/have-to-move-away from “playing to win” in order to have fun :p

Fay.2357:

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

`

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Where kitten did this come from? This has nothing to do with balance, I have no idea why someone suddenly got defensive around the wrong thing and accused me of saying stuff… I didn’t? Read the posts first, Jesus Christ

MailMail.6534:

Nice post OP. I was wondering if the scepter trait was really worth it or not…

In terms of the “debate” here, it’s very silly to say that using Shatter has always been the best method in terms of builds for Mesmers. PvE Mesmer says hello. From a PvP perspective, let us please not forget that not too long ago clone death builds were a thing which rarely used shatters either (those builds were only decent in low-mid tier though). Bottom line is until recently, using our class mechanic has been counter-intuitive in a lot of situations, hence why we are the only profession where there are builds designed not to use it.

It goes without saying that as of right now, using our class mechanic is the most optimal way to play highly depending on your MMR and opponents.

Bearing in mind that the OP himself was talking from a PvP perspective

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

`

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Where kitten did this come from? This has nothing to do with balance, I have no idea why someone suddenly got defensive around the wrong thing and accused me of saying stuff… I didn’t? Read the posts first, Jesus Christ

I’m a little confused here. Are you trying to say that you didn’t make the quoted statement about telegraphed skills falling into scrub territory? I’m not saying that you said anything other than what is quoted. I’m saying that what is quoted is an absurd misuse of the word scrub.

Fay.2357:

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

`

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Where kitten did this come from? This has nothing to do with balance, I have no idea why someone suddenly got defensive around the wrong thing and accused me of saying stuff… I didn’t? Read the posts first, Jesus Christ

I’m a little confused here. Are you trying to say that you didn’t make the quoted statement about telegraphed skills falling into scrub territory? I’m not saying that you said anything other than what is quoted. I’m saying that what is quoted is an absurd misuse of the word scrub.

Surely by your own logic, what I said was correct? That turning one’s nose at untelegraphed damage (if you qualify it as a ‘mechanic’) is scrub thinking? I still, cannot understand why this is being linked to game balance.

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

`

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Where kitten did this come from? This has nothing to do with balance, I have no idea why someone suddenly got defensive around the wrong thing and accused me of saying stuff… I didn’t? Read the posts first, Jesus Christ

I’m a little confused here. Are you trying to say that you didn’t make the quoted statement about telegraphed skills falling into scrub territory? I’m not saying that you said anything other than what is quoted. I’m saying that what is quoted is an absurd misuse of the word scrub.

Surely by your own logic, what I said was correct? That turning one’s nose at untelegraphed damage (if you qualify it as a ‘mechanic’) is scrub thinking? I still, cannot understand why this is being linked to game balance.

No, saying that damage should have some sort of telegraph is not even remotely scrub thinking. That’s expressing an opinion on game balance, not maligning others for using strong mechanics, nor is it even a refusal to use untelegraphed damage. Nothing about that statement is even remotely scrub-like.

Fay.2357:

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Matty.1953:

Fay.2357:

Ok, let’s be clear here:

“I don’t enjoy shattering. Therefor, I will use a potentially worse build/playstyle instead.”

Not scrub. Yes, you’re handicapping yourself, but the reason is simple enjoyment of the game.

“Shattering is too easy and strong. I’m not going to shatter because shattering is cheap, and people the abuse shattering to win are also cheap.”

This is scrub thinking.

“I feel that important attacks should have telegraphed animations.”

Not scrub. This is simply a personal opinion on game balance. Nowhere in this statement are implications about the unfairness of various mechanics.

“Using a build without telegraphed animations is cheap and poor play. Good players don’t need to abuse non-telegraphed mechanics.”

This is scrub thinking. You’ve now linked the balance consideration to a sense of fairness, and have drawn a false implication of what ‘good players’ do or don’t do.

I hope this is clear. Matty was making a totally inappropriate scrub accusation. Being unhappy with the balance in a game is not the same as being a scrub. Where the scrub rears it’s ugly head is when mechanics are called ‘cheap’ or ‘unfair’ or ‘unbeatable’, and when people playing with those mechanics are being considered tarnished by association with them.

`

Also, saying that damage is supposed to telegraphed falls under ‘scrub’ territory.

Where kitten did this come from? This has nothing to do with balance, I have no idea why someone suddenly got defensive around the wrong thing and accused me of saying stuff… I didn’t? Read the posts first, Jesus Christ

I’m a little confused here. Are you trying to say that you didn’t make the quoted statement about telegraphed skills falling into scrub territory? I’m not saying that you said anything other than what is quoted. I’m saying that what is quoted is an absurd misuse of the word scrub.

Surely by your own logic, what I said was correct? That turning one’s nose at untelegraphed damage (if you qualify it as a ‘mechanic’) is scrub thinking? I still, cannot understand why this is being linked to game balance.

No, saying that damage should have some sort of telegraph is not even remotely scrub thinking. That’s expressing an opinion on game balance, not maligning others for using strong mechanics, nor is it even a refusal to use untelegraphed damage. Nothing about that statement is even remotely scrub-like.

This might be a issue with the semantics of telegraph. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I’ll call damage telegraphed if I can see really obvious, maybe slow animations. I essentially define untelegraphed as not so obvious: neither of these statements are technically true. All damage is telegraphed, one way or another. Stealthed damage is telegraphed: the act of stealthing itself primes the opponent into anticipating an attack. In the case of stealth gibbing someone before a fight has begun, to define it as untelegraphed damage and then not play it for that reason (which we’ve now established isn’t true, but without such foresight) would be scrub thinking because stealth is a mechanic). I don’t really think scrub thinking is about denouncing those that maximise use of mechanics, rather about rejecting the mechanics themselves.

I understand the contradictory logic employed here. Consider them two, mutually exclusive counter arguments.

AlphatheWhite.9351:

The thing is that mesmers have two defining class mechanics, that are in some ways in opposition to each other.

1. Phantasms and clones. Mesmers are all about summoning illusions to assist them. Clones were originally intended to give defensive benefit, but they are just too stupid to be useful that way in pvp. Phantasms are largely meant to be an offensive benefit. Either way though, illusions define a playstyle, and phantasm play and management is one way of playing dps mesmer. Many people have enjoyed it in the past, and many people would surely enjoy it in the future if Anet would support it.

2. Shatters. In some ways, shatters are a necessary outgrowth of illusions. The nature of illusions demands a way to get rid of them if you like, and the concept of shatters takes that and makes it into a positive mechanic. Shattering removes the persistent benefits of illusions, though.

Anet is on record saying that not enough people shatter. They’re crazy, because that was never true, but eh. The real issue is that they’ve taken it so far that they are pretending nobody does or should enjoy a low-shatter playstyle. This isn’t true, but they’re going there anyway.

I’d like to continue this train of thought if I may, because Anet has indeed wrapped themselves in a conundrum considering the playstyle of the mesmer, and having my main as a mesmer, i care about the evolution of the class and am curious of the design choices.

You’re right in that the two class mechanics are paradoxically linked, both supporting each other but also hindering each other. An interesting thing about phantasms are that phantasm skills are always singularly defined by the summoning of a phantasm as opposed to all clone skills, which have a secondary effect (even down to utilities, decoy is an invisibility and mirror image summons two clones as it’s extra effect). I would honestly prefer clone treatment for all phantasm skills, making them slightly weaker but giving mesmers an additional effect, exactly like how echo/deja vu are block and summon skills. honestly, this change might even promote shatter builds some more, because phantasms become a less reliable source of damage while the mesmer becomes more self reliant for dealing damage (which has it’s own consequences on the design philosophy of the mesmer).

Another interesting choice that they removed was clone death effects from the old trait system because, as you mentioned, they said players were not shattering enough. illusion death traits were fantastic and my absolute favourite part of playing a mesmer (because i personally do not enjoy shatter builds, but illusionary persona being baseline has persuaded me somewhat). They allowed a playstyle focused solely on summoning illusions as fire and forget mechanics, while leaving much mroe beneficial effects to shattering (like boon removal on shatter as opposed to a 1 second burning per dead clone).

Taking the mesmer class as a whole, it’s understandable that they’d want to shift away from the paradox they created by solely rewarding players for shattering, and making shattering more viable rather than leaving clones/phantasms to die, as the class then becomes more streamlined, shifting away from the back and forth tug of war that the class mechanics were before the change.

it’s definitely an interesting dilemma, one which Anet has seemingly halfway solved by focusing on shattering over illusion summoning. Not that it’s a halfway effort, but i personally don’t believe that they’ve fully solved the issue, part of which is a three year history of illusion summoning mesmers suddenly finding that their playstyle is no longer viable/has been kitten.

As i said above, i do believe the one step further they can go is placing more self reliance on the mesmer for each phantasm skill, having some sort of primary mesmer effect with a secondary phantasm that’s weaker than phantasms are now (whether in strength of attacks or in survivability would need to be tweaked through player feedback), such as the illusionary berserker making the mesmer slash the immediate area around them with their greatsword and sending the phantasm forward, still doing it’s attack. this would further distance phantasm builds from viability, but it would solve the dilemma of reliance on illusion/shattering that the mesmer currently has.

as for supporting both playstyles without culling one in favour of the other, i’m sure there’s a middle ground, but i’m definitely not experienced enough to figure that out. the seemingly obvious choice would be to make phantasms have more survivability/more power and illusion death traits (or even better, illusion death mechanics specific to each illusion, depending on the weapon), and make on death effects weaker than shatters, kittenters have a handy number of traits that enhance them (from self healing to boon removal, not to mention the shatter effects themselves).

it’s definitely an interesting dilemma, one that i personally think may actually hinder the growth of the mesmer because of the nature of both mechanics butting heads but building upon one another at the same time. Chronophantasma and illusionary reversion don’t truly assist either playstyle in my opinion. they’re bandaids, not long term solutions (though they’re certainly a fun solution, i would not wish for their removal). and it’s something that the developers certainly need to have a serious sit down and think about how to move the mesmer forward. no other class has such a conundrum from what i understand, and i can certainly see the cool factor in how they decided to create the class.

Apologies for kind of just rambling on about this, but i wanted to get my two cents out there.

Just as an update, the build seems to be doing quite well. What’s funny is that people don’t seem to realize that I don’t shatter. I’ve got the following comments recently:

1. Sigh
2. Mesmer “skill”
3. Why does ever mesmer have to play the same cheap condi build? I know why…no skill!

Not bad for a “no shatter”/no pu/no interupt build

bhagwad.4281:

Just as an update, the build seems to be doing quite well. What’s funny is that people don’t seem to realize that I don’t shatter. I’ve got the following comments recently:

1. Sigh
2. Mesmer “skill”
3. Why does ever mesmer have to play the same cheap condi build? I know why…no skill!

Not bad for a “no shatter”/no pu/no interupt build

This would be the perfect subject of a video slapping people in the face for being idiots.

Just show your playstyle, how you don’t shatter, and then zoom in on the stupid comments.

Then the video becomes our rebuttal every time someone suggests Mesmer must be OP because so many people are complaining about it.

bhagwad.4281:

Just as an update, the build seems to be doing quite well. What’s funny is that people don’t seem to realize that I don’t shatter. I’ve got the following comments recently:

1. Sigh
2. Mesmer “skill”
3. Why does ever mesmer have to play the same cheap condi build? I know why…no skill!

Not bad for a “no shatter”/no pu/no interupt build

Hehe, just shows how clueless many people who complain about Mesmer are when they can’t even identify key skills and traits being used or not used. xD

bhagwad.4281:

Just as an update, the build seems to be doing quite well. What’s funny is that people don’t seem to realize that I don’t shatter. I’ve got the following comments recently:

1. Sigh
2. Mesmer “skill”
3. Why does ever mesmer have to play the same cheap condi build? I know why…no skill!

Not bad for a “no shatter”/no pu/no interupt build

Reminds me of hate pms I got once while playing prepatch pure glass sw/t+gs shatter (44006) accusing me of being a no-skill PU condie noob. Was just like…really?

Fay.2357:

bhagwad.4281:

Just as an update, the build seems to be doing quite well. What’s funny is that people don’t seem to realize that I don’t shatter. I’ve got the following comments recently:

1. Sigh
2. Mesmer “skill”
3. Why does ever mesmer have to play the same cheap condi build? I know why…no skill!

Not bad for a “no shatter”/no pu/no interupt build

Reminds me of hate pms I got once while playing prepatch pure glass sw/t+gs shatter (44006) accusing me of being a no-skill PU condie noob. Was just like…really?

Let me guess – they also moaned about you kittening dozens of clowns and phantasms out of your kitten, having on demand distortions every few seconds together with blocks, evades, dazes, stuns, interrupts, perma stealth, perma protection, perma vigour, unlimited teleports and stunbreaks, and… :p