Guild Wars 2

Since the beginning of time (think AD&D rules, my old friends), the trade off between ranged and melee has been clear: ranged characters enjoy more safety while melee characters enjoy more damage. What I don’t get is the idea that DPS is the only thing that matters, ergo ranged characters are always inferior to melee players. In every big battle I’ve played in this game there have been multiple “high DPS melee players” in a downed state throwing rocks. There were also lots of ranged characters who continued to safely rain down damage from a distance while the melee guys threw rocks and waited for someone to rez them. Play the way you like, and don’t disparage anyone else’s ideas because it is a game.

ranged weapons “suck” in as much as they’re not outperforming melee. but why should they? we often talk about risk/reward in these situations, and trade-offs for less risk. someone not able to stay up all the time in melee might as well try ranged (of course, numerous things factor into not being able to stay up, from profession and personal skill to group composition and combat situation). i see melee types die plenty of times, even in otherwise fast dps groups. ranged die too, obviously, but it’s often easier to manage the “alive” part from range. plenty of caveats in all of this, i know, but still… why the rhetoric must be so extreme is beyond me.

EDIT: i was actually replying to TurtleDragon, but i see that baby stealing dingo using similar notions.

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

That’s really all that needs to be said. Play how you want, but don’t moan when you get kicked.

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

Since the beginning of time (think AD&D rules, my old friends), the trade off between ranged and melee has been clear: ranged characters enjoy more safety while melee characters enjoy more damage. What I don’t get is the idea that DPS is the only thing that matters, ergo ranged characters are always inferior to melee players. In every big battle I’ve played in this game there have been multiple “high DPS melee players” in a downed state throwing rocks. There were also lots of ranged characters who continued to safely rain down damage from a distance while the melee guys threw rocks and waited for someone to rez them. Play the way you like, and don’t disparage anyone else’s ideas because it is a game.

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

That’s really all that needs to be said. Play how you want, but don’t moan when you get kicked.

This is pretty much the gist of it.

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

That’s really all that needs to be said. Play how you want, but don’t moan when you get kicked.

If you’re tired of dodging and taking hits, maybe you should play a ranged character. We’re not forcing you to do anything. With respect to the fight taking longer, I wasn’t aware that playing MMOs was an efficient use of time to being with. With respect to being kicked, I would not moan if you did. There are many others to play with. And please, don’t tell me to “play how I want” while simultaneously disparaging my style of play.

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

this notion is actually rather absurd when you think about it. it’s not like all attacks come packaged in fives!… some professions have great personal defenses, others not. some professions can throw group defense around, others not. it’s not automatically harder just because some of the party aren’t at close range.

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

it’s not automatically harder just because some of the party aren’t at close range.

There are a few bosses in the game that do not use a certain attack if everyone is in melee range.

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

this notion is actually rather absurd when you think about it. it’s not like all attacks come packaged in fives!… some professions have great personal defenses, others not. some professions can throw group defense around, others not. it’s not automatically harder just because some of the party aren’t at close range.

If you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow, the boss isn’t likely to be targeting you. That means other people are taking attacks that would otherwise have been directed at you.

Alternatively, if you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow and everyone else is in melee and the boss goes for you, you’re rendering literally everything the rest of the party is doing meaningless by pulling the boss out of melee and AOE range. 99% of the time when a melee group wipes it is because someone moved out of melee range and the boss disengaged and ran out all of the CCs and started downing people.

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

this notion is actually rather absurd when you think about it. it’s not like all attacks come packaged in fives!… some professions have great personal defenses, others not. some professions can throw group defense around, others not. it’s not automatically harder just because some of the party aren’t at close range.

If you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow, the boss isn’t likely to be targeting you. That means other people are taking attacks that would otherwise have been directed at you.

Alternatively, if you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow and everyone else is in melee and the boss goes for you, you’re rendering literally everything the rest of the party is doing meaningless by pulling the boss out of melee and AOE range. 99% of the time when a melee group wipes it is because someone moved out of melee range and the boss disengaged and ran out all of the CCs and started downing people.

This makes zero sense.

So when the ranged players draw aggro, the melee players suffer? First of all, any boss worth a fart is immune to CC, second of all, anything that draws aggro off the melee players is a good thing.

TurtleDragon.3108:

There are a few bosses in the game that do not use a certain attack if everyone is in melee range.

sure, and there are some who have much better damage opportunity if everyone stays in their face. it’s a whole spectrum of behavior, innit

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

If you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow, the boss isn’t likely to be targeting you. That means other people are taking attacks that would otherwise have been directed at you.

consider the aoe capabilities (typically) of those attacks, then adjust your statement in accordance.
also, no one is saying you need to be at max range (let alone with a longbow).

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

99% of the time when a melee group wipes it is because someone moved out of melee range and the boss disengaged and ran out all of the CCs and started downing people.

once again, hyperbole. some bosses are even stationary, rendering your claim moot (in so far as the remaining “1%” cannot possibly account for all other wipe situations).

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

TurtleDragon.3108:

There are a few bosses in the game that do not use a certain attack if everyone is in melee range.

sure, and there are some who have much better damage opportunity if everyone stays in their face. it’s a whole spectrum of behavior, innit

Most of which is avoidable.

Also, in the bosses I was thinking of, the ranged attack you are preventing the boss from using are more lethal than their melee attacks.

TurtleDragon.3108:

:)

yeah, we all know alpha… (incidentally, alpha can be done with at least some people going ranged, as long as you spread out and keep moving… but that’s besides the point of specific ranged mechanics.)

actually, i’ve never gotten around to testing it, but does the queen spider spew more if someone moves away? it seems that’s what’s going on, but i never got to experience what actually happens when fight parameters change a lot…

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

Since the beginning of time (think AD&D rules, my old friends), the trade off between ranged and melee has been clear: ranged characters enjoy more safety while melee characters enjoy more damage. What I don’t get is the idea that DPS is the only thing that matters, ergo ranged characters are always inferior to melee players. In every big battle I’ve played in this game there have been multiple “high DPS melee players” in a downed state throwing rocks. There were also lots of ranged characters who continued to safely rain down damage from a distance while the melee guys threw rocks and waited for someone to rez them. Play the way you like, and don’t disparage anyone else’s ideas because it is a game.

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

That’s really the problem with range in GW2. In AD&D and other games with the holy trinity (tank, nuker, healer), the way it broke down was that ranged characters did substantially more DPS than melee characters. But they were squishy and in order to deliver that DPS, they needed melee to tank for them. Melee’s job wasn’t to deliver damage, it was to absorb it so range could deliver damage.

When Anet got rid of the trinity, they tried to apply the common-sense notion Fluffball is stating – more risk, more reward. Therefore melee should do more DPS than range. Unfortunately, that not only gets rid of the trinity, it collapses the rock-paper-scissors-like balance between those roles into a one-dimensional slugfest. Couple that with the melee classes also coincidentally being the ones with the best armor, and you wind up with the perverse situation where melee is best… at everything. I’m not even sure why they bother having different armor classes in the game the way it’s currently designed.

I don’t think people are so much arguing that it isn’t this way, as they are arguing that it shouldn’t be this way. I didn’t mind the trinity disappearing, but you need to replace it with something besides “everyone does the same thing.”

In RL combat, range gives you a huge tactical advantage because the opponent has to travel through your ranged attacks in order to engage in melee (or short-range attacks). If you look at the early battles after the introduction of firearms before they figured this out (e.g. Revolutionary War, Civil War), you had the ridiculous strategy of soldiers marching en masse through withering cannon fire to get within musket range. Casualties were enormous until WWI when generals started to say, we can’t throw away soldiers like this anymore (after they tried it a few times only to have entire attack waves of men mowed down by machine gun fire).

Unfortunately, GW2 also completely eliminates this advantage of range by severely limiting ranged attack’s range, thus allowing you to close to melee range within a matter of seconds, if not instantly. I don’t know if it’s intentional, but their game design is doing everything it can to make ranged play non-viable. I don’t think that’s healthy for the long-term popularity of the game. If I wanted to play an RPG-equivalent of a boxing match, I would look for an RPG that specifically does that. Not play a fantasy-themed RPG with bows and spell slingers, only to find out that those are just thrown in for token flavor; and if you really want to be effective you must use melee.

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

And please, don’t tell me to “play how I want” while simultaneously disparaging my style of play.

If you’re in a play how you want group, I have no problems what so ever with you using a longbow and having a full sentinels warrior up front tanking. Have at it, hoss.

On the other hand, anyone from the above group is completely incompatible with the meta. More and more I’m kicking bearbows on sight just because I know they are going to be responsible for the run not going smoothly. I only hate ranged PvE rangers because they make my play experience absolutely miserable. If you want to rag about the berserker melee mesmer being dead all the time in your holy trinity group, that’s totally legit as well. The two play styles are not compatible.

this is terribly off-topic, but…

Solandri.9640:

In AD&D and other games with the holy trinity (tank, nuker, healer), the way it broke down was that ranged characters did substantially more DPS than melee characters. But they were squishy and in order to deliver that DPS, they needed melee to tank for them. Melee’s job wasn’t to deliver damage, it was to absorb it so range could deliver damage.

there never was a “trinity” in the mmo sense of the word in (tabletop) roleplaying. reason being, the DM controls the monsters, not an AI routine, and certainly not a threat list. aggro is a computer thing, and the trinity mechanic to latch onto that is too (actually, i don’t know if maybe the trinity idea came first, and AI was designed to accomodate it… let’s just say it’s a joint thing then).

just a sort of game history remark, i guess.

Oh guys, i had a good laugh at the start of this thread. The advice to take carrion is just ridiculous. (Do you want to wait 5min to see your enemy going down by conditions?)
Or also those guys who came around with axes and longbows; he asked for MELEE recommendations..
Nevertheless do i still think everyone should play how he wants.

As a dedicated ranger player i have to say that people tend to overreact when the sword is concerned. It is quite smooth to play if you practise it alot. (Would start with heartquests to learn it)
Greatsword on the other hand is more tankier due to the extrablock, the stun and the evade but it also does less dps.

Now you can call me a **** or elitist or whatever, i don’t care, my runs are still fast and i don’t have to rezz after every boss! Strange without any knight gear or even rabbids.
Have fun!

GrimmR.3541:

As a dedicated ranger player i have to say that people tend to overreact when the sword is concerned. It is quite smooth to play if you practise it alot.

If you’ve got an experienced group of berserkers, I go ahead and turn autoattack back on. It makes you lazy but saves your finger a bit!

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

Fluffball.8307:

Being at range is just forcing someone else to take or dodge your hits for you, and on top of that your’re forcing them to do it longer because you do bad damage. You’re making it harder for everyone else.

this notion is actually rather absurd when you think about it. it’s not like all attacks come packaged in fives!… some professions have great personal defenses, others not. some professions can throw group defense around, others not. it’s not automatically harder just because some of the party aren’t at close range.

If you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow, the boss isn’t likely to be targeting you. That means other people are taking attacks that would otherwise have been directed at you.

Alternatively, if you’re standing at 1500 range with a longbow and everyone else is in melee and the boss goes for you, you’re rendering literally everything the rest of the party is doing meaningless by pulling the boss out of melee and AOE range. 99% of the time when a melee group wipes it is because someone moved out of melee range and the boss disengaged and ran out all of the CCs and started downing people.

This makes zero sense.

So when the ranged players draw aggro, the melee players suffer? First of all, any boss worth a fart is immune to CC, second of all, anything that draws aggro off the melee players is a good thing.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing… CC really is useless against tough critters and knowing how to draw aggro at the right time is a nice skill to have.

GrimmR.3541:

Oh guys, i had a good laugh at the start of this thread. The advice to take carrion is just ridiculous. (Do you want to wait 5min to see your enemy going down by conditions?)
Or also those guys who came around with axes and longbows; he asked for MELEE recommendations..
Nevertheless do i still think everyone should play how he wants.

As a dedicated ranger player i have to say that people tend to overreact when the sword is concerned. It is quite smooth to play if you practise it alot. (Would start with heartquests to learn it)
Greatsword on the other hand is more tankier due to the extrablock, the stun and the evade but it also does less dps.

Now you can call me a **** or elitist or whatever, i don’t care, my runs are still fast and i don’t have to rezz after every boss! Strange without any knight gear or even rabbids.
Have fun!

I must say, at first I was angry at the backlash against carrion gear on melle rangers, but now I am just finding the whole discussion rather amusing. I know it’s not very Meta, and it’s honestly a little overpowered in my opinion, but I am starting to think the disagreements have more to do with flame trolls than anything.

There are a few points I’ll leave the non-trolls with:

Carrion is not a bunker set. It is a major in condition and minor in power, and the only set that has this very powerful stat combination (a major in one of power or condition and a minor in the other). There are no carrion trinkets as I suspect a full set would mess up the balance and be way overpowered.

Might grants both power And condition damage. Emphasis on the And.

A max condition build mixed with four power builds works really well In dungeons.

If you really study the trains lines, rangers are designed for these kind of builds. Just look at it. Power is with condition duration, toughness is with condition damage.

There are some interesting berserkerish style ranger builds that I really enjoy using, so don’t think I am saying these are horrible. This is not at all my point.

Finally, I am not speaking to Bambi, Turtleduck, or Fluffinutter as you are beyond reason, and are having fun flaming others. I already know you disagree vehemently with what I am saying, and your views and deriding comments drive the point home to everyone reading this forum.

I wouldn’t want to speak to you either. You’ve made several incorrect statements, tell people they’re wrong without backing it up, accuse people of strawman arguments and tried to discredit me instead of supporting your own claims. You’ve also been very immature and stubborn in your responses (Cute nicknames btw). This is why I can’t take you seriously and point out incorrect PvE statements such as this:

A max condition build mixed with four power builds works really well In dungeons.

There is no objective benefit to bringing 1 condi DPS to dungeons/fractals.

Fluffball.8307:

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

And please, don’t tell me to “play how I want” while simultaneously disparaging my style of play.

If you’re in a play how you want group, I have no problems what so ever with you using a longbow and having a full sentinels warrior up front tanking. Have at it, hoss.

On the other hand, anyone from the above group is completely incompatible with the meta. More and more I’m kicking bearbows on sight just because I know they are going to be responsible for the run not going smoothly. I only hate ranged PvE rangers because they make my play experience absolutely miserable. If you want to rag about the berserker melee mesmer being dead all the time in your holy trinity group, that’s totally legit as well. The two play styles are not compatible.

Fair enough Fluff, thanks for the spirited debate and glory to your warband.

that baby stealing dingo.7216:

Fair enough Fluff, thanks for the spirited debate and glory to your warband.

I’m human! Charr have bad armor clipping problems.

Archon.6480:

GrimmR.3541:

Oh guys, i had a good laugh at the start of this thread. The advice to take carrion is just ridiculous. (Do you want to wait 5min to see your enemy going down by conditions?)
Or also those guys who came around with axes and longbows; he asked for MELEE recommendations..
Nevertheless do i still think everyone should play how he wants.

As a dedicated ranger player i have to say that people tend to overreact when the sword is concerned. It is quite smooth to play if you practise it alot. (Would start with heartquests to learn it)
Greatsword on the other hand is more tankier due to the extrablock, the stun and the evade but it also does less dps.

Now you can call me a **** or elitist or whatever, i don’t care, my runs are still fast and i don’t have to rezz after every boss! Strange without any knight gear or even rabbids.
Have fun!

I must say, at first I was angry at the backlash against carrion gear on melle rangers, but now I am just finding the whole discussion rather amusing. I know it’s not very Meta, and it’s honestly a little overpowered in my opinion, but I am starting to think the disagreements have more to do with flame trolls than anything.

There are a few points I’ll leave the non-trolls with:

Carrion is not a bunker set. It is a major in condition and minor in power, and the only set that has this very powerful stat combination (a major in one of power or condition and a minor in the other). There are no carrion trinkets as I suspect a full set would mess up the balance and be way overpowered.

Might grants both power And condition damage. Emphasis on the And.

A max condition build mixed with four power builds works really well In dungeons.

If you really study the trains lines, rangers are designed for these kind of builds. Just look at it. Power is with condition duration, toughness is with condition damage.

There are some interesting berserkerish style ranger builds that I really enjoy using, so don’t think I am saying these are horrible. This is not at all my point.

Finally, I am not speaking to Bambi, Turtleduck, or Fluffinutter as you are beyond reason, and are having fun flaming others. I already know you disagree vehemently with what I am saying, and your views and deriding comments drive the point home to everyone reading this forum.

Ranger condition damage isn’t even good. You can put an engineer in full Carrion getting 25 stacks of bleed without any crits at all and he’ll still be hitting more in zerk.

Even assuming you’re actually 50/50 between condition damage and direct damage, Carrion isn’t going to come remotely close because you’re splitting your damage output between two different types then splitting it again in stats. So not only are you dealing less direct damage on account of using a weapon that is meant for condition damage, you’re getting less power scaling because you’re not in zerk.

maybe… just maybe… we should get TurtleDragon to upload some dps tests with carrion vs. berserker on the various weapons? traited and all (pets too), i’d say. like, just to really hit the point home (or not – my inclanation is the former, though)

i mean… what else are we gonna do with our time? (and by “we” i mean TurtleDragon)

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

maybe… just maybe… we should get TurtleDragon to upload some dps tests with carrion vs. berserker on the various weapons? traited and all (pets too), i’d say. like, just to really hit the point home (or not – my inclanation is the former, though)

i mean… what else are we gonna do with our time? (and by “we” i mean TurtleDragon)

The reason the meta is meta is because literally hundreds of thousands of players have reviewed and checked the math and actual application in a real life scenarios.

If carrion was more effective than berserker, it would be pounced on by thousands of players. It’s not. And it is not used.

People want rewards as fast as possible and carrion does not provide that.

Also if Archon had any legs to stand on he’d post his ideas in the dungeon forum instead of the ranger forum. If he were right he would completely change the way hundreds of thousands of people play.

The real problem with carrion in pve is that everyone deals condition damage without intending to and the condition cap is maxed out with low tick bleeds. Unless they change the way conditions work in pve instances direct damage will always be superior.

Also blinds, blocks, dodges are far superior to tanky armor. Building tanky just makes the fight take longer leading to an increased chance of wiping.

I don’t like this set up, I would much prefer damage, support and control to be the best way to beat content, but ignoring the reality of how dungeons work isn’t helping anyone.

Fluff and Turtle are right, but yeah, we are just elitists. What do we know, right ? Its not like people who actually created the meta builds have tried every combination..

Also carrion is a bit overpowered ? What ? Sorry to destroy ypur illusions but carrion isn’t even compareable with zerk dps.

I mean you can still play with carrion gear and you can still go with longbow and bears. But you will also need way more time that way. And thats why rangers are still getting kicked.. So as you can see, the bad state the ranger is in atm. is a result of players who go with “I play how i want”.

Don’t get me wrong i mean i don’t really care how you play. I have my guildmates and friends so i will never get kicked or anything. Its just sad about the potential of the class itself..

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

maybe… just maybe… we should get TurtleDragon to upload some dps tests with carrion vs. berserker on the various weapons? traited and all (pets too), i’d say. like, just to really hit the point home (or not – my inclanation is the former, though)

i mean… what else are we gonna do with our time? (and by “we” i mean TurtleDragon)

It’d be a waste of time. For the other weapons, I don’t already know their coefficient of DPS. I’m sure plenty of other people have done the math already, just maybe not with the same spreadsheet I used.

For some of the spreadsheets I’ve already uploaded (Sword, Axe, GS), it’s fairly easy to see the difference between berserker and carrion. Take a build editor like this one, swap the gear to carrion and then change the power, crit chance and crit damage in the spreadsheet.

Jim Hunter.6821:

I don’t like this set up, I would much prefer damage, support and control to be the best way to beat content, but ignoring the reality of how dungeons work isn’t helping anyone

Well, you still support and control with berserker builds. I think people just expect to CC-train bosses for the entire fight or have 1 person gear or trait for CC at the expense of their damage. You just have those responsibilities divided equally among the 5 members of your party. Eg. Ranger support is buffing the party’s damage output with condition removal and regen as bonuses and can swap to GS or LB for CC.

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

this is terribly off-topic, but…

Solandri.9640:

In AD&D and other games with the holy trinity (tank, nuker, healer), the way it broke down was that ranged characters did substantially more DPS than melee characters. But they were squishy and in order to deliver that DPS, they needed melee to tank for them. Melee’s job wasn’t to deliver damage, it was to absorb it so range could deliver damage.

there never was a “trinity” in the mmo sense of the word in (tabletop) roleplaying. reason being, the DM controls the monsters, not an AI routine, and certainly not a threat list. aggro is a computer thing, and the trinity mechanic to latch onto that is too (actually, i don’t know if maybe the trinity idea came first, and AI was designed to accomodate it… let’s just say it’s a joint thing then).

Hmm, that’s not how it worked in the pen and paper RPGs I played. Most of our combat happened in cramped dungeons. The tanks, by virtue of being in front, physically prevented monsters from being able to tag the squishies in the back row (you can’t just run through other beings like you can in GW2). In open combat, if a monster targeted a squishy, a tank would “protect” the squishy by engaging the monster. The squishy would then keep moving around to kite it through the tank. If the monster continued chasing the squishy, it would just be giving free attacks of opportunity to the tank.

Melee against casters was thus mostly negated, and most fights boiled down to which side’s casters could burn down/disable the other side’s casters quickest. The rock-paper-scissors effect of the trinity worked. Without the melee tanks to protect them, the casters were quickly cut to mincemeat by opposing melee, before they could get too many nukes off.

Fluffball.8307:

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

dps tests with carrion vs. berserker

players have reviewed and checked the math and actual application in a real life scenarios

yeah, it wasn’t intended for my benefit. just seems like there’re still people who need to know.

Solandri.9640:

Hmm, that’s not how it worked in the pen and paper RPGs I played. Most of our combat happened in cramped dungeons. The tanks, by virtue of being in front, physically prevented monsters from being able to tag the squishies in the back row (you can’t just run through other beings like you can in GW2). In open combat, if a monster targeted a squishy, a tank would “protect” the squishy by engaging the monster. The squishy would then keep moving around to kite it through the tank. If the monster continued chasing the squishy, it would just be giving free attacks of opportunity to the tank.

Melee against casters was thus mostly negated, and most fights boiled down to which side’s casters could burn down/disable the other side’s casters quickest. The rock-paper-scissors effect of the trinity worked. Without the melee tanks to protect them, the casters were quickly cut to mincemeat by opposing melee, before they could get too many nukes off.

but this is indeed something else. there’s no background programming telling the enemies to only hit whatever has the highest threat (that’s how aggro works, after all) – it’s in the hands of the DM instead.

the “tank” moniker still applies, of course.

TurtleDragon.3108:

Jim Hunter.6821:

I don’t like this set up, I would much prefer damage, support and control to be the best way to beat content, but ignoring the reality of how dungeons work isn’t helping anyone

Well, you still support and control with berserker builds. I think people just expect to CC-train bosses for the entire fight or have 1 person gear or trait for CC at the expense of their damage. You just have those responsibilities divided equally among the 5 members of your party. Eg. Ranger support is buffing the party’s damage output with condition removal and regen as bonuses and can swap to GS or LB for CC.

That’s the problem. There is no reason to run anything but zerk because the useful boons in dungeons don’t need you to spec heavily into anything else. What good does healing do when the bosses have big, highly telegraphed, 1 shot kill moves? DoT damage is ineffective because of the way conditions work in the game. You can’t even spec into control. So the only reason to run anything but a max dps build is because a player wants to be selfish. (With the exception of guild groups screwing around for fun)

Jim Hunter.6821:

TurtleDragon.3108:

Jim Hunter.6821:

I don’t like this set up, I would much prefer damage, support and control to be the best way to beat content, but ignoring the reality of how dungeons work isn’t helping anyone

Well, you still support and control with berserker builds. I think people just expect to CC-train bosses for the entire fight or have 1 person gear or trait for CC at the expense of their damage. You just have those responsibilities divided equally among the 5 members of your party. Eg. Ranger support is buffing the party’s damage output with condition removal and regen as bonuses and can swap to GS or LB for CC.

That’s the problem. There is no reason to run anything but zerk because the useful boons in dungeons don’t need you to spec heavily into anything else. What good does healing do when the bosses have big, highly telegraphed, 1 shot kill moves? DoT damage is ineffective because of the way conditions work in the game. You can’t even spec into control. So the only reason to run anything but a max dps build is because a player wants to be selfish. (With the exception of guild groups screwing around for fun)

I dunno, I think it’s fine the way it is. It’s not as black and white as you’re making it sound, there are viable support builds that are not Max DPS. Phalanx strength is the most recent example of this, you do garbage DPS but you buff your party by a gigantic amount. Guardian builds can still spec into virtues for support, Strength runes are not max dps,but people run them anyways for support, etc. Although, taking a build that has both inferior support and inferior DPS is a problem.

If anything I’d say DPS builds other than melee zerkers needed to be buffed, but it would have very big balance issues. Class balance is also a problem, speed runs shouldn’t be about stacking eles in your composition. I also feel that melee DPS needs to be far more rewarding than ranged DPS, which directly contradicts what i said 2 sentences ago. It’s hard issue to solve.

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

There would still need to be other changes to make condis viable, but that would be an amazing start.

we’re getting totally off track here, but still, i like the discussion and feel like we should keep it up, regardless of the location

TurtleDragon.3108:

<1> Phalanx strength is the most recent example of this, you do garbage DPS but you buff your party by a gigantic amount.
<2> Strength runes are not max dps,but people run them anyways for support, etc.
<3> I also feel that melee DPS needs to be far more rewarding than ranged DPS

1: garbage compared to who?
2: support, in a phalanx build, or?
3: how do you figure? i mean, this whole thread has majorly been about ranged being behind melee. you want to increase that distance? why?

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

are you referring to burn stacks only?
i totally agree that condition stacking should be different. actually, stacking in general – like, i stopped running might-on-crit on my guardian because i realized i was potentially removing long-duration stacks and replacing them with low-duration ones. silly…

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

are you referring to burn stacks only?

Ya guardians will be constantly overriding a condi char’s burning. As I’m sure you know, almost all classes (which are running berserker) are putting out a ton of condis accidentally.

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

we’re getting totally off track here, but still, i like the discussion and feel like we should keep it up, regardless of the location

TurtleDragon.3108:

<1> Phalanx strength is the most recent example of this, you do garbage DPS but you buff your party by a gigantic amount.
<2> Strength runes are not max dps,but people run them anyways for support, etc.
<3> I also feel that melee DPS needs to be far more rewarding than ranged DPS

1: garbage compared to who?
2: support, in a phalanx build, or?
3: how do you figure? i mean, this whole thread has majorly been about ranged being behind melee. you want to increase that distance? why?

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

are you referring to burn stacks only?
i totally agree that condition stacking should be different. actually, stacking in general – like, i stopped running might-on-crit on my guardian because i realized i was potentially removing long-duration stacks and replacing them with low-duration ones. silly…

1. Compared to other warrior builds
http://i.imgur.com/hHz4ukG.jpg
Phalanx is the first one. You sacrifice a lot of personal DPS when you run this build.

2. Not sure what you’re asking here. But the other reason to run strength runes is because the modifier is easier to maintain.

3. Out of context, it would appear this way, but I was saying to decrease the gap while making melee still better

Fluffball.8307:

all classes (which are running berserker) are putting out a ton of condis accidentally.

it’s hard to imagine how to fix the situation. there really ought to be a prority system in place, or some sort of refreshing trick.

TurtleDragon.3108:

1. Compared to other warrior builds

ah, makes sense now.
btw. i’m guessing the comparison doesn’t take phalanx strength group (potential) benefits into account…

2. Not sure what you’re asking here. But the other reason to run strength runes is because the modifier is easier to maintain.

it’s just that you wrote “support”, and i couldn’t see how strength runes figured into that.

3. decrease the gap while making melee still better

i’m afraid i don’t see the logic in this at all. buff everything, but ranged just a wee bit more? could you elaborate on your ideas here?

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

snip

Giving might to your allies is support, and strength runes make you better at doing that. They’re really strong on Phalanx warriors and Elementalists, but they are obviously not the maximum DPS option, it’s still scholar. Depending on the build/class, strength runes are also good for soloing and PUGs.

I was referring to things like condition DPS and ranged DPS, I did not mean to include melee in there. The only advantage ranged has right now is safety, if Ranged DPS was as good as melee dps then there’d be no reason to melee fights like Mossman or Archdiviner. I don’t want go into more details on the gap between melee and ranged because we’ve discussed it a lot already in this thread.

I’m also not a balance expert or game designer lol, I was just trying to suggest things that would make things other than zerker viable. I think the things that would make the biggest difference while keeping the theme of the game intact is to increase all buff/boon range to 1200, and to somehow make Condition/Hybrid DPS competitive (by changing mechanics and/or theoretical damage) with berserker builds without breaking it in PvP.

TurtleDragon.3108:

Giving might to your allies is support, and strength runes make you better at doing that.

ohh, duration-wise, check. now i get what you meant.

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

There would still need to be other changes to make condis viable, but that would be an amazing start.

So we agree then! A carrion melle ranger with 1900+ in condition with this amazing “change” would be viable! I knew I could bring you to my side of thinking!!!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Effect_stacking

I know it works because I run it from time to time. It can melt anything. Really.

Archon.6480:

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

There would still need to be other changes to make condis viable, but that would be an amazing start.

So we agree then! A carrion melle ranger with 1900+ in condition with this amazing “change” would be viable! I knew I could bring you to my side of thinking!!!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Effect_stacking

I know it works because I run it from time to time. It can melt anything. Really.

No you’re still completely wrong. I’m sure it does work, it just is subpar. I am pretty sure you either aren’t reading the thread, or you know you’re wrong.

Edit to clarify: You skipped over a dozen posts explaining why you’re wrong to quote one post you thought supported you (and even it clearly doesn’t, and you don’t understand that even stacking conditions can be “overridden” by people with lower condition damage.)

People who run dungeons want rewards as fast as possible. If you think there is anything to this theory, I beg you to post it in the dungeon forum where more than just me and 5 other people can explain why you’re wrong using math and experience. In fact I’ll do it for you.

The only thing that would make conditions viable is a serious damage scaling boost, either with precision or power. As it is even 25 stacks of bleed with no conflict with any other party member’s conditions still won’t do as much as a pure zerk setup.

Archon.6480:

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

There would still need to be other changes to make condis viable, but that would be an amazing start.

So we agree then! A carrion melle ranger with 1900+ in condition with this amazing “change” would be viable! I knew I could bring you to my side of thinking!!!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Effect_stacking

I know it works because I run it from time to time. It can melt anything. Really.

I guess you missed this Currently no information on how stacks are dropped when extras occur. in the wiki.

For arguments sake lets say that conditions always work the way you think they do. What happens when someone comes in with slightly higher condition damage than you? You are now contributing next to nothing to the run because of your insistence to use conditions.

Do what you like when running with guildies and friends but don’t try to convince other people that it’s a good idea.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Archon.6480:

Fluffball.8307:

One simple change to start increasing viable builds would be making the person with the highest condi damage actually get to do the damage. Doesn’t matter how boss your condi damage is, you aren’t the one doing it, it’s the berserker guardian.

There would still need to be other changes to make condis viable, but that would be an amazing start.

So we agree then! A carrion melle ranger with 1900+ in condition with this amazing “change” would be viable! I knew I could bring you to my side of thinking!!!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Effect_stacking

I know it works because I run it from time to time. It can melt anything. Really.

I guess you missed this Currently no information on how stacks are dropped when extras occur. in the wiki.

For arguments sake lets say that conditions always work the way you think they do. What happens when someone comes in with slightly higher condition damage than you? You are now contributing next to nothing to the run because of your insistence to use conditions.

Do what you like when running with guildies and friends but don’t try to convince other people that it’s a good idea.

Well, I do what I want and that includes sharing some of the powerful builds I’ve discovered with others. Conditions do work the way the wiki says and my conditions don’t even get bumped in huge PvE zeg-fests (temple runs). If a 5 man dungeon team/pug has another high condition dealer swap to something else. I mean, really? Takes about 30s to re-trait and swap on kudzu and swords.

I ran Queens gauntlet last night with carrion set, to test my sanity. Beat everyone the first time except fire guy (switched to bow for him) and deadeye. He took 4 tries. Laidre took about 15 and I switched to SB and celestial/travelers with full zerker trinkets to finish that fight.

And to everyone that is thinking they are elite for droning on about only using full zerker, I just think they are inexperienced. They blather about kicking people because of bad builds or whatever. Honestly, this is the scum of GW. If you were running decent builds you should have no problem carrying a few beginners through a dungeon quickly. Seriously. I take pride in never having to kick anyone from a pug. If you didn’t bring crap builds and had what I consider skill, newer players would not be in control of your survival and would have only a small impact on run time.

So go on and gang up with a group of like minded speed glitch flunkies and flame everyone for not standing in the only spot you won’t be insta-wiped for being a flunky. But don’t think you are elite or try to convince others everything else is sub-par.

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

The only thing that would make conditions viable is a serious damage scaling boost, either with precision or power. As it is even 25 stacks of bleed with no conflict with any other party member’s conditions still won’t do as much as a pure zerk setup.

As if the moment you start dealing damage with conditions your weapons stop dealing damage altogether and your pet’s (we have a pet?) claws fall out.

TurtleDragon.3108:

thomasgjkgwdn.4760:

snip

Giving might to your allies is support, and strength runes make you better at doing that. They’re really strong on Phalanx warriors and Elementalists, but they are obviously not the maximum DPS option, it’s still scholar. Depending on the build/class, strength runes are also good for soloing and PUGs.

I was referring to things like condition DPS and ranged DPS, I did not mean to include melee in there. The only advantage ranged has right now is safety, if Ranged DPS was as good as melee dps then there’d be no reason to melee fights like Mossman or Archdiviner. I don’t want go into more details on the gap between melee and ranged because we’ve discussed it a lot already in this thread.

I’m also not a balance expert or game designer lol, I was just trying to suggest things that would make things other than zerker viable. I think the things that would make the biggest difference while keeping the theme of the game intact is to increase all buff/boon range to 1200, and to somehow make Condition/Hybrid DPS competitive (by changing mechanics and/or theoretical damage) with berserker builds without breaking it in PvP.

What is the DPS (Damage Per Second) of a ranged weapon that does zero damage but applies 10 stacks of vulnerability to a boss for for 10 seconds, in a 5 man team with each other team member dealing 5000 damage a second? Let’s assume the ranged weapon does zero damage per second while applying the vulnerability to make the math easy.

Oh, I had missed this thread, but…

I use LB and Axe/Wahorn on most fractals for 48-50 with celestial/zerker mix. The mainhand axe will do 1500-1800 damage per bounce against most things, which is pretty high.

Archon.6480:

For PvE melle in dungeons I recommend carrion stats with sword/torch and GS or sword/axe. Use flame trap. Just ball up enemies and put them in fire field. Most competent groups will max team might with you fire fields. Everything will melt. Use offhand axe for retaliation (some foes are weak to this). Use leaps on GS and sword to give you fire aura. Enjoy!

…Dear…

I must say, at first I was angry at the backlash against carrion gear on melle rangers, but now I am just finding the whole discussion rather amusing. I know it’s not very Meta, and it’s honestly a little overpowered in my opinion, but I am starting to think the disagreements have more to do with flame trolls than anything.

There are a few points I’ll leave the non-trolls with:

Carrion is not a bunker set. It is a major in condition and minor in power, and the only set that has this very powerful stat combination (a major in one of power or condition and a minor in the other). There are no carrion trinkets as I suspect a full set would mess up the balance and be way overpowered.

…Lord!