Guild Wars 2

We don’t mind warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control, but we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.

In order to understand this nerf we will use deductive reasoning to see if the arguments premises necessitate the conclusion. If the premise is true than the conclusion must be true.

To do this we will switch the sentence so that it reads backwards becasue if the conclusion is true than the premise must be true.

We are trying to prevent warriors from easily doing great area of effect and control, or easily doing doing massive damage. However we don’t mind them doing both.

This statement is very problematic.
First ANET you never proved that it is easy. And failed to state in what context it is easy. Is it easy vs another profession that can dodge, use stability, blink, stealth, stun break. Answer is no. Is it going to be just as easy after you just extensively buffed the other professions the answer is no.

So ANET not only did you fail to prove that it was easy but you also failed to prove it would be easy without the nerf to warrior assuming the buffs to other professions go as planed and no change to warriors occurred in the same process.

Secondly ANET, you said we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.
This is a conjecture becasue in the 1st part of your statement by saying that "warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control you imply that they do not do both. By saying “OR” instead of “BOTH”

The 1st part of the statement is true. But the second part of the statement is false. How do we know becasue the 1st and the 2nd part of the statement do not have the same conclusion. Thus the statement is false.

Conclusion.

This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

Edited Spelling.

they only changed the hammer traits and reduced the long bow’s burst skill damage by 15%

my precious healing signet is untouched.

Warlord.9074:

And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

Your signature:
Just press 2 to win all the dps was us because we’re a warrior and we are the best class.
SoR Warrior TSYM

I honestly don’t mind….

Gives me a reason to work on another class. After the thief changes it actually might be fun to try since i wont have to sit there and micromanage a resource while trying to bust things.

You seem to have taken some philosophy class, and I woulda taken you seriously if you didn’t make spelling mistakes. Trying to sound intelligent and making simple spelling mistakes is… interesting, to say the least.

As for the Warrior nerfs… instead of getting caught up in little words and “what if they meant this? They should have used this word instead of that”, try playing WvW and then come back here. If you say Warriors still aren’t OP then… well… we all know who to not take seriously.

Thanks for your time,
A realist.

I have a suggestion for you go play an engi, or a ranger in WvW come back and then say Warriors are not OP.

Engi gets nerfed in mostly every patch.

Now when the warrior gets a little nerf the crying starts, you will get over it!

OP you should consider the fact that the very sentence you posted can be interpreted in many other ways, many hinting at the hammer skillset just like the decemeber 10th balance changed preview post does.

Also, devs don’t need to prove anything about incoming buffs or nerfs: the fact that they didn’t prove the 2 points you refer to in the 2nd paragraph doesn’t mean that the nerf can’t be based on those two points (it only means they didn’t want to prove those things, or maybe that they didn’t have the time to do so, or maybe that they can’t, but in any case it doesn’t mean those 2 points are totally false, hence the nerf may still have a reason to happen).

MethaneGas.8357:

You seem to have taken some philosophy class, and I woulda taken you seriously if you didn’t make spelling mistakes. Trying to sound intelligent and making simple spelling mistakes is… interesting, to say the least.

As for the Warrior nerfs… instead of getting caught up in little words and “what if they meant this? They should have used this word instead of that”, try playing WvW and then come back here. If you say Warriors still aren’t OP then… well… we all know who to not take seriously.

Thanks for your time,
A realist.

Resorting to an attack on my grammar is your counter argument well noted. And stating that I have not tryed WvW does not prove your point either. As you have no knowledge if I have tryed wvw or not. At no point did I state that warriors are OP, based on the conclusion of your rhetorical reply I have no reason to believe that you are a realist since, what you said about me was not real it was fake.

There is no burden of proof on Anet in this matter.

Warlord.9074:

MethaneGas.8357:

You seem to have taken some philosophy class, and I woulda taken you seriously if you didn’t make spelling mistakes. Trying to sound intelligent and making simple spelling mistakes is… interesting, to say the least.

As for the Warrior nerfs… instead of getting caught up in little words and “what if they meant this? They should have used this word instead of that”, try playing WvW and then come back here. If you say Warriors still aren’t OP then… well… we all know who to not take seriously.

Thanks for your time,
A realist.

Resorting to an attack on my grammar is your counter argument well noted. And stating that I have not tr*i*ed WvW does not prove your point either. As you have no knowledge if I have tr*i*ed wvw or not. At no point did I state that warriors are OP, based on the conclusion of your rhetorical reply I have no reason to believe that you are a realist since, what you said about me was not real it was fake.

fixed that for you. also, that last sentence, triple negative and a positive?

as for the topic at hand: Warriors are so OP it’s not even funny at this point. really. Warrior class -right now- is for those who want the “newborn” mode of GW2: where all you have to do is drool and everybody falls at your feet. Which can be a nice reprise from playing ele or engi or ranger as nobody actually likes dying all the time.

Warlord.9074:

• We don’t mind warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control, but we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.

In order to understand this nerf we will use deductive reasoning to see if the arguments premises necessitate the conclusion. If the premise is true than the conclusion must be true.

To do this we will switch the sentence so that it reads backwards because if the conclusion is true than the premise must be true.

• We are trying to prevent warriors from easily doing great area of effect and control, or easily doing doing massive damage. However we don’t mind them doing both.

Firstly, this second statement is utter nonsense, and relates in absolutely no way to the first. In fact, it’s the complete opposite to what they said, making what you said essentially a strawman argument.

First statement says that they don’t want both high damage and CC to be possible.

Your reversed statement says that they don’t want high damage to be easy or CC to be easy, but they don’t mind them being able to do both.

Warlord.9074:

This statement is very problematic.

First ANET you never proved that it is easy. And failed to state in what context it is easy. Is it easy vs another profession that can dodge, use stability, blink, stealth, stun break. Answer is no. Is it going to be just as easy after you just extensively buffed the other professions the answer is no.

So ANET not only did you fail to prove that it was easy but you also failed to prove it would be easy without the nerf to warrior assuming the buffs to other professions go as planed and no change to warriors occurred in the same process.

What do they need to do to prove it? Provide video evidence? Also, while the burden of proof does lie with Anet, in order to provide the counter point, you also need to provide evidence that the nerf is for ‘no good reason’.

The thing with balancing is it’s done in-house. If they’ve tried the build that allows both high damage and high amount of CC, and they’ve seen the build can provide both, then yes, it’s due a nerf, since you don’t need to sacrifice one or the other.

As for it being ‘easy’, by your logic, nothing should be nerfed ever, based on the premise of the other professions being able to do x, y and z.

Also, in this case, I’m pretty sure they’re referring to it’s ‘easy’ to build for both good CC and damage, since utilising it (as with every other profession) will depend on the player’s personal level of skill.

Warlord.9074:

Secondly ANET, you said we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.

1. This is a conjecture because in the 1st part of your statement by saying that "warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control’ you imply that they do not do both. By saying “OR” instead of “BOTH”.

2. The 1st part of the statement is true. But the second part of the statement is false. How do we know because the 1st and the 2nd part of the statement do not have the same conclusion. Thus the statement is false.

1. Your statement is conjecture, since you’re ‘analysing’ only a select part of it to support your argument. If we look at the full statement, the do imply that they can easily do both. Thus the reason for the nerf.

2. Your reasoning is based off of the ‘deductive reasoning’ that completely twisted the words to have no resemblance to the original statement. Thus your argument is invalid.

Warlord.9074:

Conclusion.

This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

And yet, as I said above, you also failed to show any data to support your point that the nerf is unjustified.

That was quite an entertaining read.

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

I am with the OP. I only play warrior in both PVE and WVW because I wanted to raceroll any jabroni that was dumb enough to make a different class. But maybe this was the attitude that Anet wanted to fix because I really do feel like in a 1v1 fight against a class that is not another warrior I will win about 80% of the time and to be honest I am not even close to the best player. I do think that the nerf is a little bit overkill especially since I am very close to crafting juggernaut

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

Eric.1340:

I am with the OP. I only play warrior in both PVE and WVW because I wanted to raceroll any jabroni that was dumb enough to make a different class. But maybe this was the attitude that Anet wanted to fix because I really do feel like in a 1v1 fight against a class that is not another warrior I will win about 80% of the time and to be honest I am not even close to the best player. I do think that the nerf is a little bit overkill especially since I am very close to crafting juggernaut

Oh poor soul i feel with you

Ravenmoon.5318:

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

So you’re denying that warrior is an easy class to play? Probably the easiest.

Here I was thinking Warrior was getting nerfed for very good reasons.

I’m so glad this thread set me straight.

((snort))

Ravenmoon.5318:

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

I think you dont get it sure can anyone beat the other class, but as an engi i need to do a lot more for it as a coward thief or a warrior.

Haralin.1473:

Eric.1340:

I am with the OP. I only play warrior in both PVE and WVW because I wanted to raceroll any jabroni that was dumb enough to make a different class. But maybe this was the attitude that Anet wanted to fix because I really do feel like in a 1v1 fight against a class that is not another warrior I will win about 80% of the time and to be honest I am not even close to the best player. I do think that the nerf is a little bit overkill especially since I am very close to crafting juggernaut

Oh poor soul i feel with you

hahaha well at least I will look cool even if I can’t kill anything right?

Yenn.9185:

Ravenmoon.5318:

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

So you’re denying that warrior is an easy class to play? Probably the easiest.

A full berserker warrior has less armor than well spec-ed thief. Maybe in PvE that is no brainer but once the warrior pops that endure pain he’s a goner.

Yes it’s easy class to begin with BUT it does have some advanced tactics which makes it hillariously powerful at times (like the stunlock warriors out there!) and it also has its weaknesses.

1 thing is valid through the whole game, if you are not careful, you will die. That applies to warriors-alike. Especially in PvP, where your opponent is actually trying to kill you with kitten nal of their own.

PS: And calling thieves cowards is a stupid thing to say. What … you want to be tanked by a thief or something? Preferably without dodges too? How about no armor? Geez….

Ravenmoon.5318:

Yes it’s easy class to begin with BUT it does have some advanced tactics which makes it hillariously powerful at times (like the stunlock warriors out there!) and it also has its weaknesses.

TIL: stunlock =advanced tactics.

I don’t have a hammer warrior. Never even considered the weapon. This thread has fired up my interest.

Don’t worry, Warrior and guardians will always be the strongest in WvWvW and dungeons/fractals, PvP is another matter though.

We’re all saying: Our profession don’t need a nerf, i’m playing necro only in PvE so don’t worry i know how you feel about getting nerfed but your nerf is nothing really, you’ll still be wanted in PvE and WvWvW.

Warlord.9074:

We don’t mind warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control, but we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.

In order to understand this nerf we will use deductive reasoning to see if the arguments premises necessitate the conclusion. If the premise is true than the conclusion must be true.

To do this we will switch the sentence so that it reads backwards becasue if the conclusion is true than the premise must be true.

We are trying to prevent warriors from easily doing great area of effect and control, or easily doing doing massive damage. However we don’t mind them doing both.

---

This statement is very problematic.
First ANET you never proved that it is easy. And failed to state in what context it is easy. Is it easy vs another profession that can dodge, use stability, blink, stealth, stun break. Answer is no. Is it going to be just as easy after you just extensively buffed the other professions the answer is no.

So ANET not only did you fail to prove that it was easy but you also failed to prove it would be easy without the nerf to warrior assuming the buffs to other professions go as planed and no change to warriors occurred in the same process.

Secondly ANET, you said we’re trying to prevent them from easily doing both.
This is a conjecture becasue in the 1st part of your statement by saying that "warriors doing massive damage, or doing great area of effect control you imply that they do not do both. By saying “OR” instead of “BOTH”

The 1st part of the statement is true. But the second part of the statement is false. How do we know becasue the 1st and the 2nd part of the statement do not have the same conclusion. Thus the statement is false.

Conclusion.

This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

Edited Spelling.

Um seriously…. u should play other class…..
I’ll give u simply a simple build of a poor warrior build without any expensive rune. and without any ascended equipment. for pve.

http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fIAQNAnXRjgOJvNPuQMxBEkCNsKUKmD3I9ANGw0A-jkxAYLBxkXR0YbGFRjVxgpPJiq9JFRrGA-w

U can heal when u Shout… 1660 heal for each shout with simply 3 shout better than normal heal other jobs can do with 24 cd max? and 54% crit chance with perma fury, and 93% crit damage…..

u can get 1840 power with 23k Health pool and almost 2800 armor. Seriously maybe u should try to play an ele or a guardian ( the jobs with the lowest health pool) and try to fight against Warrior….

Where are the buffs to other classes OP is talking about? I don’t see any.

Sincerely,

An Elementalist.

STRanger.5120:

Where are the buffs to other classes OP is talking about? I don’t see any.

Sincerely,

An Elementalist.

But… But, they buffed fire spec slightly in order to make it barely viable :P

Everything stated by the OP is true. However the reference, “…We don’t mind…” Is being inferred that a-net is supportive of these aspects, when to say, “…don’t mind…” actually infers indifference/ambivalence.

I am in the camp that hammer needed toning down in PvP, but hammer is decidedly weak and lacking it’s teeth in higher lvl PvE. The changes in my opinion are myopic. They appease people in the short run, but ultimately will need changing again. The longer term solution was skill splitting in PvP.

unsuspecting foe dropped from 50% to 25%. This gives cause and effect for warriors to want to have access to fury.

Merciless hammer description changed from “20% additional damage to disabled” to “stunned.”

Eathshaker AoE field reduced in size.

This would suitably make hammer more rewarding and powerful to players who effectively use boons and can target on the fly and leave PvE untouched.

As for longbow nerfs, well a number of players have already torn the reasoning behind the nerf to shreds. The argument about adrenaline and so forth has all been disproved. The opening statement to the nerf was, “We’ve looked long and hard…” and upon player testing has shown all the stated fact are 90% untrue.

As for the statement, “If you want damage play greatsword/axe” With changes to burst mastery these same stated nerfs also nerf the go to builds for axe/greatsword.

The moving of unsuspect foe from adept to master is in my opinion low hanging fruit.

I agree hammer needed adjusting. I support a-net making adjustments when something is proving itself to be overwhelming..I just don’t see eye to eye on the changes made for the long haul, which bring this back to the original statement, “Politically orientated” nerfs.

A-net has been kind enough to state the code of behaviour required by posters in order for them to objectively evaluate posts on forums. It is well known any posts that are too malicious will receive infractions, yet legit posts that are factual, logical and deserving of response go untouched and pics of twerking kraits get commented on.

This could be viewed as selective and/or cherry picking as opposed to engaging in the era of C.D.I communications which seems to be heavily promoted at the moment.

Is is great they have provided a forum, this is beyond doubt, but providing a forum is not the same as providing logic. When logic is being submitted to forums and it is not at very least being taken under advisement,..well what is the point of the forum to begin with?

Ravenmoon.5318:

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

haha! warrior is so easy to use that i think my 5 signet warrior can beat your thief u want it in wvw or tpvp?
its ok if i lose,i can just say “i used a 5 signet warrior,what do u expect?” haha!

With Hambow we had…
a 2 sec AoE stun on an 8 second cd WITH high crit/burst
a condi immunity
high regen
condi removal
range AoE+combo field with high damage
Enough armor to last in any team fight

No other class/build in the game is this flawless, in fact the last time I remember a class having this much utility was just after launch when eles were the hotness, and we saw what happened to them. We had to lose something, looks like it’s damage.

As far as PvE goes, I think they could help issue with hammers in the Merciless Hammer trait by adding the following bold to the trait.

Hammer damage is increased by 25% when a foe is disabled, or has 1 or more stacks of defiant.

“This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. "

False data like everyone dropping their old class and starting a new heavy? Don’t tell me it’s not happening since I’m one of the people who’s done it. There is no reason to work hard at a thief or ranger to get maximum output when you can play a warrior and get similar results for far less effort.

I am new in gw2. Lvlup one warrior till lvl 66.and now doing only spvp. Stun builds really to powerfull and easy to play. So i happy that they nerf it. Actualy they must do change on condition builds.they as well very powerfull and easy to play. Not trolling, play warrior aince rank 1. Now rank 40. P.S sorry for bad english.

Haralin.1473:

I have a suggestion for you go play an engi, or a ranger in WvW come back and then say Warriors are not OP.

Engi gets nerfed in mostly every patch.

Now when the warrior gets a little nerf the crying starts, you will get over it!

Anyone who doesn’t play a kite+condi engi build is gimping their class for no reason.

The engi, ranger, and mesmer all have “apex predator” kite builds that are only OP because of the broken condi meta. Which, even after Dec 10, will remain broken.

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

Ravenmoon.5318:

Verdelet Arconia.6987:

easiest class to use that excels at every aspect of the game.

either warrior need more nerfs or other class need to be boosted up to the same level.

OR! You ACTUALLY need to learn 2 play your class!

This is Gw2 people. Anyone can beat anyone. You have no excuse!

PS: <3 slaughtering unsuspecting warriors with my thief _

haha! warrior is so easy to use that i think my 5 signet warrior can beat your thief u want it in wvw or tpvp?
its ok if i lose,i can just say “i used a 5 signet warrior,what do u expect?” haha!

I’d like to watch a complete moron warrior get beat by a condi troll thief!

Where are you getting your backside handed to you so I can watch?

Right and despite the ANET “Claims” that warriors are easy to play in PVP. It’s been debated in the past that warriors are not as easy to play well in pvp as other professions.

What I find hilarious is that your reason anet for nerfing warriors and buffing other classes is that warrior is “easy to play in pvp” this is essentially your justification. But you fail to mention that other professions are a lot easyer to do well with in pvp.

The truth is warrior is the easyest class to pick up and play and the hardest class to do well with vs skilled opponents of other professions. We have already had the sigil of impact nerfed I suppose now ANET you are going to roll that change back too?

Listen ANET It has been long stated that warriors need to land CC to do damage yet you are now preventing them from doing that by increasing the cast time to a unwieldy amount and making it more telegraphed and removing the damage?

Hammer F1 burst is the most telegraphable skill in the game, but your excuse this time is that it’s telegraphable does a lot of damage. Hammer F1 is not a high damage skill. So you rational is illogical.

What is it going to be?

But lets be clear this nerf is not just about ruining the warrior and destroying the game balance, its about nerfing the warrior across the board so that it will effect effery facet of warriors. Traits that you are nerfing are warrior bread and butter burst mastery is a warrior class mechanic that effects all parts of the warrior. You are not just destroying them in PVP you are bringing them down in PVE, WVW etc.

And why because someone told you that it was easy? Did that someone also complain they got killed by a warrior?

Warlord.9074:

The truth is warrior is the easyest class to pick up and play and the hardest class to do well with vs skilled opponents of other professions.

Saying “truth is” before an opinions does not make it true.
And in my opinion it is still easier to do well versus skilled opponents compared to mesmer(since those two are the only geared 80s I have to use for comparison). My reasoning is that warriors have high defence, great regen, great hp, and is great at removing conditions (lemongrass poultry + that one trait that reduces condition duration).

Causic.3798:

Warlord.9074:

The truth is warrior is the easyest class to pick up and play and the hardest class to do well with vs skilled opponents of other professions.

Saying “truth is” before an opinions does not make it true.
And in my opinion it is still easier to do well versus skilled opponents compared to mesmer(since those two are the only geared 80s I have to use for comparison). My reasoning is that warriors have high defence, great regen, great hp, and is great at removing conditions (lemongrass poultry + that one trait that reduces condition duration).

I picked dps guardian for the first time as i never played it before, made some build out of nothing, went to pvp and..i facerolled ppl

Mesmer? 0 effort, al does the whole job, all i have to do is making sure i won’t get hit which is easy..again facerolled ppl

Spirit ranger? Spirits up, autoattack ready? Set.. Go..naturally facerolled ppl

Every class is easy to play in this game and i don’t think that should be reason to bring some class down in the first place. We are the olny class with telegraphed attack with elementalist, rest just keep spam al, evades, insta cast abilities, stacking boons, doing high damage being tanky at same time (condi builds) and so and its not a problem? Earthshaker should be also reduced to 1/2 casttime with nerf for compensate.

And the main problem are not skills, but merciless hammer trait, and that should be nerfed in the first place if they want to separate damage from control/AN logic.

Scoobaniec.9561:

Causic.3798:

Warlord.9074:

The truth is warrior is the easyest class to pick up and play and the hardest class to do well with vs skilled opponents of other professions.

Saying "truth is" before an opinions does not make it true.
And in my opinion it is still easier to do well versus skilled opponents compared to mesmer(since those two are the only geared 80s I have to use for comparison). My reasoning is that warriors have high defence, great regen, great hp, and is great at removing conditions (lemongrass poultry + that one trait that reduces condition duration).

I picked dps guardian for the first time as i never played it before, made some build out of nothing, went to pvp and..i facerolled ppl

Mesmer? 0 effort, al does the whole job, all i have to do is making sure i won’t get hit which is easy..again facerolled ppl

Spirit ranger? Spirits up, autoattack ready? Set.. Go..naturally facerolled ppl

Every class is easy to play in this game and i don’t think that should be reason to bring some class down in the first place. We are the olny class with telegraphed attack with elementalist, rest just keep spam al, evades, insta cast abilities, stacking boons, doing high damage being tanky at same time (condi builds) and so and its not a problem? Earthshaker should be also reduced to 1/2 casttime with nerf for compensate.

And the main problem are not skills, but merciless hammer trait, and that should be nerfed in the first place if they want to separate damage from control/AN logic.

Exactly, I hate when people have this attitude about warriors oh they are so simple and easy to play when that exact same logic applies to many other classes in this game. And worse, they are using that as an argument to nerf the class. Easy to play doesn’t necessarily mean easy to win and whether you play that class well or not. You’d be surprised by how many people have awful timing and aiming of Earthshaker, or don’t know how to use whirlwind on greatsword in a way that you land max damage and you land right beside the person, or just waste skills when they are blinded.

For example, I decided to try the Blackwater Mesmer build that everybody has been raving about. I don’t think I died once in a 1v1 in WvW and even won a couple 1v2’s and 1v3’s. Of course there are baddies in WvW and lots of them at that, I in theory shouldn’t be able to pick up a class and a build that I have barely played with and faceroll. It was really simple because the clones were putting all the conditions, all I would need to do is summon them or dodge roll and whenever I am in trouble just use the sword #2 evade, scepter #2 block, stealth, teleport, etc and just keep kiting while bleeds, torment and confusion eats them alive. I didn’t feel like I was using any exceptional amount of skill. I’m pretty sure I did the same thing as well as a spirit ranger build, lol.

Picking up any class is easy enough to be honest, being a master of your class is something different entirely and is difficult, no matter if you are a warrior, mesmer, elementalist etc. Because mastering a class also means mastering how to time dodge rolls, having sufficient knowledge of other classes and builds in order to adapt while fighting them, knowing how to put significant pressure and when not to, etc, knowing your strengths and weaknesses and trying to minimize them, practicing positioning and having quick reaction times and speed. All that general stuff applies to every class.

And even if warriors are OP, that doesn’t change the fact and truth that there are classes that counter them and have an easier time beating them in a duel. *cough* *cough* mesmers.

And I like the typical "oh mesmers are easy, just learn to distinguish between clones and the real person" as if that is the only thing you need to beat them. What if I told somebody that whether you could distinguish them or not, sometimes a build is helpless against it.

killahmayne.9518:

Picking up any class is easy enough to be honest, being a master of your class is something different entirely and is difficult, no matter if you are a warrior, mesmer, elementalist etc. Because mastering a class also means mastering how to time dodge rolls, having sufficient knowledge of other classes and builds in order to adapt while fighting them, knowing how to put significant pressure and when not to, etc, knowing your strengths and weaknesses and trying to minimize them, practicing positioning and having quick reaction times and speed. All that general stuff applies to every class.

I would argue that those rules apply to warriors, that some of those rules apply to all professions. But that not all of those rules apply to all professions. That is why I make the claim that warriors are easy to pick up but not easy to be good with at PVP. And that some other professions are easyer than warriors at PVP becasue some other professions do not have to adhere to all of those rules.

I didn’t actually read your entire post but:

1. Premises can be true, but the conclusion false.
P1. All crows are black
P2. Crows are birds
P3. I saw a black bird
C1. I saw a crow (False)

2. Conclusions can be true, but premises false
P1. All beer comes in bottles (False)
P2. I’m drinking beer
C1. I’m drinking beer from a bottle (True)

At least warriors have traits in trait lines that make sense and have a mechanic that actually works… I just started playing a warrior this week (level 50 so far) after playing my ranger since launch; warriors are definitely in a better place than rangers (in comparison it seems like anet doesn’t even know what they are doing or where they are going with rangers).

Drys.4018:

I didn’t actually read your entire post but:

1. Premises can be true, but the conclusion false.
P1. All crows are black
P2. Crows are birds
P3. I saw a black bird
C1. I saw a crow (False)

2. Conclusions can be true, but premises false
P1. All beer comes in bottles (False)
P2. I’m drinking beer
C1. I’m drinking beer from a bottle (True)

I would encourage you to read my posts if you find this interesting.

In your 1st example You did not state you had seen a crow so we have no reason to believe you saw a crow though. . How you came to the conclusion is not presented by the statement.

Your 2nd example even though we know the 1st sentence to be untrue there is no indication it is a false statement. Thus the conclusion is true.

So in the case of the original topic we know that warriors are not easy to play at PVP. We also know that “easy” is a subjective word and is open bias, opinion interpretation and should not be the bases of any nerf or justify one.

We also know if the 1st sentence the word “or” is used and in the second sentence the word “both” is used. So we know that the 1st and 2nd sentences are not equivalent and thus they are talking about 2 different things. One being true the other being false as explained with the word “easy”

So the conclusion made is invalid.

Warlord.9074:

This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

The problem is you have way too many of these weak, meek and pathetic types in every game, and they complain about melees fulltime. In every mmo, the warrior melee types always, always get the bat. The devs will always listen to that stupid lot.

Phillip.6485:

Warlord.9074:

This is a politically motivated nerf, motivated by false pretenses and data. And by significantly buffing other professions and nerfing warriors under false pretenses. ANET you have failed to balance the game.

The problem is you have way too many of these weak, meek and pathetic types in every game, and they complain about melees fulltime. In every mmo, the warrior melee types always, always get the bat. The devs will always listen to that stupid lot.

I don’t think they are inferior but I do think that they are manipulative. That manipulative behavior can be looked at in a negative sense however. I think the real danger is when you allow melees to operate outside of the melee rules. The problem is no one is complaining about that. People are complaining about melees being Melee. And ANET is eating that up rather than giving these professions the abilities to deal with that. And ANET has already fullfiled that responsibility and then some, but becasue they choose not to use the tools that ANET chose to give them to deal with melee then Melee must be nerfed so these manipulates can have there own way.
To play the game the way they want to not the way that ANET wants them to play.
Who really knows what ANET wants only ANET can tell you that but I guarantee what ANET wants would be different without these manipulators. becasue ANET is not holding the bag they have allowed the players to hold the bag.

Some bags are bigger than others haha

as far as i am concerned, the warrior is a melee character. the whole lot of people who complain about them are mostly range players, who somehow never kept their distance and allowed the warrior to come to close. To me, thats your fault. Dont expect the warrior to have to cover the distance to meet you at melee range only to melee with pathetic damage. Plus covering the distance means we have to take damage too.

So really, to those to play range character, learn to play and keep your distance. And dont go playing a range character with a melee weapon and come crying because you dont have a chance against the warrior.

You dont know how hard it is sometimes when we need to cover ground just to get the melee distance. It can sometime take 1/3 of our health or more to do that.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. We aren’t really anything seeing as that Eles and cloth wearers can be just as tanky. The normal laws of other mmos don’t apply here. Everyone compares apples to oranges.

lchan.2169:

as far as i am concerned, the warrior is a melee character. the whole lot of people who complain about them are mostly range players, who somehow never kept their distance and allowed the warrior to come to close. To me, thats your fault. Dont expect the warrior to have to cover the distance to meet you at melee range only to melee with pathetic damage. Plus covering the distance means we have to take damage too.

So really, to those to play range character, learn to play and keep your distance. And dont go playing a range character with a melee weapon and come crying because you dont have a chance against the warrior.

You dont know how hard it is sometimes when we need to cover ground just to get the melee distance. It can sometime take 1/3 of our health or more to do that.

The problem with range jobs. is with warriors stability…. and – duration cripple, immob. chill trait.

Any ranged jobs only got mostly 2 immob skill with a 2 sec duration at max
Chill skill mostly are ground target u can dodge rolled it easily
Cripple the duration is too short
Ward and knockback u can go through it with stability

And what i hate the most is how the hell i can stop a warrior when he using berserker stance and balanced stance at the same time when using Rush it’s a 2sec insta 1200 range…. and u’re saying u have to take damage to close the gap? even if’re not using GS u still can throw bolas come easily with shield stance…

So how can i solo kite a wr…. if u’re that good in kiting maybe i’ll need to learn from u a lot… from my point of view GW2 range jobs can only kite pve mobs (not all of them).

What I’m saying is that. Wr need a lot of nerf (at least in stability or condition) or change their trait line a bit. their good trait is to accesible and too good… especially the trait line In defense and tactics.

A full defensive trait with zerk gear are the one mostly used somthing like this
http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fIAQNAS5+CFvxQqwBE0DNMLqCVB8I9ANGw0A-jExAYfB5kXR0Y11YKXioaA-w
And dev say warrior can’t do both (survival and damage) I’ll kill anyone to get my ele to get that kind of final stats…

Even with dolyak signet and balanced stance they got a 16 sec stability (without trait) with trait adding one extra balanced stance and extra 25% duration for stance they got a 28 sec stability in total… and 10 sec of almost immune condition…
1. They’re thick as hell due to regen
2. They hurt as hell
3. They stun like hell ( try fight against a group of 3 good coordinated wr player. they’ll stun lock 5 people to dead easily)

The only job i can think of, which easier to defeat Wr is mez

Forgot to add last part…
One small thing i forgot before….. warrior can use range as well…..
and u can call Warrior is a melee class…

Reading this gave me a headache. The OP is a whiny baby.