Guild Wars 2

Preface: I’m not an engi player. I’m merely considering building an engineer strictly for WvW (fun purpose) at undisclosed time in the future. For your own sanity while reading, assume 100% engineer ignorance.

The build’s philosophy:

- 1500 range sustained aoe damage in teamfight scenarios that can be used on the move (I’m not solo roaming with this)
- defense/mobility kept at minimum, just enough to keep up with the zerg and not die due to erratic/random aoe

1) Damage modifiers – do any of the following traits affect explosions (grenades)?

I’m asking because I don’t trust tooltips very much.

- Target the Weak
- Target the Maimed
- Scope
- Enduring Damage

2) Assuming 2-111…2-111…2-111… grenade rotation for damage, which trait will give highest dps – Explosive Powder or Short Fuse?

How does it change between zerker, hybrid and condition builds (for instance, do you include Poison Grenade in rotation and when/why)?

3) What’s the real dps of every build variant (zerker, hybrid, condition) in practice?

How does it’s performance vary between small skirmish fights and zerg trains (prot, condi remove, heals, blocks etc.)?

4)Do you find Enhance Performance/HGH traits with kit/elixir juggling for might stacking the absolutely best option for DPS, or are there alternatives?

We’re loosely comparing scholar/ogre vs 20% might vs undead runes, on zerker/hybrid/condition variants, with varying sigils – force, battle, bursting, fire, bloodlust, corruption.

5) Post-your-build time!

Zerker, hybrid or condition – which variant you favour and why?

Sigils, runes, traits, utility, food choice?

Alternatives?

Is there a community consensus on best option, or is it mostly player preference?

Any additional observations or advice in T1/T2/T3 server brackets?

PS. I know there are strong, tanky engineer builds with bombkit/toolkit specifically designed for close range fighting in zerg trains, but I’m not particularly interested in that style of play. There is a point where simply playing meta is no longer entertaining for me, and in this case fun is more important than competitive aspects.

In a vain attempt, I’ll try to keep this post away from corporate politics. Regardless, I believe that certain corporate-wide policies need to be re-examined in terms of game development & maintenance, patch/update presentation and community interaction for the future.

About transparency: not limited to recent WvW scandals and community outrage, I believe we could use some form of issue-tracker and update-scheduler, present on forums or a "sister" website to main guild wars 2 website (and definitely visible as a tab on main website, as well as a link from the forums).

Issue-tracker:

- a list of all current problems with the game, separated by tabs (graphics, sound, gameplay etc.)
- every problem defined: what, how, why, temporary workarounds, ETA (be it a week, month or unscheduled)
- every problem discussed: separate thread purposefully moved away from general technical/support forums

The purpose:

- community is informed about bugs, knows they’re being worked on: less duplicates and false-positives, feedback about singular issue concentrated in a single thread
- technical forum is still accessible to users requesting personal help, or bringing up new/unconfirmed issues (less forum clutter - identified issues are moved to a separate tab or place, to reduce the chaos)

Update-scheduler:

- less technical and more general in nature, outlines game going forward in new directions (be it fixing a core gameplay system/feature, or adding new systems/features, not limited to: maps, professions, skills, events, game modes, encounter types, conditions/boons/states)
- fosters community dialogue & feedback before features go live (including: philosophical, mechanical and social consequences for the game and it’s players)

Last Words

In varying intensity and form, we’ve already seen some of these steps taken by Anet: "creative design" blogs, feature blogs and posts, progress/update posts, feature videos. What is lacking, however, are two things: consistency of approach and organisation.

Organisation: central go-to place to study and discuss existing game problems in depth, as well as game-going-forward features which are in the works, but with more flexible schedule and final content/design.

Consistency: all current issues and future features are documented, catalogued and freely discussed with the community as a prime community relations policy, NOT "as exception" rule: when under duress of public outrage, trying to limit damage after scandal/leak or "almost everything is ready so now we talk about it" mentality.

Summarising, the irrational fear of: exploits becoming public knowledge, developers being publically lynched for missing a deadline/feature, needs to go.

Exploits: make a public list of bannable offenses, gather public feedback about them and fix them faster.

Missing a deadline/feature: players have to understand that not every feature will get implemented on time, at all or in the form outlined in early design sketch or philosophy - simultaneously, playerbase as a whole shouldn’t be punished for simple curiosity and interest in the ongoing health of game and it’s continuing success.

Purposefully brick-walling and withdrawing critical information about game issues and your policy towards fixing them until the very last moment causes permanent community damage - loss of players and declining morale. I believe we deserve better.

In short: please be more upfront about your game design, talk with us openly and accept constructive criticism where it’s due. Failing that, we will see more hostility towards developers and the company, more conspiracy theories and generally poor player feedback. Worst communication is silence.

Trivia:

- "Roadmap" http://www.planetside2.com/roadmap
- "the problem, what we’ll do to fix it and the philosophy behind it" post https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/operation-make-faster-game.150281/
- "update/issue" discussion thread https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/october-on-going-performance-improvements.152361/
- "when forum or blog post is not enough" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaHgTR4yyuU

E-sports:

1) marketing propaganda to get more competitive and semi-competitive players or create "buzz" about a game prior to release
2) a mental disease, most common among deluded game developers or over-ambitious game publishers
3) an Internet meme, used to denote ANY online multiplayer game with competitive gameplay elements and at least minimal community/shoutcaster outreach on Youtube, Twitch and similar media outlets
4) a game culture, originated within Starcraft and Counter-Strike franchises
5) a bunch of try-hard players and developers trying to copy-cat the initial success and culture of e-sport community (League of Legends, DoTA2, COD/Battlefield series, Guild Wars 1, Fury, Forge - notice how nearly all MMORPG attempts have failed, are no longer supported or too niche to attract any money/business/media/popular following)

Harrier.9380:

On the other hand if Hamstring damage is left as it is, auto chain damage will be much lower...

Not necessarily.

I believe the altered damage and cast times were withhold from these "quick notes", and actual patch notes will be more descriptive. Personally I cringe every time I land Final Thrust on my sword, because it has no bleeds and it’s physical damage has lower dps than quick sever-gash, 2-hit combo.

Final Thrust’s crit on power-crit build might appear impressive in numbers, but the slow wind-up for the strike and absolutely cripping aftercast ruin all the joy of using it in the long run.

My staple tournament build is Sword/Shield + GS Warrior focused on mobility, as soon as I hit sever-gash on running opponent I usually follow up with hamstring and then wait for an opportune moment to switch weapon if blocking or stun is of no immediate concern. Maintaining a 3-strike sword combo is both impractical in design, and hazardous to dps/pressure you dish out.

Viking Jorun.5413:

No. I like having a source of fury other than signet of rage and fgj. It makes for a great combo with axe #5 and allows traits like Rending Strikes to properly function and stack a ton of bleeds/vulnerability.

If leaked patch notes are to be believed, Warriors will have permanent swiftness from crits and permanent fury from immobilize (longbow, cripple —> leg specialist —> immobilize) without Signet of Rage and FGJ even equipped on their bar. Flat 25% movement bonus for melee weapons will also help.

I’m seeking a solution that will make this skill any less useless once the patch hits Live, and hopefully a one that will make OH Axe useful in PvP, not just in PvE or niche WvW builds.

Harrier.9380:

Overall notes seem legit but kinda unfinished, some things are obviously missing, like new Warrior Sword #3 skill. Probably from one of the earlier builds.

"Final Thrust: This skill has been moved to slot #3. Now does more damage and extra damage vs foes below 50%.
Hamstring: This skill has been moved to the end of the skill chain. Cripple reduced to 1s.
Savage Leap: This skill now applies 3s of cripple."

Final Thrust is currently the third combo chain of autoattack, it’s simply swapped with Hamstring in the patch release.

Opynn.2936:

Recently I read that in Wildstar they use mob to balance classes. They created mob called Bob. Average player should be able to kill Bob in 30 sec. If ability is too powerful for Bob it will be too powerful in pvp and pve.
I think Warrior is Guild Wars 2 Bob. They balanced classes aroudn him.
I wonder if they give us more sustain or just nerf damage and send mail "pleas reroll guardian, balance is done, we are going to delate our Bob" :P

Warrior used to be their measuring stick, back in the times of closed betas and pre-order beta weekends. Most players were absolutely horrible, and Warrior’s straight-forward nature allowed them to play him relatively well in entry-level skill environment compared to say, Mesmer or Elementalist.

Another matter worth pointing out: Warrior was mostly fleshed out and developed, whereas others lagged behind in the developer’s drawing board, even in their base profession functionality. There was no mature meta to speak of either, Glass Elementalists running all sorts of garbage builds instead of the "invincible" bunker spec were easy pickings for Eviscerates or Frenzy’ed 100Blades.

What they’ve done to alleviate this perceived power disparity between Warriors and non-Warriors? They’ve introduced power creep independent of player skill to professions newer in the development cycle or perceived to be difficult to pick up (most notably: Thief, Mesmer, Elementalist). Chief examples? Invincible boon spammers with AoE damage, early Thief builds, Mesmer profession itself.

Conclusion

They simultaneously nerfed Warrior and buffed/reworked other classes, while giving Warrior little to no attention for a very long period of time after game’s release. They also left Warrior in the gutter of old (and presumably better) balance philosophy: 1) difficult trade-offs between damage, support and control 2) skill-based profession performance. Warrior’s greatest anti-thesis? Mesmer. Close runners-up? Thief and Elementalist with respective meta builds - professions almost play by themselves, even if skill disparity between individual players is still evident.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Signet_of_the_Beastmaster

Active effects of signets also affect you.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/%22Protect_Me%22

Instead of attacking, your pet will protect you by absorbing all damage you would take.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Signet_of_Stone

Passive: Improves toughness for you and your pet.
Active: Your pet takes no damage from attacks.

Been meaning to start a similar thread, but never had the patience, audacity and reputation to follow this through. Thanks for voicing what we already feel and know deep in our Warrior hearts, and signing your name all over it.

I’m not led to believe Warrior will ever be consider equal to the others, not until we get a dedicated blog post to Warrior alone, and acknowledgement of Brawn.

To be frank, I’d rather see Brawn (as in burst damage % bonus) removed from Discipline, and replaced with a sustainability buff. Most curious, however, Brawn (Burst Damage) has been nothing but ignored for the past 10 months, and the trend shows signs of continuity into near future. Brawn is not acknowledged as a problem. Brawn is not discussed at SOTGs. In fact, I’m led to believe Brawn doesn’t exist, and the Warrior profession itself will soon fade from my memory as well.

BobbyT.7192:

Why is this here?

Your bewildered amusement and a tone of curiosity give this thread far more significance than it deserves.

tl’dr

Troll!

Vaya.1354:

- they’re real, but not the final version.

You got that one right, I believe.

Axe MH nerf is disgusting, sure. Landing the full combo inside circa 130 range of the enemy will prove a similar feat as landing 3rd combo strike from the MH Mace. Even when you’re in range, the dilemma of interrupting 3rd chain and losing 75% damage boost to use another skill, weapon swap or Eviscerate will tear the hairs of most.

My interpretation of weapon changes alone so far ...

- they want Longbow to mesh in naturally with team support or healing builds, despite LB’s innate potential for AoE burst and mild control (they MIGHT want to merge Stronger Bowstrings with Burning Arrows at some point, though)
- they have bloody no idea what to do with MH Mace and OH Sword, but OH Axe is slowly getting there
- MH Sword will be the new pressure/autoattack weapon with addition of cripple spam, leap and spammable physical burst skill (Final Thrust), on top of immobilize (leg specialist, Flurry cancel)
- .... whereas MH Axe will shine for the short moment of landing a crit Eviscerate and suck in the down-time between bursts (in PvP/WvW), while in PvE landing the mini-HB in form of autoattack will be a bit more perilous than before, overall DPS unaffected (unlike HB you can still dance around and dodge)

zTales.4392:

If it _is_ true ...

"*Warrior*

Final Thrust: This skill has been moved to slot #3. Now does more damage and extra damage vs foes below 50%.
Hamstring: This skill has been moved to the end of the skill chain. Cripple reduced to 1s.
Savage Leap: This skill now applies 3s of cripple.
Riposte: If you block an attack from range, it no longer cancels the blocking.

Bolas: Reduced the aftercast by .3 seconds.

Mending: 25s->20s

Untraited Longbow range updated to 1000 from 900.

Cleansing Ire: New Master tier trait with the following effects. Gain adrenaline when hit. Remove a condition for every bar of adrenaline spent.

Warrior’s Sprint: Movement speed has been increased from 10% to 25%.

Burning Arrows: This trait now reduces the recharge of longbow abilities by 20% in addition to dealing 10% bonus damage against burning foes."

Time to play a Condition Damage Warrior again.

Sorry to burst your bubble but condition warrior is a joke with longbow and sword alike. You can try a power-crit build with these and condition as a form of filler damage that goes through blocks and provokes condition removal, but dedicated condition build (e.g. condition/precision) simply won’t work. Longbow physical burst is underestimated, even physical damage from combustive shot and the many chances to proc a fire/air sigil. In terms of burstiness, 20% recharge reduction will easily offset weird trait distribution in the right build.

Warrior’s almost-necessary traitline regardless of circumstances is the Discipline, which gives crit damage and burst damage (latter sitting at laughable 3% only for 30 points investment total). That alone should give a strong hint that primary stats for warrior regardless of build are power and crit damage, with either traits or stats filling up the role of crit chance to land crits. Anything else - be it toughness, vitality or condition damage - is only a matter of circumstance or build optimisation, not a primary or even secondary focus of the build.

When the game started I made a condition Warrior and tried it out in WvW, PvE and PvP. It failed everywhere save for WvW, and in WvW it worked only against mentally or physically handicapped players. Never bothered with a condition build for Warriors ever since, and that was early October last year if memory serves me right.

Forzani.2584:

Pendleton.6385:

Anet`s silence on this makes think they are real and intentionally "leaked" ... purely my opinion though.

I agree. It has been a tried and true tactic for many many years.

Entirely within realm of possibility.

A crude form of damage control and critical feedback assessment, as well as last-minute changes before patch hits Live. They might want to retract, weaken or delay (over a course of time) a bunch of the more ... sensitive changes, only to introduce the nerfs anyway coupled with little and comparatively insignificant buffs in order to quell resistance and offer mild psychological comfort.

Meaningless 14% damage boost to SB’s CC abilities is a good example of this attitude, and deserves universal scorn (and this is coming from a semi-retired Warrior who generally hates bunker Rangers sitting on a point). I guess we won’t be much wiser when the patch hits Live either (except for the "Ranger’s pet is better than Warrior" jokes which might become a new mocking cry for stubborn BM Rangers still playing after the patch).

The worst part about SB change is that it’s totally awkward ...they decided it has to be nerfed and went a completely round-about way around it, instead of lowering auto’s physical damage by 14-18%, fixing outstanding animation issues and making SB more of a condition/kiting weapon instead (currently it shines mostly as a power weapon).

Though to be frank, I never understood why GS’s autoattack is so pitifully weak, and why MH Sword is predominantly a power-based weapon either ... I guess I’m totally out of loop with Anet’s thought pattern, might as well wait and see. So tired of waiting to see sensible changes, though ...

Idea #1:

Disrupting Chop

Strike your foe and daze him for 1 second. If a healing skill is interrupted, that skill is disabled for additional 8 seconds.

Damage, recharge, cast time & after cast, number of cleaved targets pending.

Idea #2:

Penetrating Chop

Strike your foe for heavy damage. Remove "Protection" boon from target foe if present before damage is applied. Unblockable.

Damage, recharge, cast time & after cast, number of cleaved targets pending.

Idea #3:

Furious Chop

Strike your foe and gain 8 strikes of adrenaline. Gain 3 stacks of Might for 8 seconds for every bar of adrenaline present.

Damage, recharge, cast time & after cast, number of cleaved targets pending.

Idea #4:

Savage Chop

Leap at your foe and strike them with your axe (450 range). Gain 5 stacks of Might for 8 seconds if target is hit, 8 seconds of Swiftness if attack missed (evade, block, blind). No secondary effect if no target within range present.

Damage, recharge, casting time & after cast, number of cleaved targets pending.

These "notes" were posted some time ago, there is a possibility these are outdated internal balance test notes from the QA staff, meaning that functionality and numbers are pending to adjustments.

I’d say it’s mostly authetic, because ... brawn wasn’t mentioned even once. It should be an open secret by now, that Anet hates brawn and will never do anything about it.

Else, it’s a pretty convincing troll which draws directly from forum suggestions and known Anet patterns when it comes to game balancing and attitude.

Healing signet would be good with 8-10k active heal that was also a stunbreak on a 40 second cooldown. Passive could be improved by leaving basic passive heal as it is, but improving healing power scaling so that it would effectively double at ~1300 healing power (currently 1000 healing power gives you 30 hp/sec on top of 200 hp/sec base).

Healing Surge: 25 second cooldown, 30 bars of adrenaline, 10 stacks of might and 1 stack of fury for 8 seconds. 8k heal regardless of circumstances.

Mending: 15 second cooldown. Removes crippled, chilled, immobilized. Removes 3 other conditions (other than crippled, chilled, immobilized). 6k heal.

Ruin the only good sPvP map? You got to be joking.

Foefire is great because it allows freedom of movement and rewards risks. Your criticism of middle point totally missed it’s purpose on that map.

"Do I have to draw you a picture!?"

Pirate guy was fine before he got sterilised. Now he’s just annoying, since his half-hearted attempt at being condescending isn’t convincing anymore.

I say, give us our old announcer back, and sell some new voice packs in cash shop (starting with female narrator).

If they wanted to address the bunker problem, they would make Larcenous steal only protection, regeneration and vigor.

Right now it’s on the OP side, because it steals 2 boons (ANY boons) and is totally spammable, hurting classes with long-uptime long-recharge boons the most (e.g. Warrior’s signet of rage). Bunkers, which generally have boon spam on low recharge, are affected by sword Thieves the least.

The only way to fix this garbage is to make it rip (not steal, just rip) a single boon, and only if it’s protection, regeneration or vigor. If it’s not addressed that way, a far worse nerf is incoming.

This thing deserves 4 separate threads.

State of Illusionary Berserker.

State of Mesmer’s Torch.

State of Mesmer’s Scepter.

State of Mesmer’s build diversity.

Muramasma.1570:

While I’m sure mesmer has its share of bugs, I don’t think it’s going to be a very high priority. Many (read: all) professions have bugs and awkward abilities that keep getting overlooked, and they’re doing a lot worse than mesmers currently are.

Objectively speaking, Mesmer is in deep s...

Comparatively speaking, Mesmer is in a pretty good spot to be right now - not good enough to be nerfed, but good enough to compete with success in tournament teams.

Healing on burst skills and interrupts would give control-oriented, weapon-swapping builds more sustainability. We could see a rise of tanky-control-dps characters relying on control and minor healing to stay in the fight (e.g. mace/shield, hammer people), and enough burst during a spike to push people off the point (unsuspecting foe, hammer combos, frenzy etc).

Retaliation seems a bit void. Most of Warrior’s interrupts will push the target around, make him flee or prevent from attacking at all, getting retaliation you get no real use of (since you likely won’t get attacked) is just weird.

How about ...

"Empowering Domination" - gain fury (4 seconds) and 3 stacks of might (8 seconds) every time you interrupt a foe.

That way you could still deal punishment and capitalise on a locked down target, instead of getting retaliation when your target wants to disengage or plain can’t attack you to begin with because it’s disabled.

That’s different maps, not different primary game modes. Primary objective still revolves around point capture, although Spirit Watch somewhat bends the rules more in favour of orb running (at least that’s my impression of it).

So basically a GW1. Clear backline, midline, frontline/initiators. Health and cast bars. More profound interrupts. More defined support (healing) and control characters, ally targeting. More primary objectives than just points, or removal of points. Death Match, Capture the Hill/Flag, Run the Relic and other modes. Symmetric and assymetric, automated tournaments (variations including: 1v1, 1v1v1 and 1v1v1v1 for a final matchup). Separation of solo queue from premade queue, or only accepting full pre-made teams for tournament queue.

Turns out my GW2’s PvP vacations will be longer than anticipated. Switching target to clones, phantasms and minions during a fight just because I happen to navigate camera with right mouse button is unacceptable.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Oni Link.4621:

JonathanSharp.7094:

We think that Warriors need more sustain in sPvP. You’ll see this reflected in upcoming balance changes.

Traits are huge in this, and just like you saw trait reworks recently for Warrior, we’ll be doing more trait changes to help to this end.

It’s Sunday, but I still wanted to jump in here to let you guys know we’re not ignoring you!

Finally an answer That may be the start of the Warrior “new era” :P
Everyone here hope for some nice improvements in next 2 patches.
And if you need ideas, GW2 forums are full of them

We read the forums a lot more than you know. Karl/Peters and I actually print out threads sometimes and bring them to balance meetings.

We’re not ignoring any of the classes, I’m sorry if people feel that way. We simply don’t have time to personally post in all threads, on all our sub-forums.

Sustainability. What are your balance team’s plans for burst damage (“Brawn”)? Is it recognised as an issue, and with what priority? If you can’t talk about this, when you will? Perhaps a blog post on state of the Necromancer and Warrior, with detailed outline for profession-specific changes to them going forward? I don’t ask for high-level strategy, I’d like details for once.

DirectSong is a total, irreversible and god-awful failure as a company that sells music. It’s been unfortunate fact for years.

Frankly, I’m most baffled at Anet’s insistence that living story and other additions to the game have amounted to more than expansion’s worth of game content. I’ll just say, if I was presented with that kind of content and 54.99$ pricetag to pay for it, I wouldn’t even consider it until it dropped to 10$. Facts are different from marketing propaganda, and actual expansion with actual content is inevitable. When it’s developed and released is purely a business decision, but for average player’s understanding it’s sooner than later.

Title self-explanatory.

Buff it, change it, remove it – doesn’t matter. Just address the issue and DO something about it.

Not exactly new, but different - http://www.pathofexile.com/passive-skill-tree

Quite honestly, I miss the brainwork involved in crafting a Diablo II/PoE’s character build, or GW1’s 4v4/8v8 team composition.

Kreedz.8127:

I understand other classes have problems, and certain classes need to be toned down as well, but with the current Meta, Warriors are almost forced to have 2 utilities constant across all of their build’s; Endure Pain & Bull’s Charge. Without these two abilities we have little in the way of staying in a fight.

Feel your pain. For the past 100+ tournament games I didn’t bring a single utility that wasn’t bull’s, balanced and endure pain. I’m yet to find a rune more fitting than Hoelbrak. Frankly, it feels like going through the motions against a storm that can devour you any time you’re out of your cooldowns; then big improvisation begins till a numbers game changes, and you either assist or flee. Tbh, I’m taking a break until actual changes are made.

I’d like to see:

- power (main), healing, toughness
- power (main), healing, precision
- power (main), precision, toughness
- power (main), precision, condition
- power (main), precision, vitality
- condition (main), toughness, vitality
- condition (main), toughness, power
- condition (main), precision, power
- condition (main), toughness, healing

Berserker, Valkyrie and Rampager amulets should also get a second balance pass.

Berserker is too convenient even in not-so-zerky build with the inbuilt vitality, on the other hand the provided crit damage bonus is laughable in reliation to other stats, except for jewel. I suggest removing the vitality bonus and simply adding more crit damage for the amulet, leaving the jewel’s crit as it is (while removing it’s vitality bonus). If people want some hp on top of their zerker, they should be forced to switch out e.g. to soldier jewel.

Valkyrie is just plain old bad. Useless healing bonus could be exchanged for something of substance, like more precision, vitality or crit damage.

Rampager. Too little power to make any use of high precision. Precision alone doesn’t mean jack for on-proc damage sigils (air, fire) with low base power, whereas for condition proc there is a much better amulet available (rabid). Increase power, decrease precision, add half the crit damage of berserker, leave the vitality bonus as it is. Presto, you have a good hybrid damage amulet that is not totally useless.

Copenhagen.7015:

I’d like to see an Amulet exact opposite of Berserker with defensive stats.

Vitality, toughness, healing? I’m not sure I’d like to see claustrophobic points on Niflhel and Khylo even more clogged up than it is now by bunker engineers, guardians and eles. That, and invulnerable, constantly-regenerating beastmaster build, killing people with ... pets, refusing himself to die. No, no, no! Just NO.

Village Idiot.4256:

Que the meat sword innuendo…

http://wiki.guildwars.com/images/d/df/Greater_Arced_Blade.jpg

Guild Wars 1.

Cheers.

Had sent myself flying like a fool inside a wall in more than one occassion. Though, at least Savage Leap doesn’t ground us in place for too long like Rush does.

Haha yes, sword Thieves are fun at last. Limited, a bit niche, but fun. Now if they reverted the HS nerf and gave some more love to offhand dagger/pistol, we could see Thieves playing a bit more confident in tPvP. Currently there are far too many situations for the Thief, where it’s basically "don’t engage or you’ll explode".

To me, Thieves should be masters of improvisation (given their initiative bar), rather than berserker one-trick-ponies reliant on rotation and stealth to disengage. Currently, mesmers, eles, engineers, rangers and even necromancers are far more versatile. Long cooldowns on some Thief utility skills don’t help either.

Before you ask: no, I don’t play a Thief. I play against them with my Warrior. I know there are some good Thief players which could easily see my face melted, but overall I’m given the impression Thief needs some help. So does the Warrior, not necessarily in damage department.

Grandmaster Boon Hate trait for Warriors is actually terribly bad. It competes with other DPS traits, end result is you deal the same damage as before vs boon-stacked targets, significantly less against anyone else and lose out on other useful traits and their utilities.

Sadly, no one will notice this except for tPvP Warrior players, everyone else will just assume we got buffed and problem got fixed. Flat nerf to protection from 33% to 20% would be a much better balance change, without nerfing any bunker’s skills or traits in particular.

mjharrison.3209:

Why do you guys continue to make the majority of your balance decisions around sPVP performance when hardly anyone plays it? By any measure, sPVP has been a failed experiment, why does the rest of the game have to suffer through class balance decisions that are clearly 100% targeted at sPVP?

Rather, I’d say this game has been balanced around PvE far too much from the start.

Direct result of this, WvW with PvE balancing is unbalanced blob-zerg and the PvE content guys give monsters more hp, damage or gimmicky mechanics (move out of AoE circle or die, grind agony resistance) instead of making them interesting to fight. People cried when AC was reworked because suddenly standing in place spamming 12345 was not enough to roll over every trash mob.

Now that word is out AC will be made even easier than it is now, cof p1 spammers rejoice so they have something to do when gates to CoF are closed. You people will never be pleased, not until you get a weapon skill that kills every mob on the map and spawns a precursor with a click of a button.

If PvE was balanced around PvP mechanics, monster difficulty would come from their behaviour, not raw numbers. There would be no need for overpowered consumables, broken skills or agony resistance grinding. Bad players would simply move on and leave, like they did with Tera and similar games where spamming a wow-esque skill macro was not enough to dps the boss and live. But you guys don’t want any of that, doing cof p1 blindfolded with a zerker team all day is your wet dream. Hope you don’t choke on these flaming effigies next time you scream Warrior is OP and Ranger sucks.

I wouldn’t mind alternative game mode to Conquest.

Separate skill/trait/profession balancing, 6v6 or 8v8 format, bigger maps, guild lord and base for every team, flag stand at the middle, trebuchets to bombard every base, more secondary and tertiary objectives, disabled or heavily reworked downed mode, some form of temporary or permanent death penalty. Sounds pretty much like GvG from the original, except there are no monks to heal you.

Lonny.9873:

What’s wrong with Khylo and Niflhel?

Reasons various, from side objectives to map layout to usefulness of individual professions and build variety. Too many to count.

Better question is, what’s good about these maps?

KarlaGrey.5903:

The design of the Khylo middle point makes it a joke in and off itself. Much like the mid point in Niflhell (pun intended).

Tbh, I wouldn’t cry if Khylo, Niflhell and Capricorn maps were removed, and replaced with something better. That way 2 horrible maps would be removed from tournament rotation, and we would get 3 more good maps on top of another map in the making. Sometimes less is more, so yeah, let’s be done with bad maps first.

@ Wizzlock

This is why I suggested earlier to just award dailies for wins. Win 5 hot-joins, or win 3 tournaments. No side objectives for the daily. Then, make all standard hot-join matches 5v5 by default, to mirror the tournament play. Perhaps rework the glory merit system, so it’s more in line with doing things for the team, rather than things harming the team in search for personal glory score.

Example change: skirmishing around (close to) the point, not necessarily sitting on it, will award points for its capture, if its captured during 20 seconds after you leave it’s vicinity (you helped bunker cap or hold the point, he gets the point back and you get your glory points for your contribution while you’re away and roaming).

Another thing they could do to glory system, is multiply your personal glory score for the match by 1.5x-2x, if the match is won. That way, even if maximising personal score is not in line with winning, winning the match will still net you more glory overall despite technically lower score.

Similarly, the "top stats" requirement could be done away with, so people don’t frantically look for blood or stick to points just to get top stats in a single category. At some point people would jump to a logical conclusion, that mirroring the tPvP tactics will win them the match, most glory and net a daily requirement.

Were these changes made, the only difference between standard hot-joins and tPvP would be tournament reward chests and ranked leaderboards for the latter, enticing more confident hot-join players to try their hand at tPvP, since it’s not a completely different game mode, but something they’ve already learned the basics of.

Counter arguments: "hot-join" games currently are just that, join and leave when you like without consequences. To make all of these suggestions stick, matchmaking might need some changes, such as you can’t join the winning team on equal player numbers, or can’t join mid-match for easy victory.

The "hunt for already won games" might be impossible to take care of, and multiple daily objectives were partly introduced to force people into actually playing, not just dropping into an already won game. In addition to all this, many would be angered by no longer being able to join or leave at will without consequences, at any point during the match.

As you can see, most solutions are complex and not without their own flaws.

This map reminds me of "Bombardment" map from (now defunct) GW1’s Hero Battles. It had 3 Shrines ("capture points"), as well as Siege Cannon ("Trebuchet") to bombard the central Shrine ("capture point").

For those curious, first map on the right, upper row: http://guildwiki.gamepedia.com/Hero_Battles#Maps

A bigger map with features here: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Bombardment

Wizzlock.3492:

Demosthene.2195:

Dromologist.7980:

Rewarding glory only on a win would be idiotic and would cause people to stop playing and go AFK the instant the other team gets a good lead. That, and it would turn PvP tourneys into an incredibly hostile environment where people mostly insult each other for their lack of skills.

To fix the dailies just remove the capture requirement, change daily tournament wins to daily tournament plays and add a requirement that involves getting X amount of glory. It’s not perfect but it makes more sense than the current format.

In which case I suppose people fighting to the bitter end and turning the game at last moment has just been an illusion for me, across many other games, including the original Guild Wars. I will not convince anyone here who hasn’t experienced win-based reward system himself. If people expect to have a good time but don’t actively try to win, they shouldn’t try their hand at PvP. Any PvP. PvP is a team environment, it’s not designed for your bragging rights or self-appraisal. Giving your best is respect to the people you play with, and to the people you play against by giving them a great game. That is all I have to say on this matter.

While I agree, it won’t work from different reasons. GW2 PvP is not in such great shape, like rest of the game (not that GW2 don’t need a lot of fixing) – community is rather small from what I expected. Setting tPvP on wining is a good thing – people join to fight, fight to win, till the bitter end as You said. But from people in tournaments, that is expected.
Hotjoins are tailored to be casual and noob friendly environment (not that it is, with todays zergfest) – if You set the bar to winnings and winnings only, frustration lvl will spike to the roof. Hotjoin should be the place where kitten comes, learn and is shaped before he tries tPvP. So other tPvP players (especially PUGs) won’t need to frustrate about braindead zerger in serious match. If You take that from hotjoin, You can erase them at the same moment – why waste time on hotjoins, when reward in tPvP is better? And that will only scare more weak/mediocre players from PvP as a whole. And it’s a last thing we want in PvP in my opinion. Many elitist players don’t get it, but if You stay only in small circle of best players – game become dull and boring. Yeah – “it’s so great, we kicked all the noobs from our backyard, but why no one wants to play with me?!” attitude. So the daily need to be set low, hotjoin need to be friendly, to lure fresh players – if they come, maybe they’ll like it and stay. Both daily and hotjoin needs to be taken in opposite direction.

The problem with hot join atm is that most players find their comfort zone in 8v8 AoE zergfest, which doesn’t prepare them for any tournament play, gives completely distorted view on class balance and key gameplay concepts to the conquest style of maps.

If standard hot-join maps were only 5v5 and greater tutorial/intro emphasis was put on capturing, holding & neutralising points as well as secondary mechanics, we’d be all in a better place now. Beginners would play the game correctly from the get-go in hot-joins, but not feel so punished for defeat as in tournaments (since a greater chunk of their glory would come from points system than victory itself). If they wanted it like that they could either stay to gain more confidence, or jump to tPvP next.

Problem with tPvP matchmaking is that it would be vastly more beginner-friendly, if more beginners played for the matchmaking algorithm to work properly. Currently tPvP environment might appear as hostile (especially to solo queue people), because not enough people play it, so you get matched against who’s available at that minute based on “closest” match, rather than get a comparable opponent. At the same time, if solo was split from premade, already thin population would be even more fragmented, leading to domination of premades by few select teams making average premades quit.

Different goals that would make tPvP better for everyone involved, often contradict themselves in actual execution. We won’t get more people without necessary changes. At the same time necessary changes require even greater core population of tPvP players to cancel out their side effects. If changes are made without necessary population, population will collapse instead of flourishing, starting with rampant elitism and subsequent death of premade queue, to further marginalisation of tournaments as a game mode.

Sword/dagger + GS or sword/axe + GS melee ranger trains with points put to BM could easily finish the dungeon just as fast as those boring 4 Warrior 1 Mesmer teams. 4 Ranger 1 Mesmer teams, even. Ability to do about the same dps much safer, with access to unpatched "exploits" is just golden. More people should pick up on the idea.

Sanctuary is useless. Flesh Reaver is for hot joins AoE-spam builds, e.g. well/mark/minion necro.

Yiyojin.3241:

What you said feels like this:
*It’s like if your mother puts cameras in the bathroom.
You want to go wash yourself but you don’t want her and others to see you…
You go to her and confrotn her, telling her that you don’t want to be spied.
And she tells you back: Son.. “it’s still an option that you are not forced to participate in”. isn’t it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder

Dromologist.7980:

Rewarding glory only on a win would be idiotic and would cause people to stop playing and go AFK the instant the other team gets a good lead. That, and it would turn PvP tourneys into an incredibly hostile environment where people mostly insult each other for their lack of skills.

To fix the dailies just remove the capture requirement, change daily tournament wins to daily tournament plays and add a requirement that involves getting X amount of glory. It’s not perfect but it makes more sense than the current format.

In which case I suppose people fighting to the bitter end and turning the game at last moment has just been an illusion for me, across many other games, including the original Guild Wars. I will not convince anyone here who hasn’t experienced win-based reward system himself. If people expect to have a good time but don’t actively try to win, they shouldn’t try their hand at PvP. Any PvP. PvP is a team environment, it’s not designed for your bragging rights or self-appraisal. Giving your best is respect to the people you play with, and to the people you play against by giving them a great game. That is all I have to say on this matter.

Dailies are a whole different topic. I hated PvE dailies since game’s launched, later I got tired even of PvE monthlies. I don’t do any of them, but I still play PvE for the sake of companionship and camaraderie with a friend, so it’s fine.

One smart thing they did was giving laurels in pvp dailies, understanding people have different priorities and can play two or three different things at a time, and that dailies basically cut their already limited time for each activity.

Current hot-join daily is matter of spamming hot-join matches, because that’s easiest, almost painless and in general player’s comfort zone. Problem is, it’s no longer a 15-minute activity like it used to, and as you said, it still promotes bad play by stacking a point.

At the same time, if it was awarded for wins in hot-join matches, people would say their effort goes to waste and daily is elitist, because participation alone is not enough to complete it.

If you’re asking me, I wouldn’t have introduced dailies and monthlies to this game at all. Instead, as a developer, I’d rather people didn’t clutter up unnecessary bandwidth, and only played when, how and what they want - meaning, no compulsive-obsessive behaviour to log daily and do your daily, among many things. But that is getting us slightly offtopic.

Personally I treat PvP as a form of "sport" that is goal-oriented and merit-based, and believe that people on all levels should adapt a correct attitude and see defeat as opportunity, not punishment. It’s slightly baffling how people get defensive when someone suggest getting chest for not running or failing a dungeon, but get up in arms and give popular support to whoever says PvP is elitist because it rewards winners. Winner’s victory is his own, it’s not your punishment.

More often than not, your sole source of defeat is your inner conviction of not making a difference, not making progress and having no chance to go at it ... all the while competent players, even in the name of sportmanship, learn to spot their own and enemy errors, to improve upon own faults and kindly remind their enemy they won’t win if they don’t want to. So the question is, do you want to win?

Ideally, each "build" would be understood as a pile of decks, a complete strategy. Something that has to be learned by experience, not only studied from the outside to fully comprehend.

Sadly some responses in this thread indicate unhealthy habits from other MMOs, and a very dominant/territorial attitude that has nothing to do with e-sport quality competition or PvP sportmanship.