Guild Wars 2

Used trait, got no might procs with or without scepter. Also go nothing with or without DH.

Necro is only considered faceroll in lower tiers. Necro have bad defenses so it will always be a class that can be contained. Necros only defence is literally how many times can i get punched in the face before i go down. Necros are only strong when paired with eles.

Ele support is beyond strong and allows alot of classses to survive. Now i appreciate the support it brings but it can be overwhelming at times. I still dont get why they are allowed clerics ammy ( the last bunker ammy in the game). Real faceroll comes from rev and mesmer.

I like the changes to war, brings them back ( i personaly hate when theif is strong as i think entire pvp is less fun) but basicly theif is put in a good position.

But yea, nurfing offence and not nurfing defences (mainly active defences like mes and rev have and not necros) is not the direction this game needs for pvp.

Also the “little chill nurf” was basilcy 33% less application and 40% of its original dmg (assuming u chill 2x). Chill is basicly 1/3 of what it used to be.

New stab changes baffle me. I would leave it and just turn rev staff 5 into a knockdown.

mesmer insipiration line makes them want for a heal or condi cure as they spam both naturally as they deal their dmg.

Revanant sword 2 is bonkers. It does more than guard bow 2 did but has shorter cd and less of an animation and remains the same.

guard needs some qol changes with their sustain option and virtues. DH f2 could be an evade and f3 could just not be interruptable or when it is interrupted just be a normal 5s interrupt instead of full cd. Also zeal and honor lines should be straightened out a bit on which is the symbols line o-0!

theif seems good and well see where tehse changes take it.
druid is fine. snr got hit hard but well see how much it matters.

Engi i am not knowledge enough to comment.

I think the biggest problem has nothing to do with mmr or class balance but game mechanics.

An average game where each team hold thier home, 1 team gains mid and just brawls in a tight match for mid rest of game leads to a 2-1 game k*ttene the final score is 250-500. This is basically a landslide for a match that should have basically could been close. Close games make for FUN games. Landslides, winning or losing isnt fun.

A very simple mechanic that you could add is an altered respawn timer. Make it normal at 0 points behind, and if your team is 400 points behind have a 0s respawn time and just linearly move between the to. This allows a loosing team an advantage to help them come back and has no impact in close games.

A 2nd mechanic would be like a hyper boost if your team is like 300-400 points behind. Like ur team gets a 1 time 30s boost where you get like more defense and offense so your team can potentially turn the momentum and make a comeback.

Personally, i havent been fighting against that many condition dealers so i would 100% drop contemplation of purity for purging flames.

I am also not a fan of zeal line for burn builds. Usually you dont do enough power dmg really for the 7% dmg to matter, the 190ish condi from kindled zeal is nice but not game breaking, and shattered aegis is nice but not amazing as ur condi focused and only have a few aegis’s

U could go virtues for more justice procs or utility, or go dragon hunter to get hunters determination and hunters fortification. Otherwise u just dont get but otherwise this is basically the burn build i ran a LONG time ago, i always felt sword shield/focus with scepter torch was better for having a ranged option but its whatever your comfortable with.

But if its working for you, ROLL WITH IT!

Timston.1976:

The DH f3 has a cast time, base guard f3 does not

Both the f1 and f2 explicitly have cast times. f3 does not. So currently it would make sense for the f1 and f2 skills to be interruptible and f3 would be instant and uninterruptible.

So I would again ask that they add a 0.25s cast to it explicitly or disallow this skill to be interrupted

Timston.1976:

This STUNBREAK when traited can be interrupted. So if I’m getting chain cced and I want to pop f3 but since they are chain ccing you your sunbreak gets interrupted and you go bye bye.

I personally dont use a traited version of the f3. So that cant be it. I just thought interrupt mechanics only worked on things with cast times. So because this has no cast time it was my belief that it should not be able to be interrupted. Its also odd to even hear that a stun break can be interrupted.

You would just think that they would either give it a 0.25s cast time to be more transparent about the situation or actually make it go off instantly and prevent a “instant cast” skill from being interrupted. Esp a full cd :/

Out of curiosity, why can shield of Courage get interrupted (happens all the time) and then go on a full cool-down without gaining the affect of it when the skill has a 0 cast time.

I mean it must be the fact that it has a precast animation that can get interrupted but I just thought if it had “0” cast time then it couldn’t get interrupted. And if it did get interrupted It wouldn’t go on full cd.

Thanks

I actually dont think its a big deal if “some1 constantly hits decline”, every time they are thrown to the bottom of the que list, i think thats more of a non issue.

goign to ur dota reference, in LOL, all you have to do is reque if you happen to miss your que. I personally feel thats its just such a minor offence that it shouldnt be punished.

To my understanding dishonor should work such that if you are in a game and you leave you get penalized. So why in the world are you being penlized for missing your que? i just was in que and had to leave my keyboard for <30s for a personal matter and i missed my que. BAM! 30 min dishonor. what is the point of accepting the que pop if u get punished for missing it? the entire point of it is to prevent people who are afk from joining a match.

In my opinion you should not be punished for this.

Just dont know if this is documented.

But wings of resolve leap distance is still affected by things like chill and slow. Hopefully this gets changed to be consistent with rest of movement skils in game next patch.

Main feed back is that gryo leash range needs to be greatly reduced

also, if stealth gyro dies, you are instantly revealed instead of allowing you to run out your stealth, When it dies it counts as an attack, so it will will reveal you instantly, and if you have sigil it may proc them as well.

like the traits, LOVE THE hammer,

hammer 3 needs a bit of tunning, you often will only land 2/3 of the hits casue 1 will make you jump away and then you jump back to your target

Just find it odd since they have runes/sigils that will only affect daze or stun. Thought the wording was more intentional then you all suggest

I think you guys are Under estimating just how strong stealth gryo actually is and limiting yourselves to such narrow situations of pre-emptive stealth applications.

You can potentially use it to stealth an ally to prevent his stomp to revive him, you can do your ideas of elixer s + this guy for long duration stelaths, or you can simply let it run during a fight.

If you let it run during a fight and go in and out of stealth breaking target locks which can really throw off some players, giving yourself a chance to heal, and allow for irregular movement in the moments between when your in and out. it would work better in non-spam builds but using it to stop a shatter or a kill shot could be great.

Impact Savant : The duration of your outgoing stuns is increased, and the duration of stuns applied to you is decreased.

Considering the kit of the scrapper heavily revolves around DAZE and not stun, shouldn’t this trait be for dazes instead of stuns?

the only stun skill on the scrapper is the hammer 5. Overall the only stuns engins have are static shield, supply crate and AED. As opposed to the potential 9+ dazes the scrapper line can offer.

Do you guys agree or think it doesn’t matter and would rather have the defensive aspect of stuns over dazes?

This is one of the single coolest ideas ive heard for a spec mechanci. They aleady have an example for allowing mounting, and they could in theory have a mechanic too dismount you as well as in the first personal story fight.

I cant immagine graphical limitations are hard. Just add a new pet type that can only be mounted, perhapvs via its f2. To compensate for damage all you have to do is increase your player stats by a flat number or a % increase like the Mallyx ult for rev.

alternatively you make it so the pet can do a attacks in sync with your attacks kinda like the shiro heal skill and still give the animal its own life bar (while being very tanky) and so cleave dmg could still be strong.

I really dont think that the druid will get it as it doesnt seem to fit themeaticly for me. But perhaps next round casue this sound A-fricking-Mazing

Roy Cronacher.1576:

A few more things:

• I reduced the after-cast of unyielding anguish by 260ms so it should help the responsiveness when you land.
• Embrace the Darkness: Lowered the cast time and after-cast by 400ms and reduced it’s upkeep cost by 1 so it’s at a 7 upkeep cast right now.

100% happy with all changes now!

After hearing roy talk about those changes I feel a bit better.

I wouldnt want to lose the torment condition duration but adding a bonus to stationary targets would help in pve.

the change to UA an and EtD seem to me as a pretty good buff in pve now that i read what roy said about it.. In pvp they will still have lost a significant amount of utility. We will still have BE and PA which will still be very strong in pvp. , UA will be still decent node control, EtD i cant see being used unless it loses 1 pip. i think itll probably be fine as is in current pve.

Overall i think its to to make the change to help the pve side and hurt the pvp side.

ps. still sad about displacement loss

Thank for responding and making us feel better roy!

condi revnant will still exist just fine. most primaly used banish enchantment anyhow for condi pressure from the utilities.

The displacment nurf hurt alot for utilties for reviving allies or knocking people out of certain areas such as nodes or shadow refuge.

I agree, the ult change is horendous.

I like/agree with all the changes but legendary demon stance

the demon heal, 2, and 3 are all … acceptable changes to comprimse between what they want moving forward and what they had established.

demon 4 and 5 got completely gutted. I think demon will still be wildly used but 4 and 5 will bascily become wasted slots now.

ps im SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO sad about the displacment change. that was an absolulty fun factor that i personally never had an issue with. the downstack knockback is a pretty sad change. and teh fact its gone off of demon 4 is sad puppy.

i would leave the displacments,( or just change to a knockback i guess ;/ ) and do what u did for banish enchantment and make the 4 apply 5 torment for 5s and knockback once and leave the dark field.

i just just leave the ult as is. I dont understand the reason to nurf it form all condis potentially to just 1 torment stack for such a high upkeep. If you want to change it i would ask to reduce the upkeep of it to mabey -5.

+1, demon stance 4, and 5 got gutted.

rest is … a reasonable comprimise between what they want and they old

witcher.3197:

It’s already too chaotic and PvE oriented. The last thing we need is more brainless zerging. There’s WvW for that.

their is nothing wrong with the objective oriented pvp. but i think this is absolutely not brainless zerging. if anything thats what it is now because a team can just shove to the end. Adding more players can allow for defense without needing to commit your entire team to it. You can actually split your team up between offence, defense, and objectives.

style.6173:

I like the idea. There would likely be more stalemates, BUT way more PvP which is missing from that map

One option would be to implement a system where the npcs scale over time( like reduced % total dmg taken) so even after 10 mins, killing door breakers and/or killing heros becomes a real effort . Then eventually someone would have to win when the npcs get to the point where it becomes too much for the people to take down. (make it so the enemy npcs (guards) still do normal damage.

This might help with the stalemate issue that might arise from more players. I too dislike the game ending without the lord dying.

Next beta weeknd even I would request ANET to at least try raising the player cap of Stronghold to either 8v8 or 10v10 (with npcs scaled accordingly).

I think the map would be more enjoyable and a more balanced overall. The map is already very large and could easily support the added members.

Just wondering about everyones thoughts about the 5 man player cap in stronghold ( or in pvp in general)

I just died laughing at that video. 100% of the people who complain burn is too strong die in this exact method. I do think rings of fire need a change too how they apply stacks but burning itself is fine.

but holy lol at that vid

Terrorsquad.4802:

Chosing a Sigil which only removes 1 certain boon is quite bad:

• you’re basically sacrificing 1 of the 4 sigils you can equip on something that only would be viable vs 2/3 builds in the whole Conquest scene. For just a removal..

But if that sigil would be a transfer sigil instead of removal (which means all might transfered to you) with a 9s CD, I think THAT would be worth the sacrifice of a Sigil Slot and will keep things in line.

Ele and Warrior can easily stack might again within those 9seconds. And yes, they’ll lose it again (granted the attack landed).

Eles might see problem in this but its exactly the same as the only window we have to burst ele down is only 9 seconds aswel (after Water Attunement).

So that would be a fair trade-off

I would stick with the original over this because what would most likely happen is eles and w/e could just stop running battle and pick this up. So they would also be one of those who just steals might from others and stays at high stacks and if you were a class that didnt natrually stack might and ran this rune. they would just immidatly take back what you stole.

Its a shame that for this skill its better to have poison on you then protection for healing. But it will probably work like endure pain and itll be post mitigation healing.

Just sucks that the skill is so built around healing while under worst case scenario. Actually using defensive mechanics like resistance or ur ult aura for protection will actually lower how much you heal.

guess that just increases the “skill” in using it

Just wondering how does this interaction work.
If you are taking 1000 condi dmg a second and you have the resistance boon . will u heal 1000 condi a sec or would u be healing 0 becasue resistance puts the condi dmg to 0?

Ilusionary Reversion would be better off with an 3-5s icd then the 2 clone requirement.
I do know chrono condi was absurd but this change basically cripples it.

Happy with rest of the changes.

Kodiak.3281:

What does Tempest bring? What does Tempest add? Boons? Two Guardians already bring 24 stacks of Might and pretty much the only source of AOE Stability (Stand your Ground) for a group.

This is a terrible argument. Its like saying you should bother playing theif in pvp casue mesmer is a class already with burst and stealth potential.

ANET has alerady said that people should STOP FOCUSING ON THE NUMBERS. they are readily fixed. i mean would people be complaining if the fire overload suddenly did 5x the dmg with 5x the burn applications… no they wouldnt. \

yes ele is already good at creating might stacks. and sharing some buffs via arcane line. But tempest now offers an aura sharing via shouts which is lost previously. It offers a COMPLELTLy new playstyle of incentivizing not swapping attunments (which i enjoy). yes the overloards should be more impactful then they currently are but it also opens up new build archtypes.

a basic example is conjour wepons. say for pve when u use ur icebow or FGS, you can now swap to an attunemnt, use ur skills then ur conjoured wepon, and when ur done u can now use ur overload.

and in pvp this is supposed to be a zonning mechanic. previously they mainly just had rings/walls of fire which are not true denial. But now they can use overloads (with a bit of tuning) to make it so you really dont want to enter an area the same way you dont want to walk onto a node with necro wells on it.

I enjoyed the tempest and loved the new tricks you can do with it.

I agree, I very much enjoyed the tempest as well but i feel that they did it too conservatively. I think the impact of the overloads should be far greater (in aoe and impact) and kick you out for say 30s (preferably not reducible via arcane line) like you mentioned. I enjoy a play-style where you are rewarded for staying in one attunemnt for a while and getting the most out of it then swapping.

The only extra change I would like to see is that IF the overload completes, you are instantly kicked out of all your attunemnt and left with an empty skill bar untill you chose a new attunment.

I miss the 10v10 rooms as well. I miss Capricorn which used to be my favorite map. It was also the only one to feature underwater combat which i thought was amazing to include.

I still think stronghold would be SIGNIFICANTLy better served if its player cap was raised to 8v8 or 10v10.

let me preface this with the fact i main a burn guardian ( and i have for about a year, and on a side note its team fight potential has gone up but its dueling potential actually lowered after specialization rework, lol eles used to be a joke for burn guards and now its hilariously difficult)

Burning damage as it is is perfectly fine. ( on burn guards its literally their only condi so even small condi cures can clear it) The main problem is application from rings of fire

In comparison to bleeding, (take guardian judges intervention) The standard burning skill in this game applies about 3 burns. using the standard 1200 condi of a pvp ammy, this means that 1 burn is = 3.3 bleeds ( not including any bleed or burn amplification). So this skill instatly applies 10 bleeds. U will be very hard pressed to find a skill that adds 10 bleeds.

And where most people lose is rings of fire. The guardian and ele ring of fire applies 3 burn every time u walk through it. What it SHOULD do is apply its affect only once. ever or reduce the the rate it pulses or lower their durations. If you make a mistake and walk through it afer your condi clear you can easly get 6-9 burn on you which can be devastating. To put this into perspective again this is like instantly getting 19-30 bleeds on you instantly.

Otherwise its really not that insane

The Kurt.2518:

I actually think that 5v5 works perfectly, because you are rather few it realy forces you to have proper tacticts. Still, trying out more players might be good, but I doubt 10v10 would work, it would just be total chaos

I guess we have a difference of opinion here. even if you didnt want to go all the way to 10v 10. 8v8 might work a little better. But still. i personally feel that 5v5 spreads your team out very thin. you get alot of either dueling or 4/5 man pushes that demand one team to either copy or all fall back to defend.

You say it makes tactics more appropriate which i can consider a valid point. But if you try to go offence to pull soem heat off your losing team. and then your team needs you back for some reason. it can take a VERY long time to run from one side of the map to the other. Having more people would lessen the punishment a bit.

I think having more people would create soem more engagments and allow for more skirmishes at most locations instead of 1 location and mabey a duel soemwhere else.

a little chaos would be welcomed . I also hate the game ending due to timeouts. I know some people like “quick” games to be in and out. But i feel stronghold should have at least double the alloted time. I ALSO feel that heros and summoned npcs (archers and bombers) should continually scale over time so that they will eventually become effective and getting them will have much more important.

The lord shoudl regain life over time after a fight. But he shoudl still die each game.

- archers are decent but i think they should still put a whallop on players to make them useful for pushing.

-add more players. map is very large and would work much better under a 10v10
(At least try it for the next beta to see how people respond. and scale npc life accordingly ) then 5v5. simply so that your team wont be as punished if you go off and try to gain an objective to rather then trying to stop a push. Currently game is won by a landslide by the team who can go on offense first. So adding more players would allow both teams to compete on both ends of the spectrum instead a the majority of both teams beign concentrated to one lane.

-change the channeling the channeling is better now but but stability channeling or warrior channeling can just have no counter and its infurating. if 2 people go to a point. theier will literally be no fight. it will just be who can start channling first with stability with no counter play

-i think there should be a way to use supply to either heal lord (or have him heal over time) or to resummon guards.

-summoned heroes needs to be more resilient, a pulsating condi clense would help ( a burn guardian can drop Ossai in like 5 seconds by himself)

-There is no way to comback. in conquest if your team gets it together, you can decap or 3 cap your way back into the game.
-in stronghold, getting objectives or playing defensive rewards nothing. even if you play a solid defense,
Teams win like 20-200 even though neither one broke a wall just because one is getting the kills and theirs no way to come back.

-it can be hard to actually do anythign meaningful objectiveise to help your team out of a stomp cycle when both teams can easily kill off npcs.

-add more players. map is very large and would work much better under a 10v10
(At least try it for the next beta to see how people respond. and scale npc life accordingly ) then 5v5. simply so that your team wont be as punished if you go off and try to gain an objective to rather then trying to stop a push. Currently game is won by a landslide by the team who can go on offense first. So adding more players would allow both teams to compete on both ends of the spectrum instead a the majority of both teams beign concentrated to one lane.

I actually am really enjoying the tempest but it does have some flaws. Firstly i actually think the lockout mechanic should be made more extreme

I would probably: double the damage of fire and air overloads and increase the lockout to 30s I would adjust water and earth appropriately.

also just like the ventari in revanat. after you finish your overload you should be instantly kicked out of your attunment and just given an empty bar until u pick a new attunment.

I do agree. that it would be very nice is one of the GMs or traits was like a 1 stab for 3s at the start of the attunemnt to make it a bit more reliable.

I really enjoy the playstyle of not just button mashing and spamming attunment swaps. I like going into an attument and making the most then going to the next.

I just thematicly love the idea of this large aoe dmg impactful storm you call on if you actually get to complete the channel and then drains you completly out of it.

With stun break, both the stun and daze(salvatin gm) debuff icon on enemy still run full duration on the enemy from using jade winds

Ark Bladesteele.2943:

One more suggestion:
- Make Jalis elite an invul (or endure pain-alike) while casting, then apply the 50% damage reduction. It would be a perfect disengage.

+1 totally agree. the -50% buff on yourself while casting would be apprciated

Kidel.2057:

Only enemies that keep moving around when made of jade are the ones with stun break bar. Jade winds only removes half of it, so it’s working as intended if you were talking about them.

No this is 100% happening in pvp. Mabey its a graphical bug with the stun not disapearing if they stun break. But this happens often enough that a stuned enemy just just walks away. Granted i do belive they are still under the dazed effect and cant cast anything but they can still move sometimes.

There is also a graphical bug that seems like teh hammer 5 skill animation repeats itself

Superior Sigil of Paralyzation does not work with shiro Jade Wind, passive or active.

otherwise, even a full power ferocity build such as valkarye ( still with 50% crit) does feel week for that stats compared to other classes.

Jade wind also seems to be bugging out alot. enemies get stunned but are still able to move around. If you pair it up with the daze grandmaster of salvation line the daze seems to overwrite the stun.

lioka qiao.8734:

A wvw victory objective should be a pvp based objective cause that’s what WvW is. This idea would be fine as a map mechanic in Orr or silverwastes. The wvw version of it would be something like accessing a hidden part of the enemy’s citadel to gain a strong reward buff.

Only thing i can think of atm is just implamenting this for the lord of like stonemist castle. The reward would be acutally being able to take it and gettign the extra points for retaining it. But to keep it from snowballing you would have to add a penalty such that the rest of your facilities were more easily taken so that others could flip and take it back. which is what people are not enjoying from what im reading.

Impementing this type of aspect in an actual pve setting would most likely be a checklist of do this then this then this then fight the boss then an actuall give and take and attack and defend which is the aspect that appealed to me more so then the defeat of the boss. IT was having a reward for gaining an advantage and useing that to gain some type of aggregate goal then just… a few points that feel ultimately meaningless to any1 not incredibly dedicated to winning a leaderboard.

From my experince, wvw is fun purely for the combat. taking and holding objectives is just glorified pve unless u actually fight/defend for it. just taking and holding keeps to have more points is not a rewarding aspect of the game to me. I play on a smaller server where towers and keeps can typically be taken without resistance.

In terms of having a designated winner, if this was on the desert maps, you could always have it so you can only win on enemy servers. So in theory all 3 teams could win each week.

How the loot gets sent out would be its own thing. If your server kills the lord ( or if you participated in wvw that week) you could get a token that last for a week for a vender that appears for a week after you kill the super boss to trade in. that could be an option so that everyone would benefit for the kill.

In terms of winning, Yes you do currently win or lose in wvw but it doesn’t have nearly as much satisfaction as spvp because they battle is over such a long period. And while there is ranking systems, it is more of a population measure ( other issue entirely) . It doesn’t feel as meaningful to win ( at least to me). Also you can argue that way that wvw is just scaled up spvp. And i am still not the biggest fan of the conquest format.

I just thought this idea might add a new aspect for people who are not as hardcore wvw to enjoy. and to give players additional meaning and purpose behind taking this tower than for a few points that get added to a score.

I would agree with you but server numbers balance is a bag of issues all on its own and hopefully anet addresses it with HOT in some manner. It would mess up any type of change inherently.

Any new change gets compromised because you have to think of the case where one side gets stomped which is not how the game mode is supposed to function.

For those who dont like the idea of “PVE” in the game mode. Taking spvp as an example. The lord on lecacy of the FoeFire is pve. The lords in stronghold are pve, attacking the lords in towers and keeps in wvw is pve.

This idea is more suited for eternal battlegrounds but its basically the idea to make a lord that is for the entire map that actually requires you to have map dominance which is contested over.

Currently WvW is Literally just for those who enjoy fighting for the bragging rights. You win nothing meaningful. Even holding or taking keeps or tower is somewhat meaningless on small servers where its you seiging empty keeps just to lose them later to someone else who happens by an hour later.

Granted i do enjoy the wvw game mode, and typically i do it just to fight people since im not a fan of the conquest format. But IT would be nice to just actually have an endgame in mind for all your hard efforts.

I am mainly a wvw / spvp player. I mainly enjoy roaming with a few friends to find zergs and then pick off stragglers or engage in smaller 5v5 level fights.

With the addition of the new WVW map, i was hoping for higher incentives for roamers as well as zergs.

The Role of a zerg should be to take towers and keeps and defend vs other zergs.
The roles of roamers should be to support zergs in ways the zerg shouldnt be able to do itself. The prime example is in roaming. here they can find the locations of enemey zergs and inform them of where they are heading so that it can be defended. Or in picking off the stragglers to increase your zergs chance at stopping the attack. But anet has other ideas in mind.

Anet has claimed that they want more imporance for roamers in taking camps and stopping supply dolyacks to slow down the automated upgrade system. As it currently stands this is Completly worthless to any team and it might become more impcatful with HoT but we shall see. Taking a supply camp does have its use but in general, any zerg who needs supply will just go and take one for themselves making it less useful for roamers to take.

One HIGHLY underutlized mechanic is the rune system. 30ish cele stats for everyone in wvw. In the grand scheme of things this is quite pointless and doesn’t really help zerging as much as it does 1v1 fighters. So I would propose greatly increasing the importance of these runes for each server. If a offensive team is taking it, it should increase the dmg of rams,trebs, and such to help offecnice. On defense it should make walls and structers take less damage or something to that effect. This now heavily incentivizes owning this rune system. But it is impracticle for large zergs to constantly maintain this buff. Here the roamer or small group now has a more useful roll to help large zergs and should (hopefully) keep skirmising for these points a thing which is what i particullary enjoy.

TL;DR

Add a world boss based on map control as an ultimate “win” condition for wvw.

WvW currently has no goal. The rewards are bad and the most important fact is that you cannot “win”. My proposed option is to add a super boss ( zerg or open world boss worthy) to the map. Now killing this boss should count as your win condition so to speak for wvw and upon doing so actually gives your server some day or week long reward that is worth having such as access to certain areas in the game or something that will affect pve in a way that you would want this buff to handle certain world bosses.

But to make this boss interesting, it should be tied to map dominance. So with the theme of the new desert borderlands. What you could do is make it that this largly complex boss is virtually unkillable without holding objectives. But as you take a keep or a tower, one off its aspects becomes disabled.

For example, holding the fire keep would make you immune to fire damage. So make the boss constantly fill the room with waves of lava or have fire attacks that make it difficult to win without. And for the air keep, perhaps he constantly launches your team into the air and forces them to take fall damage.

The ultimate goal would be to make this boss conquerable with like 66-75% of a map. So each tower you take will lower his defenses or reduce his damage or lower his adds that he spawns in some way that having towers matters. Such as holding the mage tower wont provide him champion mage minions to potect him.

Whats really cool is that this rewards taking and HOLDing keeps, but gives other servers counter play. For example if you finally decide to take on this boss and an enemy server uses the central mega cannon, they can flip the keeps and you sudden defence to fire goes away. But in this reguard, you can still use healing and condi clense and stablity to make up for aspcets you dont have so that you do not need all 3 to defeat this boss.

I just think this would be a fun thing to add and would help pvers find more of a home in wvw and would inscentivise servers for holding and defending and working towards the objective of killing this boss for the grand rewards of some type (perhaps ascended or legendary crafting materials or exotic drops or large wvw reward track points or some other buff that makes other world bosses easier for pvers.

Anwyay these were just my thoughts, hopefully you all find them appealing as well and mabey anet will implement something like this!

I really enjoy this game mode but basically 3 things really need to change imo.

1) Make supply more useful in late game. Firstly a new interesting mechanic is the enemies drop supply in the lords room. Now this would be much better if their was an actual use for npcs. the bomb breakers are solid but say you have already broken all the doors. summoning archers feels almost meaningless so your not really encouraged to go and use that supply you just gathered. Having either a defensive use for supply (such as creating a player destructible barricade to replace your broken wall) or making archers much stronger in terms of pushing (since their roll of defeating guards will almost always be 2nd to a players ability to kill a guard) would make this a better feature. For example, if an archer reached the lords room perhaps it would stun npcs it hit or had some other feature such that its worth it to spawn them rather then just push with a hero.

2)Award points for defending. 2nd, i think more team points should be awarded for defending. If your team is overall losing, and the enemy keeps running supply and you keep killing the summoned npcs. I agree your team should be losing due to stomp points. But in my experience, ive had games where neither outter gate was destroyed yet and the game was 20 -240 which i feel like a Whopping difference when no real objective difference had occured yet.

3)Make all champions closer to the same level. Finally (and this is minor) i think the hero’s need a bit of a rebalance. Turai Ossa is by far the strongest hero currently. most hero’s can get absolutely melted by any kind of condi burst such as a burn build. But (particularly nika) just get evaporated. Grymm svaard has a really cool mechanic but i just think the champions should be all brought to the same level. Currently Ossa is the best at actually helping a team push and then surviving to make it to the lords room. I just think grymm and nika need a slight adjustment to make them on the same level.

Anyway those were just my thoughts.

IT would be perfectly fine to add a single target limiter so it doesnt get to insane in duels. But please leave the aoe asepct of it

Hi,
I main a condi guardian in pvp. Now when i say please revert amplified wrath i am ok with the dmg nurf but please remove the icd. I understand that the devs are probably scared of people using shelter with stack dmg. However you only get 1 tick off. If your power, gettign like 10 stacks of burn still wont be that impactful.. and If your condition, is it really that bad? you only get 1 tick of it unless u have max condi duration. And its a skill aspect to time it. But regaurdless of the dueling aspect of it. The main concern is for AOE. As a condi guard, one thing you can do it go in first, pop ur block. APPLy burn on all your enemies for a time (as its still duration inc atm) and then get out. It allows you to contribute to aoe dmg and feel impact.. The might on block nurf is also sad but i guess i can accept it.

Please revert the icd. I dont think itll do anything but help out an underrepresented archtype and it really helps out for aoe purposes.

Thank you very much.

Theif Shouldnt just be revealed for failing an attack. Any action should really cancel thier stealth. So getting blocked or “miss” from blind or any aoe attack should all break thier stealth instead of just giving them the option to try again.

It is admitbaly infurating when the best option to counter play is to randomly swing at the air.

Also, a “fight reset” cannot possibly be part of intended design. If you run from a fight you should be giving up something such as a node or something. But having a fight that is enterly dictated by the thief is unfun. I am not agaisnt stealth, But I do think that the immense acces to it allows theifs to chose the pace of a fight. Even if they should lose a fight.. they can easily run away and heal up. So defeating a theif is not killing them.. Its either they give up and leave u alone to go somewhere else. or you get annoyed at not being able to secure the kill that you leave… and they follow you with ease.

That is why the meta is driven by builds that beat theifs to deal with this.

(this is not ment to be just an anti theif forum, mesmers also have thier issues with stealth) but the real issue is more stealth and its mechancis then theifs.