Guild Wars 2

Zenith.7301:

I’m sorry but I don’t get where you think you have the authority to say what game mode an elite spec was not made for….

Actually, that’s not what is being said … you can use whatever wherever you want .. PROVIDED you don’t care about your performance.

In the case you care about performance, then it’s perfectly reasonable for someone to say that within reason, a range of builds that MAY include an elite spec are optimal solutions to a given game mode. That’s simply how the game has worked, since day 1.

Anyone who studies the game enough has the authority to make these assessments; in fact, people do it as part of their game playing hobby, resulting in meta builds.

Personally, I don’t find hammer as bad as people like to make it out to be, but it will NEVER be meta for PVE because of how easy it is to find optimized solutions by swapping kits. Camping a single weapon is just not an option for the highest levels of performance on this class; these ‘swaps’ are part of the class concept.

battledrone.8315:

Obtena.7952:

battledrone.8315:

maddoctor.2738:

battledrone.8315:

…and casual players wont jump through all those hoops for some new pixels

Then they won’t get those pixels. You shouldn’t use the word casual there though, as there are loads of “casual” players that have no trouble with HoT. You are being unfair to them

lol, ive seen this problem in pretty much every mmo i have ever played
it always ends up the same way: fewer players=lesser content=even fewer
players etc.
lets hope those “loads” of “casuals” will be enough to carry this game forward
it feels good to be back in Tyria, and by some miracle i have actually unlocked druid
spec (waste of time and effort)
ill prolly just take the rest of my toons to straits of devastation and leave them there

That’s not a problem, that’s the natural evolution of MMO’s. No one has changed that evolution because no one has made a dynamic world yet.

Lots of casual players support this game and do what they need to do to get things done. I think that you need to gain a healthy sense of who this game is made for and what kind of person plays it. The game was made for casual play, it’s sustained for 5 years … I think any idea that it won’t be continued to be supported by casual players, even after the HoT expansion and raid focus is not an accurate view.

and most of the current casual players dont support the game with any money at all

Really? Based on what? You’re going to make a definitive statement, then immediately retract by saying it’s an expression of your opinion? I guess if you want to engage in thoughtless rants, that’s how you do it.

Well, what I said isn’t opinion. The game is focused on what we understand as casual players … and the fact it’s still here being developed after 5 years gives a more than neutral impression that this business model has worked for them. You have nothing more than speculation that the game is less than what Anet wanted it to be.

The only thing that proves if GW2 continues to be ‘successful’ is if it continues to be developed … and so far, despite the negative spin you want to put on the game, it’s done that.

battledrone.8315:

maddoctor.2738:

battledrone.8315:

…and casual players wont jump through all those hoops for some new pixels

Then they won’t get those pixels. You shouldn’t use the word casual there though, as there are loads of “casual” players that have no trouble with HoT. You are being unfair to them

lol, ive seen this problem in pretty much every mmo i have ever played
it always ends up the same way: fewer players=lesser content=even fewer
players etc.
lets hope those “loads” of “casuals” will be enough to carry this game forward
it feels good to be back in Tyria, and by some miracle i have actually unlocked druid
spec (waste of time and effort)
ill prolly just take the rest of my toons to straits of devastation and leave them there

That’s not a problem, that’s the natural evolution of MMO’s. No one has changed that evolution because no one has made a dynamic world yet.

Lots of casual players support this game and do what they need to do to get things done. I think that you need to gain a healthy sense of who this game is made for and what kind of person plays it. The game was made for casual play, it’s sustained for 5 years … I think any idea that it won’t be continued to be supported by casual players, even after the HoT expansion and raid focus is not an accurate view.

Ramoth.9064:

If understanding meta is so hard for you, you really should get yourself acquainted to competitive game modes before you spout these nonsensical arguments. Its a farce!

You want to talk about competitive game modes while supporting the idea of condi buffed daggers? That’s a seemingly contradictory position. Perhaps you want to clear it up by presenting a competitive build that reaps the benefits of this condi buffed dagger or you all talk?

No one is being specific about competitive game modes in this discussion except for you. I don’t think it’s an unreasonable ask: If the condi buffed dagger is so awesome to fix certain condi builds, competitive or not, then obviously you and others have put some effort into what those builds are, how they would work and where they are used … why so sheepish? Obviously I’m open and interested to a discussion on that. Show me I’m wrong; that these builds exist. So far you got … chill on dagger; at best, an inferior copy cat of the GS. Not a good first show.

Ramoth.9064:

No one would take staff as anything more than a utility weapon they can’t wait to get out of. For it to be any good it needs to be more than a fire and forget weapon.

… and? You’re re-iterating what I said here; no where did I give the impression that staff would sufficiently fill the ‘condi LF regen’ role as it exists now, to be clear, I simply believe it’s an easier ‘sell’ to buff staff to address the reasons people want to buff dagger. Of course you didn’t comprehend that, or chose to not do so.

The irony is that you complain about staff is a weapon that people don’t want to use more than they have to. Funny … that’s exactly what anyone would think about a condi buffed dagger as well … fill your LF and get out ASAP.

While it’s unfortunate we lost our ability to have a non-weapon based condition damage build, I think it’s inevitable this happened because of the focused condition damage build we are getting with Axe.

I don’t really see a way to get around this; how does Anet maintain the globally-available condi application while having a focused condi build at the same time? How is that situation something they can even contemplate adjusting when balance is in question? I don’t think the answer is to balance durations or different applications on the knife’s edge … then have to continue to do so with other game changes so things stay reasonable.

I would prefer to maintain VoJ as it was but if the tradeoff is a focused, good condition damage build, I will take that. It’s not like there was a massive range of good condi builds because of the global VoJ application anyways; Passive VoJ was always going to favour the weapon with the fastest executions.

It’s boring? Well, to be honest, you get used to it after playing GW2 for 5 years ..

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Fun fact: melee range happens in all game modes, even on condition builds. It’s true!

That’s right … We have a GS and a Scepter condi builds. So again, I’m seriously questioning where a melee condi weapon fits into EITHER of those builds … and even why the issues people express that a condi dagger would solve are not already solved with a Staff.

GS beats dagger in melee damage and LF regen; Scepter beats dagger in condition application. How does creating a marginally applicable weapon in any of those categories help either of those groups of condi users? What is that build look like and what is it used for?

You list the reasons this is desired. You can list 100 reasons this or anything else is desired; being desirable is less than compelling. The question is what problem are you trying to solve and why is the condi buffed dagger the BEST way to solve that. I think that solving ‘LF regen on condi’ builds is NOT best solved with a condi buffed dagger, simply because of how close Staff already is to doing that as well as being a meaningful alternative in either a Scepter or a GS condi build. It’s not even clear that a weapon buff approach is the best way to address that problem, so how anyone in this thread has nailed down “bleed on dagger AA” is beyond me.

Crinn.7864:

Staff is the utility weapon which is why its so “hodgepodge”

Moreover staff already has a role to itself that it fills, and fills well. It’s a mainstay in both sPvP and WvW.

Dagger on the other hand is just a power melee weapon that competes directly with greatsword, and because of that is never used in any of the gamemodes.

If dagger was given some level of synergy with condis, it would actually have a place because it would not have a direct competitor for its slot.

While making staff more interactive would be nice, staff is hardly in need of a rework since its already competitive in several modes.

This is what I call ‘chasing’ meta; the idea that a large portion of a toolset being competitive is a necessary part of a healthy toolset, and using that idea to justify the need to change. I don’t believe that’s a compelling reason for change, because Anet is either incapable or not interested in doing so; evidence of the 5 years we HAVEN’T had a large range of ‘competitive’ weapons on every class.

I don’t disagree because because I do think you’re right .. it would be NICE for weapons to be more inline with each other and have some ‘place’ in the game. I just think that kind of thinking doesn’t provoke Anet. They simply provide a wide range of concepts for us to mix and match; they aren’t really concerned with ensure these combination ‘do’ something in a certain upper range of performance.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Staff could potentially be used to fill the “condition build life force builder” weapon, but it needs a total rework to do so. Dagger mainhand, meanwhile, would need only a small change and would strengthen its conceptual identity in the process, as well as moving it away from being in direct competition with Greatsword.

That’s not really an accurate assessment … Staff ALREADY has the ingredients on it to address the concerns people are expressing. Making Staff a more appropriate ‘LF regen Condi" weapon does not require much more than some changes to the numbers that already exist on it; I question even now why anyone use use a condi buffed dagger over the current version of staff. What does that build even look like? What’s it used for?

There is a big problem with the whole approach in this thread; There isn’t a problem trying to be solved. What you have is a bunch of people that WANT a reason to use the dagger coming up with reasons it would be good to do so. The problem is that there are BETTER ways to solve the problems those reasons address. I mean, the whole problem that there isn’t much LF regen on a condi build isn’t even necessarily a weapon buff solution in the first place! Why would anyone want to be locked into a WEAPON to address that problem? Why would any Scepter Necro want a melee weapon to do that? Do you really expect me to believe that Scepter Condi users WANT to go to melee range to replen their LF with a dagger? Have you put any thought into the fact that if people want to be melee condi, they are already using the superior Reaper GS chill approach to do that? Do you honestly think a condi buffed dagger has a role in either the Secpter or GS condi builds?

I honestly don’t think anyone has thought this suggestion through. You’re all so desperate to get ANY buff on dagger to make it more desirable to use, that you’re willing to suggest of marginal ones to get it hoping something clicks with Anet. I think that’s tragic.

Staff doesn’t have a concept? I would beg to differ. I think it’s concept is pretty clear … AOE effects that ‘mark’ targets applying debilitating conditions at range. I mean, how is that not a straight forward concept? It’s about as ‘vanilla’ a staff conceptualization as you can get …

Regardless, if the concepts are too abstract for you, then simply looking at what Staff does and how it does it in the current ‘space’ of Necro condi builds should be a simpler way to conclude how it is closer to what people are asking for. The point isn’t to argue what has the ‘best’ or ‘clearest’ concept; that’s only one aspect to be considered. The point is what weapon is most likely to address the problems people have defined; if we stick to LF regen on a condition build, Staff is clearly closer to solving that problem, technically and conceptually.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Staff is very slow on the life force generation. It also already does have a combo field on 3.

The issue with staff is that it just does no damage and it requires a trait to generate life force on anything but the auto. Dagger is at least close to being sufficient.

Basically, adding bleeds on Dagger auto fulfills the role without requiring a total rework, which is what Staff needs. You’re constantly screaming pointlessly about the “identity” of a weapon. Staff doesn’t have one aside from “1200 range”.

Hey, you can delude yourself all you want about what is rework and what isn’t; any suggestion is going to take Anet to do something. Staff is ALREADY closer to that “LF regen Condi” weapon than any AA condi-buffed dagger will ever be. These are just semantics … The amount of LF regen on staff is more dependent on the scenario than dagger is; I don’t think it’s a forgone conclusion that Staff is worst than dagger in that respect, or even inappropriate … I don’t think anyone established that we need the HIGHEST LF regen to solve this problem, just more than what Scepter gives. Staff does that.

Still, if Anet is willing to change a weapon, none of it’s stats are set in stone. If it would be reasonable or necessary to up the LF regen on Staff, it could be done, without breaking it’s concept. Conceptually, Staff is a more appropriate weapon to address these LF regen/condi problems than dagger will ever be.

Ramoth.9064:

Oh obtena, how about you throw some of these “better solutions” our way.

No problem … if you guys want to solve a “need more LF regen for condition builds” problem, then the staff is a step away from being that weapon. I didn’t even have to think too hard about it and neither would anyone else with lots of Necro experience.

1. Its got the conditions flavour to it already
2. Its got the range to match the Scepter if you want to use that as a strategy
3. Its got the LF regen people desire
4. Its AOE so it plays right into how Shades work for Area Control

1. I would fix #2 to be a more significant conditions contribution. That’s tweeking numbers
2. Staff has been missing a Combo Field for a LONG time, just like Guardian Scepter/Sword were missing Symbols … It would be a nice addition. To be honest, I don’t recall what the various combo finishers do but I don’t think it would be too hard to come up with an appropriate field inline with the theme of the Staff.
3. I would probably remove piercing to an AOE or tweek AA speed … because the projectile is bloody slow and people/NPC’s don’t tend to line up for you, but bunch up. Either works IMO.

The Staff weapon concept is already inline with the things that people are looking for. It’s way easier to think of ways to improve Staff for a role it’s already partially good at than it is to thoughtlessly adjust dagger INTO a concept that even buffed, it would be at best, average.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Oh, I’m sorry, I was only counting reasons given that weren’t directly addressed.

• would be too strong
  Strength of a damaging condition added depends on condition, stack count, and stack duration. Keeping these low ensures this isn’t a problem unless dagger is already where it needs to be on damage (you’ve said yourself that it isn’t.)

• Would make Scepter irrelevant
  Scepter has a massive range advantage and would still put out higher DPS in a condition build than a low stack condition.

• would encourage people camping dagger
  You weren’t able to back this up and actually immedietly backtracked when called out on it.

• would remove choice
  It would actually open up a new choice to condition builds

• would discourage swapping
  Low stacks=only using dagger for building life force/sustain. Swapping necessary for higher damage output.

• isn’t on theme for the weapon/against the identity
  Weapon already has a skill that wants the target bleeding. Giving it a way to actually accomplish that goal is called “synergy” not “lack of identity” or “changing identity.”

• bleeding on target would be braindead if added to auto
  To be fair, I haven’t addressed this one yet because I thought it was so obvious, but this would require completing a full auto chain before using Life Siphon. And I mean right before with a short Bleed, as in no time to do anything else if you wanted to maximize the damage. Considering Life Siphon has a range advantage over the auto of 470, this is hardly a sure thing.

• bleeding should be achieved through other means
  Why? Should Ghastly Claws lose its damage buff versus Vulnerable targets because the auto applies Vulnerability? Should Scepter not inflict conditions with the auto or Grasping Dead because Feast of Corruption wants conditions on the target?

Bring up a legitimate argument that’s not “I don’t like it” and I’ll answer it completely in 5 sentences or less.

I’m only going to address and correct your recap of the concerns that I ACTUALLY have (not sure where you made up the others from):

1. The build choice argument is lame; there are not more builds opening up because of this simple suggestion; at most, a condition might give a player pause to rethink a trait or a sigil. By you’re own admittance, if you only put bleed on the last chain so it’s not a braindead bleed on target, then this is made even less effective as a ‘choice’ for condition build applications. Claiming we get all these new build options as a smokescreen to get this on dagger is dishonest IMO.

2. Bleeding shouldn’t only be open to us with other means … but it already IS open to us from other means. Adding bleed to dagger is actually redundant and doesn’t make players think about how to take advantage of effective their builds give or think about applying effects their builds have. Maybe you think making the game dumber is a good thing; I do not.

3. Any bleed added to auto removes any thoughtful execution of Dagger 2 that exists … if the target is always bleeding, the effect is always active. They might as well just buff Dagger 2 another 20% and be done. Adding an way to get a special event effect permanently is dumb.

4. It would be too strong; No, I did not say it would be too strong. I object to the thoughtless idea that putting a condition on a power weapon as an effective way to buff its DPS. Taking advantage of a condition on dagger that with different traits/skills/gear prefix would actually be a DPS loss compared to vanilla builds using dagger. This is one of the primary reasons I dislike this idea; condi buffing dagger is a dead end. That may change with Scourge but it’s speculative.

5. It would make Scepter irrelevant; No, I didn’t say that. People argued that they wanted a melee condition weapon because of a ‘gap’. I’m pointing out to them that Scepter used at melee range already fills that gap.

6. Weapon identity. I think this is a strong point that people easily gloss over because they misunderstand what weapon concept is; I don’t blame them because Anet doesn’t explicitly explain them. Still, they exist and there are strong hints of what those concepts are. I haven’t got a problem if you want to propose dagger be something else as a concept. I do have a problem if you want to add an effect and claim it ‘fits’ what dagger should be.

I’m not the only one that objects to this idea in the thread either, for much the same reasons I hold. If there is one overall concluding statement I can make, it’s stated simply: There are better opportunities to address these issues than the path chosen by this idea.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Obtena.7952:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Obtena.7952:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

But not being in line with the intent of the weapon? The weapon already has a skill that wants your foes to bleed.

Again, I’ve explained why that’s a reason to NOT add bleed to dagger AA. The weapon takes advantage of bleeding foes; that does not mean it’s intent is to be a condition application weapon. Enabling the weapon to give the extra dagger 2 advantage without thought is a stupid implementation.

I love how you just ignored the part there about Axe having received a very similar change. In fact, it happened in the exact same patch as Life Siphon started caring about Bleeding! They’re even both #2 skills and channels!

I don’t see how the two influence each other’s concepts. Axe does both, doesn’t necessarily mean that dagger needs to as well. Of course, it doesn’t mean dagger can’t but that’s neither here nor there. I’ve given reasons I don’t think it should.

Your reasons have been…nonexistent, really. You’ve basically been saying “I don’t think it should have bleeding because then it would have bleeding and I don’t think it should have that.”

No that’s actually unfair and dishonest; there have been many reasons given for why I don’t think this should happen. Dismiss them as you wish, but they are well documented in this thread. Even my previous post gives one (of many) good explanation to why I don’t think bleed should be on dagger AA. You simply ignore them.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Obtena.7952:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

But not being in line with the intent of the weapon? The weapon already has a skill that wants your foes to bleed.

Again, I’ve explained why that’s a reason to NOT add bleed to dagger AA. The weapon takes advantage of bleeding foes; that does not mean it’s intent is to be a condition application weapon. Enabling the weapon to give the extra dagger 2 advantage without thought is a stupid implementation.

I love how you just ignored the part there about Axe having received a very similar change. In fact, it happened in the exact same patch as Life Siphon started caring about Bleeding! They’re even both #2 skills and channels!

I don’t see how the two influence each other’s concepts. Axe does both, doesn’t necessarily mean that dagger needs to as well. Of course, it doesn’t mean dagger can’t but that’s neither here nor there.

I’ve given reasons I don’t think it should. I mean, I think it’s fair to say that the axe’s intention was ALWAYS to take advantage of vuln … it’s the very nature of the condition in the first place, so making Axe 2 more appealing to use because it actually gives meaningful choice when deciding to execute Axe 2.

Adding bleed to dagger aa actually takes out meaningful choice … you can just get the advantage all the time because you’re always applying bleeds on AA instead of having to time or wait for an applied bleed to get the extra advantage.

So maybe that’s a subtle difference, but it’s a significant one for game play

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

But not being in line with the intent of the weapon? The weapon already has a skill that wants your foes to bleed.

Again, I’ve explained why that’s a reason to NOT add bleed to dagger AA. The weapon takes advantage of bleeding foes; that does not mean it’s intent is to be a condition application weapon. Enabling the weapon to give the extra dagger 2 advantage without thought is a stupid implementation.

The ‘axe’ argument doesn’t make much sense to me. Their is no reason the dagger has to apply bleed and take advantage of it just because axe applies vuln and takes advantage of it. That’s the Axe concept.

No, I said adding a condition in not inline with the intent of the weapon. That’s a significant difference.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Sublimatio.6981:

i would rather have staff completely reworked than see just bleeding added to dagger

Staff definitely needs attention and an actual identity. That said, bleeds on dagger make thematic sense as the weapon is tied to blood magic and already has a skill that wants the target to be bleeding specifically (instead of just wanting conditions).

That’s a very weak thematic link IMO. If anything, the staff link with Mark of Evasion is more relevant as a thematic link to Staff than this.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Obtena.7952:

If you think adding a paltry condi on AA is ‘intention changing’ for a weapon, then I don’t believe you understand what intention or weapon concept actually means.

Funny you say this, because that’s the argument YOU YOURSELF ARE MAKING.

So, yeah. You can’t even keep your own arguments straight. You’re done here.

I’m making an argument for adding a condi on AA to change it’s intention? No, that’s not even close to anything I’ve said, ever.

Sublimatio.6981:

i would rather have staff completely reworked than see just bleeding added to dagger

I would like to expand on that … because it makes much more sense to me to take a weapon that already has LF regen and condition applications to address the concerns people have raised in this thread they want to solve. It also maintains meaningful choice. Seems like a much more likely, sensible and inline with what that weapon does.

That’s just plain dishonest; I’ve never said the intention couldn’t change; I said if you want to add something to a weapon, it needs to be inline with the intention of the weapon. That’s not the same thing.

If you think adding a paltry condi on AA is ‘intention changing’ for a weapon, then I don’t believe you understand what intention or weapon concept actually means.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Nothing obtuse here. You guys want to pat yourselves on the back for a poorly thought out idea to buff dagger with damage conditions while ignoring game mechanics and intention. It’s not all that hard to even think of an idea that doesn’t ignore those things to buff dagger, but for some reason they elude you because of this conditions fixation.

I mean, someone asked what happened to simply buffing dagger damage … he was completely ignored because that idea doesn’t push the condition buff agenda.

OK so what about that idea? It maintains the concept of the dagger, it maintains meaningful choices during swapping, it addresses ‘competitive’ to a degree.

Oh, applying conditions = ignoring game mechanics now? That’s a new one to laugh to!

Maybe you think that … I never said such a thing. Feel free to laugh at yourself if that’s what you want to think.

I will say that applying conditions that isn’t aligned with the concept of a power weapon is ignoring it’s concept and intention.

You have no idea what intentions a weapon has despite how much you think you know about the game. GS in raids is now used in condition builds, despite it being marketed as a ‘power’ weapon.

That’s not correct. You can get a really good insight to what the devs intended a weapon to do by it’s skills, the special traits associated with it and the other traits in the same line … to claim otherwise is nonsense.

Again, intentions have constantly been changed. None of which you could have predicted in your tenure as a fake arenanet employee.

Hey, I’m all for changing intention … but adding bleed on AA isn’t going to do that. That’s silly. It doesn’t do anything … there is no new concept there and even worse, an effect that very little to take advantage of. It’s simply a desperate plea for a buff.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

You buff dagger direct damage and now you have a big problem with Greatsword: one will always be better than the other if you try to solve its issues that way.

By only increasing Power coefficients, you either kill Greatsword or you leave Dagger irrelevant. This will continue to be the case until yet another Power-based Elite Spec comes along.

However, by tweaking Dagger’s identity to that of a sustain-focused weapon for all damage types, you now have something attractive to many builds without trying to directly compete with other options. Adding short duration bleeds means condi builds now have an option to rapidly replenish life force without totally murdering their damage output. It means Life Siphon actually has synergy with both of the other skills on the weapon. It means Power builds still get a DPS boost (which they need).

It’s not without tradeoffs, though. For condition builds, you will still lose DPS and be at higher risk due to melee range. For Power builds, Axe is much safer. Only Life Siphon useage doesn’t have a tradeoff, and honestly, that skill is hard enough to actually use that a direct buff through self-synergy won’t hurt anything.

Axe is actually a decent weapon now due to self-synergy and a focused theme of execution. Vulnerability increases the Axe 2 damage, which subsequently makes it easier to get the target low on health to stack Vuln faster and get them in range for the second hit on Axe 3. Each skill feeds into the others and now it’s actually a good weapon. Dagger, they went halfway on the synergy, and they chose the bad half to start with.

I don’t disagree that dagger concept is lacking; that’s a game issue more than a weapon issue … life-drain/sustain builds aren’t implemented very well or very useful. I don’t think adding a condition to it to change it’s identity will really do that much to change that. I mean, if we are being honest and civil here, I think the whole lifesteal idea needs to be dropped and dagger get a whole new one if dagger as a competitive weapon is to be a thing again. The lifesteal/sustain is a questionable strategy in this game and Anet doesn’t seem to want to support it for ‘competitive’ level.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Nothing obtuse here. You guys want to pat yourselves on the back for a poorly thought out idea to buff dagger with damage conditions while ignoring game mechanics and intention. It’s not all that hard to even think of an idea that doesn’t ignore those things to buff dagger, but for some reason they elude you because of this conditions fixation.

I mean, someone asked what happened to simply buffing dagger damage … he was completely ignored because that idea doesn’t push the condition buff agenda.

OK so what about that idea? It maintains the concept of the dagger, it maintains meaningful choices during swapping, it addresses ‘competitive’ to a degree.

Oh, applying conditions = ignoring game mechanics now? That’s a new one to laugh to!

Maybe you think that … I never said such a thing. Feel free to laugh at yourself if that’s what you want to think.

I will say that applying conditions that isn’t aligned with the concept of a power weapon is ignoring it’s concept and intention.

You have no idea what intentions a weapon has despite how much you think you know about the game. GS in raids is now used in condition builds, despite it being marketed as a ‘power’ weapon.

That’s not correct. You can get a really good insight to what the devs intended a weapon to do by it’s skills, the special traits associated with it and the other traits in the same line … to claim otherwise is nonsense.

Those things that were added are inline with the concept of the weapon .. I see no problem with that … and that had nothing to do with balance either, it was a change basd on the weapon concept. That doesn’t mean that dagger AA bleed application are though.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Nothing obtuse here. You guys want to pat yourselves on the back for a poorly thought out idea to buff dagger with damage conditions while ignoring game mechanics and intention. It’s not all that hard to even think of an idea that doesn’t ignore those things to buff dagger, but for some reason they elude you because of this conditions fixation.

I mean, someone asked what happened to simply buffing dagger damage … he was completely ignored because that idea doesn’t push the condition buff agenda.

OK so what about that idea? It maintains the concept of the dagger, it maintains meaningful choices during swapping, it addresses ‘competitive’ to a degree.

Oh, applying conditions = ignoring game mechanics now? That’s a new one to laugh to!

Maybe you think that … I never said such a thing. Feel free to laugh at yourself if that’s what you want to think.

I will say that applying conditions that isn’t aligned with the concept of a power weapon is ignoring it’s concept and intention.

Nothing obtuse here. You guys want to pat yourselves on the back for a poorly thought out idea to buff dagger with damage conditions while ignoring game mechanics and intention. It’s not all that hard to even think of an idea that doesn’t ignore those things to buff dagger, but for some reason they elude you because of this conditions fixation.

I mean, someone asked what happened to simply buffing dagger damage … he was completely ignored because that idea doesn’t push the condition buff agenda.

OK so what about that idea? It maintains the concept of the dagger, it maintains meaningful choices during swapping, it addresses ‘competitive’ to a degree.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Why does this have to be regulated to competitive play? So you can claim my concerns and points aren’t relevant? GG. I think you are dillusional if you think adding condtion to dagger AA elevates it to ‘competitive play’, whatever your vague definition of that may be.

The fact is that while I’m a primary dissenter, I haven’t been the only one; try to keep it honest OK? The other people that have commented and challenged this idea have also echoed my own feelings on this; ignoring the fundamental concept of the weapon just to buff it out of what is simple desperation. Not a compelling reason.

Balance is based around the nature of competition, if there were no competition involved there would be no need to balance.

This isn’t a question of balance. If it was, no one would be so clueless as to suggest a few conditions applied by dagger AA would address it.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Because if you’re not balancing around anything remotely competitive, what point is there in balancing?

Here comes the ‘metapushing’ mentality. You can’t think of a reason, other than being competitive, for Anet to buff or change something? That’s funny, because it happens often that things are buffed for non-competitive reasons. You’ve even mentioned some of those changes yourself in this thread!

Maybe you want to think that balancing is only because of ‘competitive’, but that’s not true. There have been buffs, and nerfs, simply because of concepts that weren’t implemented. Let’s not pretend that every change is a ‘competition’-based one.

I’ve given TONS of reasons for my dissent. I don’t really get that accusation. If I thought it was useful to continually table all the reasons I think this is a bad idea, I would.

Why does this have to be regulated to competitive play? So you can claim my concerns and points aren’t relevant? GG. I think you are dillusional if you think adding condtion to dagger AA elevates it to ‘competitive play’, whatever your vague definition of that may be.

The fact is that while I’m a primary dissenter, I haven’t been the only one; try to keep it honest OK? The other people that have commented and challenged this idea have also echoed my own feelings on this; ignoring the fundamental concept of the weapon just to buff it out of what is simple desperation. Not a compelling reason.

I said it won’t get added because it starts diminishing meaningful choices, which is clearly intended by the design of the game. What makes you think Anet doesn’t intent for classes to have restrictions and trade offs by choice of weapon? It’s pretty clear it is intended.

Besides, dagger needs things? I think there is a big difference between what it needs and what you want it to have. Dagger 2 has synergy with bleeding? Seems to me that’s a good reason to NOT put bleeding on Dagger AA … I mean, if you’re just going to make an opponent bleed for so little effort, then that synergy simply turns into a thinly veiled buff of Dagger 2. The idea here isn’t that Anet just hand you all these buffs; you need to think about where they come from to take advantage of them. There is no thinking behind getting a bleed on AA just to automatically get a conditional, extra effect on Dagger 2. That’s silly.

To say there is NO way to get bleed to take advantage of Dagger 2 extra effect because Dagger AA doesn’t have bleed is nonsense. Your demonstrating that you aren’t willing to solve your build challenges with the tools we already have.

Increasing DPS? Again, I’ve asked why any sensible player would want to increase a power weapon DPS with a few crap condition applications. Apparently, you guys think this is the obvious answer; I think it’s a dishonest reason to buff dagger with a condition.

Finally … the number of builds. So far, I’ve seen zero builds from the people that make this claim that would make me think I’ve got something new to try out; a way to make me rethink how I build and play necro; if dagger got a condition.

This isn’t about balance … this is simply an attempt to blur lines across weapons to make choices less meaningful. I can’t assure you that weapon swapping doesn’t force a player to make meaningful choices? I’m pretty sure it does …. otherwise we wouldn’t be talking here now about how that’s a bad thing.

You’re going to wait a long time; my argument isn’t about camping dagger, it’s about how dagger doesn’t actually need more versatility (because we have that through swapping) or how simply stating adding condition is an improvement isn’t a reason to buff it. You can ignore that Anet wants you to make those choices to get things you need if you want, but rest assured, weapon swapping is there exactly for this reason, to enforce players to make meaningful choices to get things they need from the various weapons.

I mean, we can wax on academic all we want about what condition and how many on whatever weapon … sounds good until someone asks you why it’s necessary despite the fact that it’s clear we can swap weapons to get the things you say are the reasons to buff dagger.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Translation: I don’t actually have any points, so I’m just going to pretend that I know what ANet wants and just hate the idea of any more condition application being added.

Adding bleeds on dagger auto does many things to help the weapon. It ups the damage (which it needs, It gives synergy to its own skills (which is always good), and it opens up the number of options for various builds (namely condition and hybrid builds).

So, what language is “Obtena” anyway? Has to be some Greek offshoot, given the similarity to “Obtuse.”

I don’t need to pretend … even you’re supporter friend admitted that Anet doesn’t want us to camp a single weapon because it’s not the intention. I mean, you’re again trying to discredit simple facts of the game to promote your desire to have condition on dagger. That’s not really a sensible approach because that is in fact, what Anet will use to consider the idea; the intent and mechanics of the game.

Crinn.7864:

Lahmia.2193:

Yeah you’re right there, fair point well made. What do you think the amounts should be, if they were to add?

I think a single stack of bleed for 3.5 seconds on Necrotic Stab and Necrotic Bite would suffice. It would be just enough duration to get off life siphon, and also enough to make the weapon not a joke for condi builds, while at the same time not be enough to overthrow scepter.

Obtena.7952:

that Anet doesn’t want people to camp a single weapon, then why is it in their best interest to make a single weapon so versatile? That makes no sense.

Because making dagger versatile would give dagger a role, since right now dagger is just a bad version of GS.

Really? You don’t think dagger has a role? You think dagger needs to be more versatile to make it have a role? Those things don’t make much sense do they? Other posters have outlined daggers role in this thread and I can assure you that if you want to give a weapon a role, adding versatility is not the most effective approach to do that.

All of that is understood; it goes iwthout saying that giving a condition to dagger makes it better, even though I struggle to understand how that means it’s a good idea; that means any improvement is a good idea. Clearly you can justify any buff with that logic, though some buffs make no sense.

Let’s just not pretend that condi buffing dagger is in Anet’s best interests, just because some of you think it’s a good idea. Maybe if people thought about things they wrote … I mean, if Lahmia is acknowledging that Anet doesn’t want people to camp a single weapon, then why is it in their best interest to make a single weapon so versatile? That makes no sense. If we have legitimate reasons to promote this idea, then say them; no need to invent things that aren’t true or make common truths reasons to buff.

Lahmia.2193:

Kam.4092:

Lahmia.2193:

Crinn.7864:

tbh while I believe putting a condi on dagger would be great, chill is not the one.

Putting chill on dagger only really synergizes with Reaper, it does nothing for scourge and little for core necro.

The dagger AA should apply bleeding on the 2nd and 3rd auto chain, and dagger #3 should have a lower cast time to make it more reliable to land.

I’d still opt for torment, just because its pretty much the main scourge condition (and burning would be a bit much).

I can’t really picture a weapon that does Immobilize having Torment.

I would rather have a mix of Bleeding and Poison on Mainhand Dagger.

The arguing in this thread has really done nothing, and seems to mainly be from one person now. I don’t know if Obtena is trolling again or what. They have had a long presence of doing things like this in threads in the past. I just ignore them now.

This thread is just a game suggestion that makes sense. Arguing back and forth attacking other people’s ideas does nothing. At least I see more agreement in the thread.

The reason I want a mix of Bleeding and Poison is because I don’t want Mainhand Dagger to be the most powerful Condition weapon. I’d be fine with just Poison.

The only problem I could see from suggesting this, is making camping Mainhand Dagger more powerful than Scepter. I don’t want it to be stronger. I just want it to do a bit more damage, so the loss of switching to it for Life Force isn’t as big of a loss. I think Mainhand Dagger is also the best weapon to add a Condition to for us.

Even if they never do this, I’d want Life Force on Scepter auto at least. I’m just hoping they add a Condition to Mainhand Dagger because the playstyle when testing was so fun. It was the most fun I’ve had in a while on Necromancer. I loved switching from Scepter/Dagger to Dagger/Torch. It was actually using a weapon instead of just abusing it for Combo Fields like with the Greatsword.

I just hope Devs read threads like these.

It’s in anet’s interests to be honest, since they aren’t a fan of camping a single weapon set.

That doesn’t make sense … increasing the versatility of dagger with conditions PROMOTES camping a single weapon set. So no, I don’t see it being in Anet’s interest.

True there is a player element but the bottom line here is that every class has the tools it needs to do the content in the game. Sometimes, even with that set of tools, the player element results in failure. This isn’t a deficiency of the game; I come from an era where it was COMMON for people to be unable to finish games; some games only provided you the slimest margin of toolset to win it and there was no social network to push you through. GW2 is not that kind of game. The tools the classes have are more than sufficient, even overabundant in their ‘survival’ toolset and players/guides are more than giving of information to help people succeed. if a player can’t figure out how to use those things, Anet shouldn’t be coming in to save them with a fix.

Ramoth.9064:

If you were running a condi reaper build, you wouldn’t use dagger. End of story, theres no debate necessary for that.

If dagger applied chill, you COULD use dagger, thanks to deathly chill, and the fast attack speed. There, you would have a supplementary weapon that applies condition damage, and has the added advantage of faster LF.

That doesn’t change what I’m saying; applying chill in reaper and using a dagger isn’t unique to a chill-buffed dagger so it’s not a new build option. Therefore, it’s not a good example of how adding a condition to dagger opens up new builds.

The option to use a dagger to make a chill reaper isn’t ‘new’ though … I can do that now. It’s not even an all that unreasonable build … not much more unreasonable than a GS chill reaper build is. Is it competitive? That wasn’t the claim people made … to the ADVANTAGE of people arguing for condi-buffs on dagger. if you want to talk about making dagger competitive with a condi-buff, I think you got a big problem there.

It’s not an unreasonable ask here; if condi-buffing a dagger opens up new build for people, what are they? There isn’t any ambiguity in that ask … I think it’s pretty clear what is meant by ‘new builds’. If I can make a chill dagger reaper build, then adding chill to reaper doesn’t make chill dagger reaper builds a ‘new option’ to me.

You assume dagger has no purpose and shouldn’t be able to be kited? That’s a poor assumption considering it’s the way dagger worked for the last 5 years and people have presented good ideas of what the purpose of dagger is. Maybe you feel it’s too significant a deficiency. Besides, you don’t actually make sense … a condition-buffed dagger would prevent it from being kited? … Um, no, it wouldn’t prevent that at all. That would depend very specifically on the buff and the scenario. In otherwords, a condi-buff wouldn’t be enough to address that concern.

I’m not setting any parameters; people said ‘new options’. That’s their words. I can only assume that if they meant ‘improvement’ that’s what they would have said. I specifically asked about what builds would be new; I have never strayed from that line. You want to make this about new things the dagger can do, I never asked that. I want to know what new builds a condi buffed dagger would present because that’s what people claimed a condi-buffed dagger would do.

The justification makes no sense … an improvement isn’t a justification to buff anything. That means every possible buff you can propose, no matter how ridiculous, makes sense and should be done? If that’s how you think, then you question my qualification? Apparently logic and reason is my qualification … Asking for buffs just because it will improve something makes no sense.

You are saying no one in this thread has agreed with me? I think you should go back and have a look at the thread. I’m simply asking for people justify their arguments so we have a good basis for a discussion. Right now we have people making up reasons that don’t make much sense. If there are builds that are opened up because of condi dagger, let’s see them. If you want to interpret ‘opened up’ as improved, then there isn’t much to discuss, because any condi buff to dagger is an improvement. Therefore, you can justify any buff to it because of that reason … clearly not a sound reason to buff anything in this game.

That doesn’t change what I’ve said … improving dagger builds we can currently make is not the same thing as opening up new builds we haven’t had before. If someone interprets that as a ‘new’ build, it is simply to suit their own purpose.

Dagger solving problems with current builds doesn’t show those builds are new; it simply demonstrates improvement to current builds … which in itself shows these builds aren’t new. This is not the premise that people argued for buffing dagger with conditions. It’s easily argued that those deficiencies provide meaningful points of choice for players when considering what they want to do. Again, you’re misinterpretation of what is meant by new builds vs. improved ones. I’m not here to argue that adding conditions to dagger makes it better; that goes without saying.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

Crinn.7864:

No you can make a underpowered noncompetitive reaper build with dagger.

And condi dagger would have a place in condi builds that would be otherwise starved for lifeforce, since scepter is the worst mainhand for LF generation. It would also give condi necro a weapon that has some sustain.

Let’s not get in the trap where improvement equals new. Yes, you can get those things with condi-buffed dagger. I’m not asking about improvement to current builds; that was not the reason people gave to condi buff dagger.

Again, all of those things are addressed by weapon swapping. I’ve already covered these points. The concept of the weapon and the ability to swap weapons as meaningful choices can’t be done away with because you don’t want to make meaningful choices or ignore weapon concepts.

Lets not get into the trap of flying off on tangents nobody agrees with.

There needs no agreement; weapon swapping IS the method Anet provides players to make these choices to address some of the deficiencies with a single weapon builds. Anyone that thinks otherwise is not paying attention to how the game works.

Crinn.7864:

No you can make a underpowered noncompetitive reaper build with dagger.

And condi dagger would have a place in condi builds that would be otherwise starved for lifeforce, since scepter is the worst mainhand for LF generation. It would also give condi necro a weapon that has some sustain.

Let’s not get in the trap where improvement equals new. Yes, you can get those things with condi-buffed dagger. I’m not asking about improvement to current builds; that was not the reason people gave to condi buff dagger.

Again, all of those things are addressed by weapon swapping. I’ve already covered these points. The concept of the weapon and the ability to swap weapons as meaningful choices can’t be done away with because you don’t want to make meaningful choices or ignore weapon concepts.

Crinn.7864:

Obtena.7952:

I’m simply asking you to show what builds open up by adding conditions to dagger

It would create builds that use dagger.

I can already make a chill reaper build using the dagger as it is now; chill on AA isn’t not the only source of chill to make that build work. Is it as good as chill on AA? No, but that’s not the question being asked here. If the premise for the argument to add condi to dagger is that it opens up new builds, then adding chill to dagger for a Reaper build doesn’t demonstrate that.

I’ve already covered the discussion about ‘serious’ builds … condition-buffed dagger does not even come close to making one if that’s your angle. If you think adding a condition to dagger AA makes it a serious contender as a condi manhand weapon compared to Scepter, you’re just not paying attention to what it takes to make a good condi build on Necro.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Clearly, nothing will convince you because you can already equip a dagger in any build you like. Doesn’t mean it will be any good, but you are capable of doing it, so you will just say “I can do that already.”

If you want to argue if any of these builds someone might present are useful options as well as being new options, that’s an even SMALLER group of builds; that only supports my argument that a condition buffed dagger isn’t all that good an idea to expand build diversity.

But don’t let that stop you … if you want to present a build that is new AND is useful because of a condition buff on dagger, I’d love to see it. Certainly, Chill Dagger Reaper isn’t it. I mean, if you want to believe that putting chill on a dagger somehow makes some new set of builds that you can’t get with vanilla dagger, that’s fine. I don’t think that fools any reasonable person. It’s a different way to chill for sure, but it’s not a new build concept.

I’m simply asking you to show what builds open up by adding conditions to dagger since you support the idea to add them because of this reason … certainly it’s not builds I can already make with the vanilla version of the same weapon.

That’s still not a new build option. That’s the same as claiming that adding Spectral Grasp on a Reaper chill build is a new build too. These are just variations of existing builds. Besides, I already told you my ask was about new builds, not increased efficiency or functionality. If I can make a dagger chill reaper build, then adding chill to dagger doesn’t open up new builds to me.

Ramoth.9064:

Obtena.7952:

It doesn’t matter … what you are proposing isn’t new. I asked for new builds, not more effective builds than the ones we have now.

Lol, deathly chill every 2 seconds on auto isn’t new? Can dagger do it now? It’s new. You’re done. You’re grasping now, and… It’s sad

The chill on dagger auto is new … the build is not. I can make a dagger chill Reaper build with the things we have now. If the whole premise of the argument to add conditions to dagger is because it opens up new builds/options/whatever you want to call it, then you should at least genuinely present these new builds to justify that statement. You haven’t.

There is no grasping … putting chill on dagger doesn’t open up new builds if I can already make a dagger chill Reaper build with the things we have now. I haven’t asked you for anything difficult here; you claim new builds open up with condition buffed dagger … I want to know what they are. It doesn’t make sense to present builds we can already make.

It doesn’t matter … I can get Chill from multiple sources using a vanilla dagger as a Reaper so adding chill to a dagger auto doesn’t give me anything new. You’re claiming new builds open up by adding conditions to dagger as a reason vanilla dagger should change … but this example doesn’t show it; using chill with Reaper and a dagger isn’t new. Putting chill on dagger auto as a reaper is just a different source of chill … the build isn’t new at all. I asked you to show me these new builds. I guess I’m still waiting. Shouldn’t be hard … you’re telling me there are lots.

Ramoth.9064:

Lol chill on auto attack. Now viable with reaper. Thanks, you’re done.

There isn’t anything new about that build … I can already make that build with Vanilla Dagger and Sigil of Ice. So again, chill on dagger auto doesn’t open up any build options we don’t already have. Perhaps you should think about what it means to be more effective vs. new options … you seem to have the two confused.

Einlanzer.1627:

Ashen.2907:

The fights are great for solo players. Finally a use for our interrupts, CC, target prioritization, a reason to dodge and move.

Too bad about the actual map design.

Depends on your class. Something that gets talked about surprisingly little is how much variance there is in ability to solo easily from class to class. Personally, I think a lot of story bosses are just hellacious playing solo. Like I have almost rage quit the game on a few occasions, and I know I’m at least average in terms of play skill.

It depends only a little on your class … I haven’t played a class I couldn’t solo around stuff with. The variance is very small, again, depending on how well you know the class and can play it.

What DOES vary is how much easier a class will be over another to solo stuff.

Go ahead and do it again … You would simply be demonstrating that you don’t know the difference between increased functionality vs. having more build options. I mean, if you think a condition applied on dagger AA makes it open to some kind of new builds we don’t already have with the current dagger, go ahead and post what those new builds we haven’t seen look like and explain why we can’t make that build with the current dagger … shouldn’t be hard because obviously you’re telling me you have tons to choose from.

I’m on vacation until Tuesday … I can’t wait to see all these awesome condition dagger builds you’re going to post because of the new options a condition dagger opens up for us.