Guild Wars 2

Keepin it simple and sleek =)

8/10 Nice look. Which mask is that? Love the subtle green glow.

The only problem is coverage is king. One server could stomp another into the ground during prime time, but the server that can night cap entire maps is always going to win.

Yeah I was wondering how effective bark skin actually is considering how little time you spend below 25% health. I’ll give both a shot and see which one sacrifices less survivability.

I don’t see all the doom and gloom people are talking about. WvW still has ques on our server. People are still playing. Our vets are still playing. Not one single person in our guild has quit over this. A lot of people are even enjoying WvW more than they used to. There’s a lot of people that support the AC change. There is no mass exodus from WvW, at least on our server.

Maybe this is because we usually roll in groups of 10ish instead of zergs, but we’re loving WvW as much as ever right now. Yes, arrow carts make things more challenging during a siege. We consider it upping the difficulty and challenge ourselves to find new strategies. Strategies that do exist btw. A keep defended by ACs is not impossible to attack, just harder.

So to the people that are actually leaving the game because they can’t adapt to a minor change like this. Maybe WvW wasn’t intended for you to begin with. Which is not me trying to take a shot at you, just saying maybe you were looking for something else.

Just wanted to give you one final shout out. I’m loving this build now. Was roaming yesterday and stumbled on 3 enemies trying to take our SE supply camp. I was able to keep all 3 of them busy while contesting the camp for several minutes until allies arrived to kick them out. And I managed to kill one of them in the process during the 1v3.

Now that I’m getting a feel for it, I’ll probably swap the 10 points in Nature Magic over to the precision line in order to get the extra 30% crit damage for the pet. But I’m having fun on the Ranger again! Cheers mate.

It’s been about a week and a half now since this change was implemented.

In spite of everyone crying that the sky was falling and sieges would be impossible, people are still losing their towers and keeps even when defended by these “OP” arrow carts. At what point are people going to realize that they aren’t nearly as OP as everyone is saying? The facts just don’t support it.

What it has done is made people change their tactics and not just zerg up to a gate, throw some rams and rush a keep in 5 minutes.

The arrow cart damage is fine. The only remaining problem with them is that they melt other siege too quickly. So instead of nerfing carts, buff the other siege to be a bit tougher. Give siege a passive resistance to arrow cart fire. Give the person manning a flame ram a 50% damage reduction from siege. Arrow carts are meant to be anti-personnel anyways, not anti siege.

scanz.4536:

The Rooster.2615:

Ran this tonight in WvW and was pretty pleased. I was routinely tying up groups of 2-4. I seem to run into trouble with conditions fairly often though. Considering seeing if the lemongrass soup helps.

Great for solo play. But I’m still feeling a bit lacking in terms of what I bring to a group. Although that’s more of a ranger problem and not a problem specific to this build.

Getting a bit bored of this accusation now. A good Ranger brings plenty to the group, particularly in WvW.

There’s a solid counter argument to this, but we shouldn’t derail Puandro’s thread. Happy to discuss with you in PMs if you like though.

Back at Puandro, have you attempted using healing spring instead of troll unguent and then leaping through it as much as possible to boost your heals? After running this last night, I’m wondering if that might actually be a better way to go. Although troll unguent is definitely amazing, the condi removal on healing spring seems like it would help quite a bit. Thoughts?

Ran this tonight in WvW and was pretty pleased. I was routinely tying up groups of 2-4. I seem to run into trouble with conditions fairly often though. Considering seeing if the lemongrass soup helps.

Great for solo play. But I’m still feeling a bit lacking in terms of what I bring to a group. Although that’s more of a ranger problem and not a problem specific to this build.

Note to self: If running from Puandro, hop into water. He can’t swim! =P

Same here. I would run it if it didn’t reset whenever you enter the water. For WvW it’s a deal breaker.

Vigor is an interesting contribution.

Fury is not so rare. I’ve never found myself wishing I had a Ranger in the group so we could have fury. There seems to always be plenty of it to go around. Maybe it’s just because we usually run with a few warriors.

As with all traps, frost trap is really a second rate aoe when compared to a necro with wells. Well of darkness when trated will pulse blind and chill while frost trap just chills.

Muddy terrain can be a valuable contribution. Is that our main benefit to the group then? CC through frost trap/muddy terrain/entangle?

After the buff to signets and pet HP, Ranger is very solid in small fights. I’m consistently winning 1v1s and 1v2s after this patch as I suspect many Rangers are, so please don’t mislabel this as another “Ranger is so UP buff us nao!” post.

The biggest problem I see with my Ranger is that it brings almost nothing of use to my group. It’s not that the class is underpowered, it’s that it doesn’t help your teammates very much. The only thing I have found useful to my group in WvW is healing spring for blast healing, which is arguably the best water field in the game. Everything else the Ranger can bring to a group, someone else can bring better.

I can go for a DPS build, but that role seems better filled by Warriors and Eles.

I can go for a support build, but that role seems better filled by Guardians.

I can go traps and condition damage for control/AoE, but that role is filled much better by Necros.

So are we really only valuable as a roamer in WvW?

This is why, for the Ranger balancing that is supposedly still being worked on, don’t make us stronger. Make us more valuable to a group. I can think of plenty of times in WvW I’ve said, “Man I wish we had a mesmer/ele/guardian right now.” Give us something that will make a group wish, in even just one type of combat situation, that they had a Ranger with them.

Other than healing spring, what do you feel you bring to a group that no other class can do better?

Aneu.1748:

The Rooster.2615:

Aneu.1748:

Im still concerned with people overlooking this…

I just manged to plant 31 arrowcarts on the north gate of SM. 15 on the ramparts 10 below and 6 on the third tier. All were able to hit the gate where they were placed.

Note: Just because they arent built doesnt mean they cannot be built. The siege limit was not hit due to AC’s now being able to hit for 3500 range while the siege limit range is per 1000(or there about). Im fairly certain I could place more on the upper tier where the Cannon is also that can hit. (edit: I just placed 6)

Rampart – 15 AC – http://i.imgur.com/eG0HJVS.jpg
Below – 10 AC – http://i.imgur.com/aWN3vWT.jpg
3rd Tier – 6 AC – http://i.imgur.com/3kzw56n.jpg

THIS IS WHAT WE WANT!

Don’t attack that gate?

With SM it is possible to siege all outer gates with 10 Acarts and trebs on each of the 3rd tier arms that can hit pretty much anything that can hit SM. You then can still plant 10 carts on your keep plus have enough map siege limit for 10 carts per tower that you own (4) and still your map limit has not been achieved!

If you invest that much siege to defend SM or any keep, and have the coordination to make sure that siege is manned at each point your enemy begins to attack, then I would argue that keep should by all means be very difficult to take. Nothing wrong with game design there.

But if you’re saying that siege you have stacked up is going to make you never ever lose SM because of how OP the arrow carts are, well I guess time will tell how that one goes.

Aneu.1748:

Im still concerned with people overlooking this…

I just manged to plant 31 arrowcarts on the north gate of SM. 15 on the ramparts 10 below and 6 on the third tier. All were able to hit the gate where they were placed.

Note: Just because they arent built doesnt mean they cannot be built. The siege limit was not hit due to AC’s now being able to hit for 3500 range while the siege limit range is per 1000(or there about). Im fairly certain I could place more on the upper tier where the Cannon is also that can hit. (edit: I just placed 6)

Rampart – 15 AC – http://i.imgur.com/eG0HJVS.jpg
Below – 10 AC – http://i.imgur.com/aWN3vWT.jpg
3rd Tier – 6 AC – http://i.imgur.com/3kzw56n.jpg

THIS IS WHAT WE WANT!

Don’t attack that gate?

Rams do go down quick now, but I think reducing the damage that rams take from carts is the better solution rather than nerfing the carts. Maybe give players manning a ram some damage reduction as well. A passive ram mastery skill that gives 25% damage reduction to the player while on a ram could work.

Either that or make rams the only mobile siege. Then you could build them out of range and have a group wheel them up to the gate. You know, like real rams.

Caliban.3176:

I just saw a post (that has already been censored by the lortnoc egamad team of Anet) saying that IRON is quitting, partly due to this kitten up.

That is a sad, sad thing. They were an awesome guild. They would do fun stuff to troll the frenchies (le iron blob) but they were mainly a capable guild that pulled of some really impressive stuff. They were one of the main forces behind a server that stayed in T1 for a very long time. This is sad, very sad.

I hope you guys respect this and don’t start posting things like AC beat the blobs and zerglings because if you had ever run against or with IRON you would know better than that. I have done both and know for a fact that the entire WvW community is the loser in this scenario.

I suspect that IRON has other reasons for quitting. Any guild that claims to be decent at WvW will adapt their tactics and change with the game.

As for those who are claiming the AC changes hurt small groups. I can only say that this is simply not true. Not from speculation, but from playing the game since the change. We typically run with a group of 10-20 on JQ in my guild and we have seen smaller groups become much more powerful when taking on zergs. Does the AC change hurt small groups who think taking a tower just involves dropping a few rams and storming the gate as fast as possible? Absolutely. Why? Because that’s a dumb tactic. Change your approach. Taking a tower is actually a challenge now and that’s a good thing.

This change has caused zergs to get smaller, split up and hit multiple objectives. In short, they actually have to use tactics now. And people are doing it. We’re having fights with other groups of 20-30 and the combat has actually become interesting instead of blob vs blob. This is the best WvW has been since launch.

Vol.5241:

You won’t like it when you realize that there will be no more zergs roaming WvW after they all quit in protest.

Unforuntaley, I doubt that would happen. If it did happen though, it would be the best thing to happen to WvW since launch.

garethh.3518:

The Rooster.2615:

A lot of people are suggesting spirits, but don’t realize how short their range is. Spirit buff range is about 400 or the size of an average aoe. So if you want them to help your group, you need to have them right in the middle of the fight, where they will still probably die within a few seconds even with the HP buff.

Its 900 and if you walk at all within that range it puts a 6s buff on you saying you get the chance to proc perks.
The active’s tend to have 300~ range.
(maybe 500~ on the elite)

Are you sure about the range? We were testing it out last night after the patch by noting how close we had to get before the buff popped up. The area seems to be about the size of a traited necro mark which I’m pretty sure has a radius of about 400. Maybe 600 tops.

Try it out. Put a spirit down and have a guildie slowly walk towards you until the buff appears.

Ranger is pretty solid in a 1v1 or small scale fight now. Pet health buffs really helped. But if you run mainly WvW like I do, you’ll find that the Ranger still does not bring anything particularly helpful to the group that another class can’t do better.

Playing a tanky support Ranger? Guardian and elementalist both fill that role better with buffs and the ele with water fields for blast heals. Yes, healing spring is better than the ele water field, but eles don’t have to blow their main heal skill to use it.

Going traps for aoe? Necro can fill that role MUCH better with wells/marks.

Going glass cannon? No matter how high your DPS gets, it will always be less than other glass cannons as the ranger DPS is balanced with the pet in mind. And as we all know, in a large scale fight, pet DPS is barely noticeable.

A lot of people are suggesting spirits, but don’t realize how short their range is. Spirit buff range is about 400 or the size of an average aoe. So if you want them to help your group, you need to have them right in the middle of the fight, where they will still probably die within a few seconds even with the HP buff.

I’m not a Ranger hater. I really want this class to be my main and I still have fun on it at times. But it’s hard to deny that you just don’t really bring anything particularly useful to the group.

The only thing I can see Ranger being decent at in WvW at the moment is solo roaming.

Best change yet for WvW. Zergs cant just mindlessly run up to a gate, toss down a few rams and swarm over a tower. Yes, you can’t just run into a lords room defending by carts now. As it should be. Your objective should be to destroy the carts first. God forbid WvW require some thought.

Change your tactics. Split your zerg into multiple groups so that the arrow carts have to choose one or the other. Think and don’t just mindlessly follow the blue tag. Two thumbs up for this change.

Let me preface by saying I tend to think high toughness is more valuable for a guardian.

That being said, there’s a misconception that vitality isn’t as good because it can be only used once so to speak. Vitality allows you to use your heals earlier in the fight and by result, more often as well.

For example, if my base HP is 17k, I can pop my first minor heal skill (Usually a shout through AH), at around 15.5k. That bumps me back up almost to full health again leaving my opponent 17k to chew through before I’m dead. Now because I used my heal so early and have a decent health pool, I’ll likely be able to use it a second and possibly a third time before I’m dead. If I only had 15k HP to start with, popping that first heal at 13.5 then only brings me back up to 15. This leaves less HP to chew through which = less survival time which means I may not get to use those heals for that third time.

Again, I think toughness is more important, but you should not neglect Vitality either. Especially if you’re going for a tanky spec.

Xerlyph.3829:

[- ] Reliant on Pet for 1/2 damage output

While this is a decent build, this one con is what makes just about every Ranger build sub par in wvw. Bunker ranger is solid in smaller fights or 1v1, undeniably. But the larger the battle, the less effective the ranger is specifically due to relying on the pet for DPS.

+1

Anything to make it so the zerg can’t be anywhere on the map within 2 minutes is a plus.

RyuDragnier.9476:

Make it so that they have to be voted on by the server itself while in WvW. I know, it can be abused, but still…everybody who plays and knows the good commanders would vote them immediately.

+1 to this. Make the commanders earn the respect of the server before they get a seal.

Our groups tend to stay away from commanders nowadays just to avoid the zergs. I’ve also seen many a terrible commander. My favorites though are the ones who throw a tantrum when people stop following them. I fondly remember one who started going off in team chat:

“Everyone stack up on me or I’m logging off!”

Our response:

“Bye!”

They really should use a different criteria other than dropping a bunch of gold to obtain a commander’s seal. A server voting system would be much better in my opinion. That way you have to gain the respect of your peers before you can get a seal.

Bloodlet.1427:

Acelerion.6820:

Zergs were never called armies don’t try to legitimize it more than the game already does.

Dear fool, I am not speaking just about this game. Armies are masses of people gathered together for the same belligerent purpose. kitten like you use the term as some sort of pejorative to describe enemies who have more numbers than you causing you to lose. Call it a zerg if you want but it’s a stupid and overused term used by people who are angry that they are outnumbered..

Technically I think “Army” implies some sort of organization is involved. Zerg is a more accurate term to describe the mindless 80 man masses that we see in WvW. Either way, a zerg is a zerg. If I’m rolling with 70 friendlies and stomping enemies, it’s still a zerg. And still boring.

Even when I’m winning in a zerg I find it so boring that I’d prefer to go solo, throwing myself into groups of 5 and seeing how many I can down before they kill me. Even that’s more interesting to me than rolling around mindlessly spamming skills and hoping you hit something.

They need to find a way to get rid of the zerging. The best way to do this is to design a bigger map that takes a longer time to travel across. Make it so there’s a real consequence to having all of your players in one area, like leaving the majority of your territory unreachable and undefended.

But, sadly, I’m sure that would require far more time investment than anet is willing to put in.

Kaleban.9834:

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

This. Many seem to be basing an argument against cap removal off of the game’s current state. But if you remove the aoe cap, strategies would change. Tactics would change. Roles would change. And that’s the idea. To introduce some tactics and strategy into the game instead of the prevalent “Stack up and charge in” approach.

Confusion mesmers are a whole different beast. Arguably the strongest wvw profession at the moment when played right. If your condi removal is down, you’re left with a choice to either die slowly or die quickly. But that’s a topic for a different thread.

In all honesty, the best way to get rid of zerging is to design a map that you can’t travel across so quickly. Make a real consequence to having all of your players in the same area, like leaving most of your territory not only undefended but unreachable. But the likelihood of something like this actually being designed is minute to say the least. Removing the aoe cap is a much simpler and more realistic fix.

Suddenflame.2601:

The Rooster.2615:

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

Have you ever heard of the zerg stacking up? Even if it did then you stack the AOE covering fire. The only reason why it doesn’t happen is cause there is no overlying commander. The limit has no effect really from my experience in WvW other then prevent just a couple of people from eliminating an entire zerg. Also before people bring up the counter argument they could just move out of the red circle. It is really hard to see that red circle when there is spells going off all over and people littering the ground.

I don’t mean to sound rude, but which server do you WvW on?

The prevalent tactic for all zergs is to stack up and charge in and is seen consistently in JQ, BG and SOR. I can’t speak for the rest, but on those 3 servers, it’s all we do as it’s undeniably the superior tactic at the moment.

Stacking AOEs does not necessarily damage different targets. If you have 10 people together and stack 2 aoes on them, it doesn’t spread evenly between all 10. Depending on positioning, it will hit the same 5 targets until they’re dead before touching the next 5. Apply this to a zerg of 40+ and instead of your aoe damaging a large number of people, you damage 5 until they’re dead. Then the next 5. Then the next 5. This is why stacking up is the superior tactic as you minimize your losses to aoe.

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

I’d be thrilled with a 10-15 cap. Anything to let people take a bigger chunk out of stacked players.

Atherakhia.4086:

Siphaed it’s been repeated a dozen times or more that is one of the main reasons people are against this change.

It’s been said that removing the AE cap won’t solve zerg balls because of things like retaliation and confusion.

It’s been said that removing the AE cap isn’t realistic so long as AE’s can so easily ignore the rules of LOS and barriers.

It’s been said that removing the AE ca kitten imply too powerful when you consider a select few AE’s and how they work and a blanket rule simply isn’t a realistic option.

This thread has been going in a circle for 5 pages now because these points are brought up and ignored by the people in favor of removing the AE cap even though it’s pretty obvious those who want it removed haven’t clearly thought it through, have no real understanding of the type and power of various AE’s in this game, how few classes have AE’s of any real value, and just how little room is available inside keeps and towers.

Yes, all of these things have been said. But just because you keep repeating them doesn’t make them fact. All you have been repeating is your personal speculation and challenging our usage of the English language. The reason this argument is circular is because each time someone brings up a logical counterpoint to your argument, you just repeat your original argument that people have brought up counters to numerous times. Let’s try and at least define your argument in one coherent statement. Our logic seems to be the following:

Uncapped aoe = dead zerg = good.

Now if you disagree, you must argue either:

Uncapped aoe (does not) = dead zerg.

Or:

Uncapped aoe = dead zerg = bad (overpowered aoe)

Pick one of those and let’s go from there.

Atherakhia.4086:

There’s nothing to discourage people from balling up.

Hey! You’re right! You know what would discourage people from balling up? Removing the AoE Cap.

Atherakhia.4086:

Introduce null fields to force people to actually move out of AE

You’ve lost me here. So you want to introduce a new mechanic that makes people move out of aoe as opposed to say, just making the aoe itself a reason to move out of the aoe…

Atherakhia.4086:

Can’t remove the AE cap until it will actually have a real impact on the game.

So that I understand this correctly, your points are this:

-Removing the AOE cap would result in certain classes having enormous power and would make AOE OP.

-Removing the AOE cap will have not have a real impact on the game and so it shouldn’t be done.

These points are mutually exclusive. You can’t logically argue both at the same time. Furthermore, if you’re honestly serious that removing the aoe cap would not have a real impact on the game, then why argue so vehemently against it? WvW is already a zerg fest. Say you’re right and the changes have no impact, it’s still a zerg fest. But if it works, then the game becomes much more interesting.

Atherakhia.4086:

Null Fields are things like the guardian wall would now block line of site through it so you can fire through it but the enemy can’t. Mesmers being able to drop their reflect orbs wherever they please removing LOS to the enemy. Introducing AE’s with AE knockback pulses. Remove the heal from shadow refuge and replace it with a pulsing blind.

The changes you suggest would be very interesting and add depth indeed. But even adding just one of those skills would take anet months of balancing to get right. Removing the aoe cap is a simple fix that can be done immediately.

Atherakhia.4086:

LordByron.8369:

you can stack 10 MS as well today….nobody does…
You have some innate hate for ele it seems….

RTL and firegrab? really .-.

I have an ele… And we stack every AE the Ele has today. I don’t know if you run with 10 eles though.

But think about what RTL does.

It makes you move at 200% speed up to 1200 yards and it hits for about 2k damage to everyone within 300 yards. Have all your Eles in your zerg do this to the enemy zerg and that’s a lot of damage that’s very difficult to anticipate, very difficult to stop, and even more difficult to avoid.

And firegrab I’m not sure why you scoff at. That thing crits for like 10k and is a cone attack. Since Ele elite skills are so awful (we all use greatsword for another escape option), Norn is the best race for them because of cat form. Zergs line up. Your eles cat form. Run into the enemy zerg undetected. Firegrab hitting everyone for 10k ecah.

I’m not sure how many different ways I can say this. That’s the point. Yes your RTL would do a ton of damage if you use it on a [B]ZERG[/B]. This would create large disadvantage to zerging which is exactly what we’re trying to accomplish. You’re basing all of your speculation on the idea that everyone would still clump up in a ball. We’re saying that removing the aoe cap would make it so clumping up in a ball is a terrible idea. That RTL isn’t nearly as powerful if it hits 2 people instead of 5. Or 3 people instead of 10. Makes it a good idea to spread out instead of clump up, don’t you think?

Atherakhia.4086:

Now these are the areas that an AE without a cap has:

1.) It provides enormous power to a very small number of classes because so few classes actually have any real AE option.

2.) It doesn’t resolve anything because zergs will still ball up regardless. All it does it shift balance from a specific set of classes to another.

3.) It opens up the game to even more abuse because some AE’s ignore LOS, others aren’t counterable (RTL), others provide too many side effects.

1. The enormous power you’re referring to is countered by simply not standing in those red circles that all have long cooldowns.

2. How can you argue that the aoe will have enormous power to wipe zergs, and that zergs will still ball up regardless? You’re contradicting your own argument.

3. AEs that ignore LOS are the exception as opposed to the rule. There are very few of them in comparison and are hardly used for “abuse”. I’m assuming by RTL you mean retaliation… which is not an aoe.

Atherakhia.4086:

The issue right now is how the amount of boons, blast heals, and things of that nature nullify a lot of the effects of AE in this game. Why not propose something reasonable like increase the AE cap to 10 but leave the beneficial boons/blasts to 5? This way more weight is placed on the offensive side of things instead of equal weight on offense and defense?

Two thumbs up. I’m all for it.

Atherakhia.4086:

Why not simply introduce more AE into the game? Why not AE that actually has a real impact on a zerg? Like give thieves a shadow field skill that pulses every second blinding up to 5 targets? Why not give Warriors a move that spawns a tornado that doesn’t move and pulses once a second knocking up to 5 targets 300 yards away? Why not make Mesmers reflect actually affect enemy AE so people under the AE can only cast AE’s in the circle of influence and if they cast, it actually hurts allies? Why can’t Rangers get an explosive collar and send their pets darting into the zerg to explode into a horrendou ball of blood and fur?

While these are interesting, the likelihood of any or all of these being incorporated is minimal. Adding multiple new skills to different classes requires far more balancing than simply increasing or removing the aoe cap.

Atherakhia.4086:

It just feels like the people who suggest removing the AE cap don’t have a real grasp on just how many different AE’s there are, how they can be used, and how few classes actually have them.

We fully understand it. We understand it would make WvW much more difficult. It will indeed be VERY difficult to take a well defended keep. This is exactly the kind of change we are asking for.

Atherakhia.4086:

I don’t know how many different ways you want me to explain the same thing. AE’s don’t have a 5 yard radius. They have a 300 yard radius. Which means they have a 600 yard area to deal damage. In a keep’s
courtyard, a single AE of that size can cover 75% of all open land.

I honestly have no idea how you came to the conclusion that 600 yards = 75% of all open land in a keep.

Atherakhia.4086:

Fortunately, there’s a 5 player cap so not everyone will be hit running up the ramp to the lord’s room. Your change would make it so everyone under that rather large AE is now being hit by a move that ticks for 1k a second, snares you, applies bleeds, and has a 100% chance to crit.

For as long as you stand in it, yes. Do you make a habit of standing in aoes for their entire duration? This also means that people can’t just run blindly up the ramp to the lord’s room.And once again, the only time this would be any different from the current game mechanics is if more than 5 people are standing in the aoe. If people simply spread out (which is the intended result) then there is no difference.

Atherakhia.4086:

You then multiply by several Rangers and you’re left with an enormous amount of power provided to a relatively small number of people against odds they should have lost against without tactics or skill playing any part in it. All they did was stood on a ledge and targeted the ground.

If you can’t follow it that time then so be it.

You are assuming that these rangers with an enormous amount of power (lol, btw. Ask on the Ranger forums how many of them feel they would have an enormous amount of power simply by removing the aoe cap from one of their skills) would decimate all odds. This is only true if their targets stand in their aoe and let themselves die. Or to use your own words, not use tactics or skill.

Why do you assume that everyone is going to sit still in the red circles? If they do, they should die. You’re now invariably going to argue that these all powerful rangers can spread their aoe out to encompass a large area. (Or as one might call it, “using tactics”) Now if 5 rangers can do this well enough to wipe a zerg, which would be all but impossible due to the long cooldown on lb#5, then that zerg deserves to be wiped.

The only way to do enough damage fast enough to wipe a zerg would be to stack the aoes in the same spot, in which case anyone with half a brain is going to move out of that spot. If the aoes are spread out, then they’re doing a normal amount of damage in each one which is not going to wipe anyone. What it will do is pressure them back and make them unable to blindly charge up to a gate, stand in one spot and knock it down.

GS #3 + 1h Sword #2 + Judge’s Intervention = So much fun!

Yes, you need a target for it, but you can cover some serious ground if you’re chasing someone down.

Looks like a pretty straightforward support build to me. I take it you run 3 shouts? Or maybe 2 shouts and wall of reflection?

Either way, this can be a successful support build. Is this for WvW or sPvP? If it’s for WvW, the best advice I can give you is have a hammer and a staff also in your inventory and be ready to swap them in should the situation call for it. Empowering might works well with Altruistic Healing too. I go back and forth between that and 2 handed mastery myself. Can’t decided which one I like more.

I also wouldn’t bother with the +boon duration food, but that’s just my preference. Others like it, but +20% is only going to give you an extra second or two on most buffs. I’d suggest going with some toughness/vit food to make you even more tanky, or lifesteal food to take advantage of your decent crit chance.

Atherakhia.4086:

The 5 AE limit is still important because all 30 of them could still be under barrage’s circle but only 5 could be hit. Whereas without it, all 30 would be hit even though they aren’t balled up.. they’re spread out all over the courtyard to the keep. Only they can’t fire back due to the wall’s lip, the rangers have them all perma snared and bleeding, and barrage has a 100% chance to crit.

Removing the cap is a terrible idea because it opens up the game to this kind of abuse.

That just doesn’t make sense. They’re either balled up and the aoe cap is a factor, or they’re spread out and it is not. What is it that you’re trying to argue?

If you’re standing in an aoe, the counter is to dodge out of it. If you’re talking about people spreading aoes over a large area to encompass a large amount of people, there is no difference from the current game mechanics as people are not stacked up. I’ll say it again, the only time removing the aoe cap makes a difference at all is when more than 5 people are standing in it. At all other times there is absolutely no difference from the current game mechanics. The solution? Avoid having large numbers of people stand in the same spot so as to avoid getting melted by uncapped aoe. You now have a choice, follow a mindless zerg and be killed mindlessly. Or think, be aware of your surroundings, spread out to avoid aoe but work to not get too separated from your group, employ tactics to exploit weak spots in enemy formations. In other words, use some skill.

Daecollo.9578:

You say “Abusive Gameplay” I say the current system is pretty much a “Player Skill Cap.” Removing such will make good players stand out over bads which it is how it is suppost to be. Artificial skill caps are unhealthy and make games more and more boring, old games never had such things, which is why people still play them.

This too.

Atherakhia.4086:

A game should never need different rules for PvE and PvP. Especially a game like this where PvE is nothing more than a distraction to prepare you for PvP. Now as for AE CC and such, I’m very much in favor of this and I was shocked to find no real dispels, purges, controls, and heals in PvP in this game.

There’s just no depth to PvP in this game. And without any depth you limit the number of tactics and strategies players need to succeed. And when players don’t need tactics or strategy to succeed they clump up in a ball and play follow the leader all day.

Adding more depth to this game is never a bad thing. Adding unlimited AE or forcing 2 rulesets (1 for PvE and 1 for PvP) isn’t a solution.

Which game are you playing exactly? GW2 already has different rules for PvE and PvP.

Everybody is saying that AOE without a cap would be OP against the zerg. That’s the point. We’re talking about a way to discourage people bunching up into large groups which results in the uninteresting gameplay you mention. Don’t want to get murdered by AOE? Don’t all stand in the same spot. Be aware of your surroundings. Think and whatnot.

Of course AOE would be OP without a cap against the zerg. You know when it wouldn’t be? If 10 people weren’t standing in the same spot. Then it would be exactly the same as it is now The idea is to encourage people to spread out.

Listen, removing the aoe cap won’t even change the majority of combat situations. The only time it will make a difference is when you have more than 5 people standing in the middle of an aoe which is exactly what we’re trying to discourage. At all other times, there would be no difference in aoe.

Your reasoning is backwards. People don’t ball up into zergs because the game lacks depth and tactics. They ball up into zergs because it is the best tactic. People will always follow the path of least resistance. So until you make it dangerous for everyone to stand in the same spot, people will continue to do so.

Sunflowers.1729:

The AoE cap does not reward people for standing in AoE – it simply punishes them less, as each individual aoe has a smaller chance of hitting any person. If it really did reward zergs for doing so this would be a bad game mechanic, yes, but it doesn’t. It just puts a cap on how much hurt one single player can do.

The cap does reward people for clumping up, but that isn’t the same as standing in AoE. Think about it – if a 50 man zergball had a choice, they would prefer not to get hit by any aoe effects.

Even as a staff elementalist I don’t support removal of the AoE cap as it just leads to too many problems.

1) Balancing of loot in WvW, again. Professions with low AoE (mesmers, thieves) will get so much less loot than anyone who can put out consistent area damage.

2) Stacked retaliation + regen + protection + fury + every other buff. Try and use any area skill on a cluster of people with retaliation and you risk instantly downing yourself. While the case can be made that corrupt boon works really well on this, see point 1. Guess we should only have necros and elementalists.

3) Zergs will still exist (after all more people = more damage), just spread out more. While it will stop the (rather cheesy, I admit) zerg-ball tactic, how does this change anything? I’ve transferred from a T4 server to a T2 server, and while there are no zerg-balls in T4 (at least on Crystal Desert), there are still zergs. We just didn’t all stand in a little clump. It was boring, to be honest. Just poke at each other forever until one side had too many people, then rush the other team in a giant disorganized blob.

4) You think lag is bad now?

A better solution I think, is to remove the AoE cap for siege weapons and/or increase their damage + area. Zergs will still be effective in the open field, but clumping up to attack any fortified structure will become less of a good idea.

Reward vs. Being punished less is just arguing semantics. The point still stands. There is a bonus for having 10 people stand in an aoe as opposed to 5. The bonus is that 5 of those 10 people take no damage.

1. This is a non-sequitur. Balancing of loot between classes is already an issue regardless of aoe cap. I love playing my support guardian but I don’t get half as many bags as I do on my Necro.

2. I don’t think anyone is suggesting removing the aoe cap for buffs. Even so, this is in itself a counter argument to the “aoe is OP” argument. You can’t argue both that AOE would be OP without a cap and that it would be suicide to use an AOE on a group because of stacked retaliation. You’re on two different sides of the argument.

3. A spread out zerg instead of a clumped up zerg is a step in the right direction. It opens up opportunities for tactical game play, exploiting weakness in formations, etc. Much better than ball up and charge in.

4. This could be a valid point, but it’s speculation to argue either side. I would be interested in seeing how much lag would actually be caused by registering large amounts of hits. You could be right and it may be a problem, but it could also not be a problem at all. We don’t know at this point.

I would be all for removing aoe cap for siege weapons. I think that’s a great suggestion actually. Make siege weapons be the anti-zerg.

McDili.1549:

Daecollo.9578:

Malediktus.9250:

AOE would be overpowered without such a limit. Its good as it is.

Explain how it would be OP?

IF it wasn’t limited, it would force people to “THINK” and not mindlessly run in.

People would actually dodge and avoid AOEs.

This logic is so flawed. You posted a video of a small group dominating a large zerg BECAUSE they mindlessly ran in, into the AoE that the small group was putting down.

Making AoE more effective against zergs will not make people zerg less at all. It will make people play AoE damage roles more while within the zerg. I keep seeing these random assumptions that people will zerg less if AoE is more powerful. Where do you guys grab that from? People will zerg because zerging is effective. A zerg with more AoE users is more powerful than a small group with less AoE users. Plain and simple.

I don’t understand how people don’t get this, a small group with 5 ele’s has enough AoE for a 25 man zerg. The limit doesn’t stop them. The distribution of damage is based on whoever is closest to the center point of the AoE. The only grey area is how equidistant targets are calculated but that’s so insignificant.

This trend of wanting to remove the AoE limit is just a reach for easy mode, maybe some AoE abilities could be improved on but the cap is fine as it is as shown in the video posted earlier in this thread. Proper use of AoE in a small group can destroy and deny an entire enemy zerg. What more do you want?

First of all, it’s hardly a reach for easy mode. It’s a wish for hard mode. Zerging is easy mode. We want to remove the cap to make the game require more skill and be more of a challenge.

Secondly, the argument about the 5 eles having enough aoe for a 25 man zerg can be correct, but only in a very specific situation. If the 25 man zerg is all stacked up on one spot (which they do fairly often) your 5 eles are not going to be very effective. As opposed to hitting all 25 at once, they will hit 5. If they kill those 5, they’ll hit another 5 and so on. This makes defeating the zerg very slow and rewards people for standing in aoe to actually avoid it. I’ll type that again, it rewards people for standing in aoe. You can’t seriously think that that’s a good mechanic for a game.

Even if removing the cap doesn’t eliminate zerging, it will make people spread out. When you encourage people to spread out instead of clump up, it opens up the field for much more interesting fights and actual use of tactics as opposed to clump up and charge in.

Cap should be removed or at least increased to discourage zerging. As others have said many times, AOE is only powerful if you stand in it. So don’t stand in it. Learn to exploit weak points in defenses instead of relying on clustering up in a mindless ball and charging into enemy fire.

At this point, anything that helps to get rid of the zerg is a step in the right direction.

Like others have said, all about the build. If you run sigils that proc on crits, consider upping your precision to around 50%.

Siphaed.9235:

I’m trying to see a logical argument against the AoE cap removal, but all I’m seeing is single-pathing minded concepts where everyone thinks that players will brainlessly go into narrow areas of death. That’s what we have now already in the game in the zerg vs zerg that currently exits. And the problem with what we have now is that people do this willingly because they KNOW that only 5 people are hit by a single AOE; being a group of 20, you’re chances of getting hit is 1 in 4, a significantly easier thing to risk if walking into that AoE was a 1 in 1 hit chance without a cap.

This. Most of these arguments seem to be based on the fact that AOE would be OP against the zerg without a cap. Well, you’re right. But that’s kind of the point. AOE should be devastating if you take 40 people and stand in the middle of it. The balance to AOE is not to stand in the middle of it. What a lot of people seem to be missing is that if you remove the AOE cap, the game will change. People will stop zerging up so as to avoid getting wiped by AOE. They will be forced to spread out, run in smaller groups, take multiple objectives and generally think more overall.

Yes, AOE would be OP against the zerg without a cap. That’s the idea. To get people to stop running in mindless zergs. At least bump it up to 10 and see if that promotes some more interesting gameplay.

Why would you post this on the forums?!!!

“Dear Anet, your grind is not grindy enough. Please make it grindier.”

Shhhh. Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along…

Mister Mustard.7203:

The Rooster.2615:

If you are a skilled player, can you still do respectable DPS? Yes. Can you provide a noticeable benefit to your group? Of course. But you will have to work twice as hard as most other classes to get the same amount of performance.

That exact statement has been said in every single class forum. Engineers are probably the ones with the best claim to it though.

Every other class doesn’t rely on an NPC to contribute to their DPS.

Rangers seem fine in smaller fights. 1v1 or 5v5ish, mainly fights that are small enough so that your pet actually has a noticeable effect. In larger scale battles is where the ranger suffers. Your DPS is balanced with the DPS of your pet factored in. So anytime your pet is dead or not in the fight (fairly often in large scale combat) you are doing substandard DPS.

If you are a skilled player, can you still do respectable DPS? Yes. Can you provide a noticeable benefit to your group? Of course. But you will have to work twice as hard as most other classes to get the same amount of performance.

Lepew.7890:

Really disagree with WvW comments regarding Ranger. I have 9 level 80s- one of each class, and 2 rangers. One of my Rangers is geared out in berserker gear running a 30/30/10/0/0 build (for the 50% fall damage) with longbow primary, and is there to rain the pain. I tried an engineer grenades build with the 1500 range, and while this can equal the range and AOE of the LB, there is a time of flight issue that makes it annoying to play (moving players hard to hit, sort of like tossing meteors in Diablo). Barrage (LB 5) will clear a wall and destroy siege you can not get to short of building an arrow cart. I have had great success flanking the zerg, dumping LB 5 into the middle behind the front rank, then piercing with LB 4, 3, 2…the intense pressure this puts on the zerg causes many to flee into that barrage. Glass cannon LB ranger is like mobile siege.

Piercing is so huge. Target the supervisor in the camp and strafe to line up all his flunkies, and watch them melt. Yeah warrior gets it on rifle, but they don’t get AOE on rifle like barrage. They have to go for LB, and traiting that up with rifle is a bit difficult.

Yes your WvW pets die easy with a LB ranger in a glass cannon build. There is a nice thread on how to live with a 0 or 5 BM build. I have had luck with spiders as active pets…the immobilize can hit at a really bad time for a runner and save the day. They stand off and toss ranged stuff so it helps them live a bit longer, but they still stupidly stand in damage circles. Devourers last longer, but lack that immobilize.

My other ranger is running around in magic find gear and is in a 20/20/0/0/30 shortbow spec. I took faster bow attacks and piercing (can’t really live without them) and went 30 BM for regeneration on the pet. Pet lasts long enough to make it somewhat viable in instances, and is very useful for taking veterans down in open world. Any time I have to farm or run instances, this is the guy I wheel out. This guy is perfectly fine for taking out sentries, taking down supply camps, taking out Dolyaks, and serves well for being that annoying roamer that makes your team retake stuff. Sure mesmers or warriors would be better 1v1 for roaming, but I just use this guy as a PvE guy in WvW.

I think this game is more about finding a good fit for how you play rather than identifying the optimum power profession and trait build.

All of this is valid. I’ve tried glass cannon and bunker ranger builds as well. It is true that you do respectable damage when full berserker, but anyway you look at it your DPS is balanced with the DPS of your pets added in. So if your pet is dead or not in the fight, you are doing substandard DPS compared to other classes.