Guild Wars 2

Dreaming serpent.5197:

Holy cow, this just inspired me to make this build: http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fRMQNAW7Ylc0oxml3w7GcyNBuQB9AEARbkZwEQZbMGA-T1SAABKcBAo4gAQjuBpfAAQpkZLlQAcEAg2810KBvS5Q17Pq/QKAYWWB-w

with 100% condi duration and the amount of bleeds wolf 1 pumps out, you can get 25 stacks of bleeds in TWO seconds…. not to mention another fear (terror mancer ftw) that also can proc extra perplexity stacks.

Talk about a condi spike

Dump Hemophilia, Master of Terror, and the Sigil of Agony. 100% condition duration is the cap for everything, so those don’t do anything at all.

It’s annoying that Renewing Blast isn’t a bit easier to heal allies with, as that is really the trait’s only problem. The amount it heals sure isn’t. It’s placement is all right as well, really (a bit odd, but being in the same line as Vital Persistence and Unyielding Blast provides a nice 3-major trait synergy).

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

You probably didn’t totally waste money on spears, as I’m rather confident that will be their underwater weapon.

I doubt spear. The Revenant doesn’t have weapon swapping. The other 2 classes that don’t weapon swap have a ranged underwater weapon. So imo either harpoon gun or trident. The engie has a harpoon gun and the ele has trident. The two other heavy classes trident (guardian) and harpoon gun (warrior). I’m going to guess trident for the Revenant as the harpoon gun seems to be for professions that are less magical in nature.

Honestly, it could be any of the three, but I’m guessing they will still get spear and possibly use it as a ranged weapon as well. Or it will have strong gapclosing ability.

I guess Spear because they are definitely a martial profession (trident is doubtful) and because it’s the only underwater weapon that isn’t the sole choice on a class. It seems likely that due to the physical, impactful feel of the weapons we’ve seen, that Spear is the most likely to continue that theme.

azurrei.5691:

Red Queen.7915:

Please no. That would defeat the very definition of a “legendary” weapon

Totally invalid as $250 already simply buys a legendary weapon… however, precursor (even if account bound) doesn’t really make sense, regardless.

How about a special ticket for an account bound black lion weapon skin of your choice (for each alt!)? Now that sounds awesome!

I do like this idea, but so far the birthday rewards have been items that we can’t get any other way. The cake gun is actually rather handy, and I hope we get something along those lines instead: something useful.

More likely we’ll get a mail llama.

spoj.9672:

Yeah well im kind of ignoring offhands as they dont have an auto attack. :P

In that case, a case can be made for Guardian hammer, since the auto can supply perma-protection for a group.

But fair enough :p

spoj.9672:

Theres no such thing is a tanky weapon.

Shields. They all give armor.

Roquen.5406:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I disagree with this one. Precursors should never be just handed out for literally no effort.

Even though I don’t know what it consists of, since we know the precursor scavenger hunt is coming, I’m satisfied. Assuming, of course, the terrible RNG isn’t pushed to a particular component of the collection, like needing a different particular exotic to drop in order to get the precursor. Anything in the collection needs to either be craftable, purchasable from a vendor, or have fairly reliable droprates.

I know that most people will likely flame me for this…but precursors have ALWAYS been handed out for literally no effort. With the way RNG is you either get it or you don’t. There is no skill/effort/etc in getting a prec some people are lucky (usually more than once for some odd reason) while most aren’t. But that’s another discussion entirely. I just wanted to say I hate when people just say “You want something for no effort”, because that’s exactly what this system has been.

And just to set the record straight it’s not that I agree with the OP, just that I don’t agree with you. Besides if you think about it as you put 3 years into the game and are thus rewarded with a precursor…That’s a bit of effort, no?

Not literally no effort, since you still had to do something to get it. I will agree, though, that the current system is bad as the effort put forth in getting a precursor is horridly inconsistent.

Not nonexistant, but inconsistent. Farming hundreds of exotics to toss into the Forge is a very significant bit of effort, and this is what a lot of folks do. Others get them to drop off a moa. As such, you can’t say there is “no effort” in getting them right now. There very much is effort involved, it’s just horridly inconsistent.

However, getting them for your third birthday? That just means you made a character three years ago. You didn’t have to do anything with said character. And yes, there’s also the fact it would royally screw up the market to a degree we have never seen before. Even if the precursors were acount bound, demand for various lodestones, t6 materials, ore, wood, dyes, ectos, and mystic clovers would skyrocket prices.

spoj.9672:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Anchoku.8142:

Here are a few more speculative thoughts:

1. GS auto attack probably hits hard but slow and has cleave. Should be roughly equal to staff’s AA but trades piercing for cleave

If Marjory uses the skills we’ll be getting, the auto-chain is actually rather fast, taking 2.2 seconds to entirely cycle. Dagger auto takes 2.1 seconds, for reference.

Her chain also applies a chill on the last AA which has about 50% uptime untraited.

3rd hit of 4, actually.

Its probably only 3 hits. Its a very similar animation to rangers greatsword auto. I admit the spin does make it look like it double hits. But i doubt it actually will. Ofcourse it would be cool if it is the first 4 hit greatsword auto though.

Listen carefully to the audio when Marjory attacks something. You hear 4 impacts.

Sometimes I misclick and drop target or switch to the wrong target. Other than that, no.

Though I do recall a funny moment in PvP when a Mesmer misclicked onto my Flesh Golem. Turns out, Moa’d Flesh Golem still can charge just as well. Makes me want to have a bone minion Moa’d for an exploding bird.

You probably didn’t totally waste money on spears, as I’m rather confident that will be their underwater weapon.

Rising Dusk.2408:

I’m still hoping GS 5 is a pure DPS well of some kind for purposes of trait interactions.

I’d rather see Mark of Pain

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180

And likewise, if a Cleric’s meta arose, you wouldn’t be forced to play it. Your entire argument was that players like you would be forced to change how you play when it is quite clearly not true in the slightest.

You do realize digging yourself deeper and throwing out more strawman doesn’t actually help your argument right?

DeathPanel.8362:

Forcing specific builds for specific encounters not only makes group formation tedious but promotes greater elitism with gear checks and role calls etc.

DeathPanel.8362:

At the end of the day what you say essentially boils down to making mixed groups mandatory for beating content optimally, which is a solution looking for a problem that isn’t there.

The net result of your changes would be to make things unnecessarily more tedious and less fun because people would have to either swap characters and/or gear to optimally beat different content what they used to be able to beat optimally with their dedicated pve character with one gear setup that is well known. (ie one with zerker build in most cases)

-snip-

What you state will increase that tedium for me due to either making me swap characters or gear for specific encounters or take longer to beat with my pve char’s current gear with no tangible benefit whatsoever. What you don’t realize is your proposal simply results in a net increase in tedium and frustration and net decrease in fun at the end of the day.

But I’m the one using strawman arguments. Please, tell me where I suggested that increasing variety of optimal builds and strategies would force anyone to do anything or bring a trinity to the game? Let me know where I suggested that having multiple optimal possibilities for different paths making mixed groups mandatory? I’m really rather curious.

Heck, I can also bring up

You admit that you are not the sole arbiter of what is “supposed” to be or not and say that is ANET’s job but you conclude with: “ANET isn’t perfect at making things the way they are SUPPOSED to be.” once again claiming you are the sole arbiter of what is supposed to be or not. You get points for contradicting yourself within the same paragraph. Congratulations.

I don’t see how I’m contradicting myself when the examples I gave are ANet’s own words. That’s right, I didn’t say that Berserker is supposed to be the highest DPS (though I agree it should be), nor did I say Necromancer is an attrition profession. Those are ANet’s words.

Lol are you serious? In the beginning of the paragraph you say you are not the sole arbiter of what things are supposed to be, yet by the end of the paragraph you say ANET isn’t perfect at making things the way they are Supposed to be. That by definition is a self contradiction because by stating that you implicitly mean that you know how things are supposed to be. Those are YOUR words.

Again, I clearly stated that ANet defined how those things are supposed to be (if you like, I can link their statements), yet you claim those were my words. ANet’s definition of how things are supposed to be is apparently my sole decision now? When ANet outright states something is supposed to be a certain way, then reality doesn’t match their statements, it’s somehow me deciding how things are supposed to be? Does that mean I am ANet? That would be news to me.

So tell me, who is using strawmans?

DeathPanel.8362:

You aren’t forced to play the zerk meta and that’s the bottom line. So according to your own logic you shouldn’t care about it because you have the choice to choose it or not. Thanks for defeating your own argument.

I accept your concession.

And likewise, if a Cleric’s meta arose, you wouldn’t be forced to play it. Your entire argument was that players like you would be forced to change how you play when it is quite clearly not true in the slightest.

My argument has always been much larger than anyone being forced to play a certain way; it was rather obvious that nobody was (except, apparently, to you). My argument was that different paths should have different metas/optimal compositions. Which you effectively countered with “I don’t want to get new gear to run content.” Granted, you didn’t refer to yourself, rather “players running a single build for dungeon running,” but I find it safe to assume you do count yourself in that group.

They could still run all dungeon paths in that gear just fine. They just may not be optimal in all of them. So, they make a choice: “stick with what I already have and not be optimal 100% of the time, or invest in multiple gearsets and always have the right one to be optimal.”

In short: your argument falls apart as soon as you admit that it would not be forcing anything for the meta to vary.

I can point quite clearly to what the benefits are of altering the dungeon meta to not be homogenous. The only thing you have said in response is that players who want to be optimal in everything would have to invest in it and not all would want to make that investment. It’s fine that not all players would want to invest in being optimal in a variety of metas, but they shouldn’t pretend they are being forced to play a certain way when all they are doing is dealing with the consequences of their choice..

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Yet you keep coming up with nothing to explain how Zerker being optimal in all dungeon content isn’t “forcing” people to play a certain way, but anything else becoming optimal, in some old or brand new content, does just that.

You’re playing a game where you need to follow all the rules and mechanics of the game. That is a necessary constraint.

The point is I’m not forcing people to play things my way like you accuse me because the game is this way already.

However as I’ve explained already if you advocate for a change where people adapted to the current state have to change their ways to run dungeons optimally, you’ve just forced this subset of people who run dungeons optimally to play things your way.

Get it now?

So you’re saying that nobody is forced to walk everywhere to map things out, because that is how the game was released? But Heart of Thorns will release and force everyone to hang glide if they want to map everything, because that’s a change from how it currently is?

Because that is exactly the sort of argument you are making.

Lol you just don’t get it. I’ve explained in excruciating logical detail to you many times already the implications of what you are asking for. Go read a book on basic logic and read up on what default position means. Hopefully you can throw out less strawmans after that. Class dismissed.

Congrats on quoting only the first paragraph of my post, then trying to look good from there.

If anything but Zerker were to become optimal, whether in the entire dungeon scene or in just part of it, it still would not be forcing anyone to play anything unless that were the only way to complete the content (which absolutely nobody is suggesting). Playing whatever were to become optimal would be no more forced than playing Zerker is now.

Why? Because playing what is optimal is a choice you make. The game does not force it on you in any way. But if you set a goal (which being “optimal” is a goal you desire), then you need to do what is necessary to meet that goal if you think you will meet it.

Regardless, you are not being forced to do anything. You chose to do that yourself. Choices have consequences.

However, what does variation on “optimal” bring? Quite a few things that would be healthy to the game and dungeon scene as a whole; more interesting encounters, renewed interest in dungeons by players, developer attention, greater challenge, and a happier overall playerbase due to less exclusion. The fact you choose to ignore absolutely everything that goes against your notion is rather disappointing, honestly.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Yet you keep coming up with nothing to explain how Zerker being optimal in all dungeon content isn’t “forcing” people to play a certain way, but anything else becoming optimal, in some old or brand new content, does just that.

You’re playing a game where you need to follow all the rules and mechanics of the game. That is a necessary constraint.

The point is I’m not forcing people to play things my way like you accuse me because the game is this way already.

However as I’ve explained already if you advocate for a change where people adapted to the current state have to change their ways to run dungeons optimally, you’ve just forced this subset of people who run dungeons optimally to play things your way.

Get it now?

So you’re saying that nobody is forced to walk everywhere to map things out, because that is how the game was released? But Heart of Thorns will release and force everyone to hang glide if they want to map everything, because that’s a change from how it currently is?

Because that is exactly the sort of argument you are making. In no way is anyone forced to play Zerker now. Likewise, if Zerker were not the optimal choice in every single dungeon, nobody would be forced to play whatever is optimal.

Running what is optimal is a choice. You make the choice, you do what is necessary to fulfill your goal. But you are not being forced because you chose it.

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Anchoku.8142:

Here are a few more speculative thoughts:

1. GS auto attack probably hits hard but slow and has cleave. Should be roughly equal to staff’s AA but trades piercing for cleave

If Marjory uses the skills we’ll be getting, the auto-chain is actually rather fast, taking 2.2 seconds to entirely cycle. Dagger auto takes 2.1 seconds, for reference.

Her chain also applies a chill on the last AA which has about 50% uptime untraited.

3rd hit of 4, actually.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Windsagio.1340:

No, I"m sorry. Making other options viable is not enforcing those methods.

Other options are already viable since all options are viable. Viability is not the same as Optimal. Based on your comments you just want the game to be played your way with optimal builds according to you. That is the very definition of forcing others to play your way.

How is something different being optimal forcing anyone to play their way any more than zerker being optimal forcing anyone to play your way? Double standards, much?

It’s pretty sad you still don’t get it after it’s been explained to you many times this thread.

If state A is status quo, and you change the game such that state B is the new optimal where state B is the one advocated by you and players who adapted to state A is forced to now change their setups to play in state B optimally, you’ve just demonstrably and by definition forced people to play the game your way.

I’m not calling for any changes so I’m not forcing anyone to play my way since that is the way things are already. If you knew basic logic you’d know the fact that I took the default position is in no way using double standards.

You are the one calling for changes therefore it’s incumbent upon you to show why it is needed and you’ve failed to make your case. It’s just one fallacy after another with no good arguments.

Yet you keep coming up with nothing to explain how Zerker being optimal in all dungeon content isn’t “forcing” people to play a certain way, but anything else becoming optimal, in some old or brand new content, does just that.

Right now, if someone wants to play optimally, they are forced to play Zerker, regardless of what they like doing. Heck, they are even forced to not play Necro at all. Engineers and Rangers can also be argued to be excluded in the face of optimal goals.

It works both ways. You are preaching a double-standard, which does nothing to persuade anyone.

I disagree with this one. Precursors should never be just handed out for literally no effort.

Even though I don’t know what it consists of, since we know the precursor scavenger hunt is coming, I’m satisfied. Assuming, of course, the terrible RNG isn’t pushed to a particular component of the collection, like needing a different particular exotic to drop in order to get the precursor. Anything in the collection needs to either be craftable, purchasable from a vendor, or have fairly reliable droprates.

DeathPanel.8362:

Windsagio.1340:

No, I"m sorry. Making other options viable is not enforcing those methods.

Other options are already viable since all options are viable. Viability is not the same as Optimal. Based on your comments you just want the game to be played your way with optimal builds according to you. That is the very definition of forcing others to play your way.

How is something different being optimal forcing anyone to play their way any more than zerker being optimal forcing anyone to play your way? Double standards, much?

Either having something (doesn’t matter what) be optimal forces people to play a certain way…or it doesn’t.

Zerker can be viable without being optimal, just like every other gear set in the game is viable without being optimal. In no way does it force anyone to play a certain way, so long as it’s viable.

Anchoku.8142:

Here are a few more speculative thoughts:

1. GS auto attack probably hits hard but slow and has cleave. Should be roughly equal to staff’s AA but trades piercing for cleave

If Marjory uses the skills we’ll be getting, the auto-chain is actually rather fast, taking 2.2 seconds to entirely cycle. Dagger auto takes 2.1 seconds, for reference.

spoj.9672:

Would rather not see more traits which reward you for bad play.

To take advantage of such a reward, they need to play even better. Then it becomes a balancing act: maximizing benefit while keeping yourself alive.

This is why I thought old Automated Response was a better designed trait than Diamond Skin. Automated Response created a balancing act, while Diamond skin is “just do what you wanted to do anyway and get a free reward out of it.”

Vargamonth.2047:

Not working under NDA really baffles me. If closed betas are so close and testers will be able to freely provide us any sort of information, isn’t it like we should already had a much deeper insight on most of the things to come?

I also hope that some information that’s not relevant for testing, like new collections or legendary recipes that could be using already existing items, is properly hidden on the beta client.

I think the closed beta is to work out the rougher parts with a bit more focused input before the open beta, which tests how well things hold up to greater numbers and how people use features in possibly unexpected ways.

Basically, Closed tests to make sure it all works well. Open tests to see how people use it.

I could be mistaken, but that’s how I would do it.

spoj.9672:

Other options are already viable. I seriously dont understand why people have a problem with this. Please explain to me what is wrong with a system where everything works.

The reason we cant have a decent discussion is because there is a major failing in understanding of the other side.

If you are argueing to make other methods socially acceptible. Then fair enough. But theres no discussion to be had there. Because thats a people problem and unrelated to the system. You also cant fix people. This thread is about changing the system not the people. So i believe you are in the wrong thread.

There is a bit of a discussion to be had, though. To make them more “socially acceptable,” it will basically require a change to the current dungeon environment. Either introduction of new content where the optimal route is something that we currently don’t see (lots of ways to make this work, but it involves looking outside of current PvE for ideas), or an increase in difficulty to the point where the majority of 5-zerk teams just don’t have the coordination or ability to hold up anymore. I would rather we not see the later, but it can work.

There are tons of ways to increase difficulty without putting a stronger emphasis on DPS. There are also ways to create optimal situations for things other than Power DPS. Reversing the health/armor paradigm would immedietly bring condition builds in. Revenant+Engineer or Necro + Mesmer are both pairings that can work well with minimal condition overlap (as is Revenant+Necro). Designing encounters with lowered spike damage, but drastically increased pressure would keep total enemy DPS the same, but encourage beefier setups as pressure overwhelms active defenses, but spike damage does not. Environmental effects are also perfectly fine for use in dungeons (Arah uses a few) and those can also alter what is optimal for a path.

And yeah, I hate the idea of uncrittable enemies as it is lazy design and really makes nobody happy.

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Or do the opposite with health. Like
Blood Frenzy
Gain attack speed as you lose health.
<75%: 5% increased attack speed
<50%: 10% increased attack speed
<25%: 15% increased attack speed.

I really hate Traits like that & siphoned power because they require you be nearly dead to gain the most of your potential.

Having them be effected by enemy health however works fine.

Siphoned Power sucks primarily because it is such a low threshold, because it doesn’t help you stay alive, and the bonus is mediocre due to the short duration and single stack.

My view on traits that trigger below a certain health threshold is that they should either help keep you alive (most do this), or they should have a series of thresholds with scaling benefits based on how risky of a situation you are in (sadly, none do currently). This idea happens to do both, since Necro survivability does increase with attack speed, thanks to faster life force generation. Plus, life siphon would cast faster to help you stay alive.

For example, I would love to see Siphoned Power reworked to be 1 stack when <75% health, 2 stacks when <50% health, or 3 stacks <25% health. It would be a vastly stronger trait, and actually provide a meaningful amount of Might. That amount of bonus damage could actually swing a fight in your favor, since it’s not only a meaningful amount, but it kicks in at a point where you’re not trying desprately to stay alive.

spoj.9672:

Also if people really want other gear stats to be optimal. Instead of just spewing reason. Why dont they give examples of how it can be done without causing forced gear changes and making it impossible for some compositions to work? Im sure anet would love to hear them. I would to. Because i certainly cant think of anything that would satisfy both sides.

Kind of what I’ve been doing. There are some things that could be done to create new optimal compositions and builds without making it impossible on anyone. Spread out, ranged enemies in an appropriately designed area negate the “pull in for stack & smack” strategy, but in no way make it impossible for any given composition to complete. However, the need to deal with pressure as you take them all on may alter things a fair bit. Reflects aren’t a be-all-end-all on this, since there are a number of non-projectile ranged attacks in the game and, if reflects were expected to make an encounter trivial, those could be used instead.

Enemies that have high armor and low health pools will have optimal group comps using condition builds (and thus gear), which are currently entirely absent from the dungeon meta. Again, not forcing anything, but the optimal route is different than what we currently have.

NPC escorts, if done well, could emphasize any number of different strategies, depending on how it was set up. The one thing I would have to request, if this were done, though, is that the NPC never stops moving along his path in order to prevent backtracking and getting caught on terrain to bug out. Trying to protect a dolyak in WvW from enemy players can be quite challenging, and it could be fun to see something similar in a dungeon.

Another method (and by far my least favorite) is to have uncrittable foes. I don’t like this one at all, but it would work without forcing anything. Would hate to see ANet implement this when there are vastly superior ideas, though.

It’s rather uncommon, but it is very effective. Strangely, most Necros I’ve seen roaming have been human or sylvari, and I have never actually seen this tactic used by anyone, but it definitely works.

If the difficulty on enemies went up, some people would switch away from Zerker. Statistically speaking, they may be an insignificant portion, but it would still be a drop. I never said that some who can’t run zerker now would run zerker later. I said some who can run zerker now could not run zerker later.

And not all mobs in dungeons are skippable, so it’s quite possible adding Retaliation would make a difference. The impact of any change depends greatly on where the change is made as well as what the change is.

I’ve noticed a very considerable drop in the white items I’ve gotten dropped, and recently as my MF has increased, even a significant drop in blues compared to greens. I now get more green drops than blues or whites combined.

I would say Magic Find does work, though I admit Rares and Exotics have not seen a noticeable change in drop rates.

I’d like to be part of it, but if I’m not, oh well. I’ll participate in the open beta.

I disagree on your conclusion. Some players would switch over to other gear sets simply because to keep going in Zerker would be too difficult for them. Some others would temporarily switch to other gear sets to learn the increased difficulty before eventually returning. Others still will be stubborn and die repeatedly before calling for nerfs to NPC’s.

Overall, how many continue to run Zerker successfully would decrease, though exact numbers vary with what changes are made. There would still be some that do run it successfully, of course, just a lower (possibly in the sense that 499<500) number.

Even just introducing Retaliation on mobs in a dungeon path would be a significant step up in difficulty for most groups. The most organized groups would likely also have to re-evaluate their approach, even if it’s just something like “engineer brings throw mine instead of Elixir Gun”"

thefantasticg.3984:

You’re not getting it. You can’t apply WVW and PVP challenges to PVE. Why? PVE goals have healthbars and because of this the only goal will be to drain that healthbar as fast as possible regardless of what the “challenge” is.

So does PvP/WvW. Notice that Courtyard, which literally has no goal but “kill things” still doesn’t have a Zerker meta.

You can’t introduce build/gear diversity without changing the goal of PVE, which literally means changing the goal from killing things to not killing things because as long as there is a healthbar the ultimate goal will be to kill it as fast as possible. This literally means you have to make PVE exactly like WVW or PVP with the same goals as WVW and PVP.

No, it doesn’t. It just means diversity in how encounters are set up. Players use a number of abilities that NPC’s just don’t, such as condition cleansing, boon rip, stun breaks, dodges, and Retaliation. There is quite a bit more to this list, but you get the jist of it.

Of course, when I say zerker meta I’m referring specifically to dungeons/fractals… beacuse open world, who cares what people run? It’s just going to get zerged down anyway. I really don’t understand why people think there’s a zerker meta in open world pve. There’s not. And if we had a gear check you’d see that… or if Anet would release those stastics we could see that most people run non-zerker build/gears. The only people I know that run true zerker gear/builds are the hardcore dungeon/fractal people.

EDIT:
And like Thaddeus says, the majority don’t like content that is really hard. That’s why Orr mobs got nerfed 2+ years ago and that’s why AC got nerfed.

This is completely true. I’m still irked that Mordrem Wolves traded Retaliation for Swiftness. I understand the unstrippable Retaliation on mobs going away (which, by the way, it didn’t), but the howl should have been left alone. I never found mobs in Orr hard, either. Tougher than icebrood in Frostgorge Sound, perhaps, but not difficult.

That said, AC they did re-buff a couple of the bosses. Namely the ghost eater being a more difficult encounter now than at launch.

My guess is that Greatsword will be higher DPS against 3+ targets while Dagger will be better against 1-2. Gives both a role, then.

Greatsword auto, assuming it is the same as Marjory’s (a pretty likely scenario), is a 4-hit chain, causing 1 second of Chill on the third hit. The entire chain takes about 2 seconds to complete with total cycle speed of 2.2 seconds (so the attack speed is pretty close to dagger AA). The 3rd and 4th hit are opposite ends of the same animation, so they are likely the same skill.

So, it looks like ~50% chill uptime from the auto attack, untraited. Given the strength of Chill, I doubt it will be a high damage attack.

hybrid.5027:

Balekai.6083:

However, it’s a false choice to begin with as gear, trait and weapon choices aren’t mutually exclusive. The majority of build power and diversity comes from gear stats in GW2. There are many traits and skills that are useless unless you gear for them correctly.

This isn’t true. GW2 PvE build diversity comes from weapon choice, traits and utility skills. Build effectiveness comes from stats. Wall of Reflection still reflects regardless of your gear. Shake it Off removes the same condition in berserker gear or Knights gear. Are we even playing the same game?

And “build diversity” is not referring to the number of possible builds, but the number of viable or optimal builds. Scepter/Dagger Terrormancer in Zerker gear is not even close to being viable. I am not joking when I say Necro Scepter in Zerker gear still sees half of its damage output from the bleeds and poison that have no condition damage to back it up.

Gear is intertwined with the rest of the build. Viability is heavily dependent on synergy, optimal status even more so. You cannot talk about builds without also discussing gear as part of it, as the gear largely determines if a build even works.

Also, Reflected projectiles use the Reflector’s Precision and Ferocity stats, so yes, they do still scale with gear.

hybrid.5027:

You are looking for variety in gear. Why not look for variety in traits? Or weaponsets? that all exists. There are plenty of PvE viable builds using weapons that aren’t strictly meta. Or trait set ups that are completely viable and outside the meta builds. Why is gear variety the goal you wish for? Ask yourself this: would the game be better if more gear types were near-optimal, or if more trait choices were near-optimal? which answer would result in greater playstyle and gameplayer variety: more gear prefixes, or more viable weapon/trait choices?

Think carefully before you answer that.

That is a particularly difficult question to answer because they are intertwined. For example, the trait Master of Misdirection will not ever be optimal unless Condition Damage is optimal. There is simply no possible way around that.

Saying “it’s just gear, not a build” is a fallacy as gear is an integral part to a build. You don’t run on-crit traits and sigils with Soldier’s gear, and you don’t use condition damage setups in Zerker gear. Those are examples of the gear fighting the rest of the build.

Increasing the number of optimal builds necessitates increasing the number of optimal stat combinations.

Do you actually have Ascended Zealot’s amulet/rings/trinkets? Last I checked, they didn’t actually exist.

gavyne.6847:

I feel bad for those that PvE as a necro. But necros have always had issues in PvE in MMORPG’s. Ever since the dawn of MMO’s, starting with Everquest, necros have always been solo gods but difficult to be a part of groups, especially groups that enjoyed fast killing.

Except in GW1 where Necros were gods in PvE. Nigh infinite energy, powerful group and boss clearing skills, etc. Heck, 3 Necro heroes was actually a meta team comp for a while in PvE.

I’d say the reason Necro bunkers don’t really exist is because they lose the point to the first knockback. Too vulnerable to hard CC to bunker that well.

Vampiric and Vampiric Precision are fairly worthless. Bloodthirst is only good because of the skills it affects are effective (I’m hesitant to say “good” on Signet of Vampirism, but the active is effective, and Bloodthirst affects it.). Vampiric Rituals some people swear by, but it has always seemed useless to me. Vampiric Master is decent for a couple reasons.

Just point out that we do have the option to spec for sustain. It just involves using skills and traits that people keep touting as “bad” simply because you can’t slap them in a meta build and have sustain.

Life Siphon now is like having a second heal skill. Signet of the Locust can produce massive heals now (with very good scaling). Reaper’s Precision extends death shroud extremely significantly. Unholy Sanctuary can easily offer a 2k heal each time you go into death shroud.

For example, this build : http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fRAQNBIhZakjmKbrpxnG2bTgLITm8K0LC0KyPnA-TFDCABofIAm4IAgz+DXp0zLlBjpEEgTAAp6AKV9nC1EUiWAIeAABAQAuZs5ND4m38o38o3sUAPNGA-w

Puts out pretty significant damage. With the birthday cake from the blaster, Life Siphon heals for 4,509 total (including Vampiric) every 15 seconds (including cast). Signet of the Locust heal for 1795 per target struck (max of 8,975). And it has utility beyond that in boon corruption and condition conversion while still maintaining decent damage.

Then there are spectral builds, which have pretty good sustain as well. A lot of variations on those, though.

What we don’t have the option to do is make a bunker spec.

Or do the opposite with health. Like
Blood Frenzy
Gain attack speed as you lose health.
<75%: 5% increased attack speed
<50%: 10% increased attack speed
<25%: 15% increased attack speed.

Shiki.7148:

Yknow what I’m currently really laughing at? Colin’s comment about “really great skills tied to the necro greatsword”. Yeah, sure, and Necros are great for PvE-Speedruns atm.

To be fair, the skills could be really strong. We don’t have a clue what they are yet, so we really can’t comment on them.

The question is if those skills, which could be fantastic, do anything that the profession doesn’t already have some ability to do.

For example, say this was the Greatsword 5 skill:

Clausterphobia
Call forth a ring of spectral energy around you that contracts. Foes that touch the ring are teleported to your location.
Initial radius: 480
Minimum radius: 120
Duration: 5 seconds
Combo field: ethereal

Such a skill is possible with the new tech they’re implementing, and it could work to hold enemies that normally try to scatter in place for AoE.

On the other hand, we could get something like:
Reap Boons
Damage and steal one boon from each enemy hit

Which is a decent skill, but it doesn’t accomplish anything that Necros don’t already do.

Pandaman.4758:

First bullfrogs, now toads?

What a ribbeting turn of events.

That, good sir, is a tree frog.

Claw of Jormag has had its blind spots removed, at least. Took a number of patches, but you cannot stand in one spot to avoid all of its attacks.

DeathPanel.8362:

Wrong. In fact ironically you are the one that sounds like those people that denies global warming. Because under your logic just because something is discussed a lot automatically means it is a problem and global warming deniers do talk about the “global warming hoax” a lot. So far I’m the only one that is calling for empiricism and logic.

All right then, what sort of evidence would convince you? Anything on this topic is going to be subject to opinion of players, so numerical data is exceedingly difficult to come by. Here is what is true: variety is good for a game, and we currently don’t have variety in dungeons.

Wrong. You have called for making content changes such that some fights are better optimally done with other build types and that means that the old build optimal build is no longer as effective, which is by definition a nerf.

Sooo, because gear X is optimal in content A, if content B comes out later, gear X needs to be the optimal choice there as well, as anything else would be a “nerf?” Do you even know what it means to nerf something? Taking it from being the best choice in 95% of total content to being the best choice in 80% of total content by adding new content does not make it a nerf: it is still just as effective as it was before in all the same places as before. It’s just not the best choice in the new stuff.

The only “problem” with your arguments is that they are short sighted and without any real evidence to show that they would result in a better state of things than before and based solely on your own opinions which a lot of people here don’t share as the posts indicate.

Actually, I see three people including yourself (I think it’s 3, one poster is difficult to read due to lack of punctuation and spelling) who don’t share my opinion and quite a few more that do.

Because doing so would mean a net increase in frustration and decrease in fun for those using single dedicated dungeon runners with a single build because they’d have to change characters or gear. I’ve already stated this no less than 3 times yet you chose to ignore it. You are artificially introducing unneeded complexity into a system with no tangible benefit.

So in other words, because you personally don’t want to get a second set of gear. Thanks for confirming you don’t have any other reason.

There are tangible benefits to introducing complexity: improved skill of players as they have to deal with multiple situations, improved variety of content, improved build diversity, a renewal of interest in dungeons (both from players and devs). Those are all things that can easily come from introducing new paths or changing old ones to have different optimal strategies.

Lol are you serious? In the beginning of the paragraph you say you are not the sole arbiter of what things are supposed to be, yet by the end of the paragraph you say ANET isn’t perfect at making things the way they are Supposed to be. That by definition is a self contradiction because by stating that you implicitly mean that you know how things are supposed to be. Those are YOUR words.

Are you being intentionally dense here? I’m thinking so, because the examples I gave were paraphrases of quotes from ANet. ArenaNet has stated that Beserker’s gear is supposed to be the highest DPS. They also stated that Necromancers are an attrition profession that is difficult to escape from (check the profession design philosophy, I’ll wait). I did not, in any way, shape, or form, claim to be the sole person who knows how things are supposed to be. So, by ANet’s own statements of how things in their game are supposed to be, we can check against reality. Is Zerker the highest DPS set? Usually, yes (niche cases like Husks aside). Are necromancers an attrition profession that’s hard to get away from? No, sadly.

Got news for you: Adding unnecessary new code to a computer program is bad coding. Your statement is also a strawman argument since I never said computer programs were not artificially created. So in fact you basically dishonestly strawmanned me while failing to answer my response to your so-called “common sense” statement.

Unnecessary code is bad coding, yes. New content, though, requires new code, so it would not be “unnecessary.” Artificially creating situations would be things along the lines of “this random enemy negates crit damage,” or “you can’t heal in this fight.” Things that arbitrarily negate core aspects or are immune to strengths of builds. Not “this enemy takes reduced damage due to high armor” or “this encounter isn’t focused around DPS.”

Common sense comes in that variety in content is good for a game, so if there is an area without variety, that area should be changed up when possible in order to improve the game.

DeathPanel.8362:

People discussing something doesn’t make that something a problem. logic 101.

Frequent discussion of a topic indicates there is indeed a problem. And this is probably the most discussed topic on these forums.

Right now, you’re sounding like one of those people that denies global warming is a thing. I can point you to as much evidence as you like and you will still say “nope, not true.”

Again you are asserting it is a problem without demonstrating why. 5 zerk is nowhere near meta for everything. There are tons of different builds for pvp and wvw for example, which are 2 other giant pieces of GW2. Also there are always a meta for any game content, you nerf it something else will become meta. My main problem is with your so-called solution, which would lead to a lot more problems as I have demonstrated in my other posts.

Context! Not once have I strayed from discussing the homogenized state of dungeon metas. Ergo, unless I specify otherwise, I am still referring to dungeon metas. There will always be a meta. I have not advocated for nerfing anything here. I only advocate for variation in metas, which is quite possible to do without nerfing a thing.

The only “problems” that you demonstrate are that you personally don’t want to get a second set of gear. That is literally the only problem you bring up: you personally don’t want to put forth the effort to be optimal at different content.

Also there’s a difference between viable and optimal as many people and myself have pointed out. No one is pressuring anyone to build zerk because all other possible builds are viable for successfully completing content. The problem lies in some people not using the meta being mad that their own build is sub optimal even though it’s still viable.

And why should some different builds not be optimal in some paths? You keep failing to answer this one very important question. Why should different dungeon content not have different metas?

Wrong again. I’ve already pointed out there are plenty of different builds for wvw and pvp which are giant parts of gw2. Therefore zerk being optimal in pve doesn’t mean it “works against everything”.

Again context tells you that “everything” means “everything in dungeons”, as that is literally the only place in the game where this is even relevant. Please, stop trying to be superior and learn to understand context and its importance in argument.

This is perhaps the most ironic and unself-conscious statement you made so far.

You admit that you are not the sole arbiter of what is “supposed” to be or not and say that is ANET’s job but you conclude with: “ANET isn’t perfect at making things the way they are SUPPOSED to be.” once again claiming you are the sole arbiter of what is supposed to be or not. You get points for contradicting yourself within the same paragraph. Congratulations.

I don’t see how I’m contradicting myself when the examples I gave are ANet’s own words. That’s right, I didn’t say that Berserker is supposed to be the highest DPS (though I agree it should be), nor did I say Necromancer is an attrition profession. Those are ANet’s words.

Wrong. In this case you are advocating for artificially creating different situations requiring different approaches where they didn’t exist before. That is the antithesis of common sense.

Got news for you: it’s a computer program Every situation is artificially created.

But here’s the thing: different situations are different. This is by definition, so you really can’t argue with that. As circumstances change, how you react to them should as well. It sound to me like you learned a First Order Optimal Strategy (FOOS for short) and are terrified of being in a situation where it doesn’t work. The purpose of FOOS is to give you a good basis from which you can expand your skillset as you face new challenges. It is not for covering everything you encounter.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

The fact we are even having this conversation shows that it is a problem. Why is it a problem for different content to have different optimal strategies? One would think that’s what is supposed to be the case.

No, the fact that we are having this conversation shows that we are having a conversation. You still haven’t actually substantiated your argument with any evidence.

All right then, would you like me to go through Google and link every single thread discussing this exact same topic? I think you’d get sick of it at say, the 30th one? I know I can go well beyond that if you insist.

There is indeed a problem with 5-zerk being the meta for everything: a lot of players feel slighted and pressured into something that they don’t actually enjoy in order to do content that they do enjoy. In any other game, you wouldn’t think the same strategy works against everything, would you? Even in sports, this isn’t the case: you don’t take on the New England Patriots and the Detroit Lions in the same manner, for example. In Golf, you don’t tackle every hole the same way. So why is it okay for all dungeons to be handled the same? Because you are lazy and don’t want to buy a second set of gear?

Different content aside from pve already has different optimal strategies. The scope of this discussion is around pve. You are advocating for additional optimal builds for different pve content when it isn’t needed and would just increase frustration and tedium as I’ve explained already.

The “optimal strategy” in all dungeons (the only place where “meta” means anything in PvE) is to stack up and AoE all enemies until they’re dead. This only varies slightly with bosses. This isn’t variety, this is reskins.

And no, one does not necessarily think that is supposed to be the case because that is subjective. You are not the sole arbiter of deciding what is supposed to be or not.

You’re right; I’m not the sole arbiter of what is “supposed” to be or not. That is ANet’s job. Berserker is supposed to be the highest DPS set, and it is! Necromancer is supposed to be an attrition profession that is hard to get away from and…well, it’s not. Moral of the story: ANet isn’t perfect at making things the way they are supposed to be.

However, common sense dictates that different situations require different approaches. I’m advocating that ANet encourage a well-stocked toolbox over three sizes of hammer in dungeons.

You are the one advocating for the change therefore it’s incumbent on you to backup your assertions with evidence rather than just sophistry, which is what you’ve been throwing out so far.

And what sort of evidence would satisfy you? 20 threads saying there is a problem? 50? I can probably pull 70 or so if you like. I can outline situations that encourage different things than 5-zerk (and have already) that even already exist in the game! But they don’t exclude zerk either. It’s just not the most optimal set in those circumstances. Are you saying those situations are tedious and cause undue frustration because you can’t be the best thing evah in those situations?

Bhawb.7408:

I don’t see why Necro/Revenant would be better than Necro/Engi.

Better Torment? Doesn’t take a lot of Torment to be better than burning, but Engies burst more different conditions faster than what we’ve seen Revenants be capable of.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

The fact we are even having this conversation shows that it is a problem. Why is it a problem for different content to have different optimal strategies? One would think that’s what is supposed to be the case.

You claim that it would increase frustration for players who don’t want to change anything for different content. Yes, this is what you are arguing, and yes, it is true. However, it is not a reasonable thing to design around.

I claim that making different content have different optimal strategies will improve the game for everyone. You don’t want to change from 5-zerk? Fine, stick with the content where that is still the optimal choice. You want to do new/changed content with a 5-zerk group? Fine, you can do so. You want to do all new/changed content kitten -zerk and have that be optimal? How selfish can you be? You already have content where that is optimal and you are in no way barred from doing the new stuff that way.

In the meantime, many, many others could get content where they are optimal. Players actually wanting to do everything in the optimal manner recognize that they will have to change things up then if new content gets introduced.

Stagnation has never helped a game, but that is exactly what you are advocating.

Strange you mention spider queen in AC as an example of my third suggestion, since every time I’ve seen it done has been to LoS it by the stairs and just burn everything in that one spot. Pretty sure the little spiders are melee anyway, making this a really bad example. Caudecus Manor has a better example with the snipers, but those are all clumped together making reflects and AoE simple. The best example is the Harpy fractal, though that is artificially made harder due to effectively being a jumping puzzle.

As far as condition builds vs. direct damage builds, they really can’t make them equal, as that would defeat the purpose of variety. Each is best against different things. The only problem is that what condition builds are best against don’t show up anywhere in dungeons right now. So having a mix of enemies with high and low armor is the best solution.

Why do I propose mechanics that are already in use? Because they work. Not only do they work, but they don’t force anything in particular. They just aren’t done often enough (not at all for 2/3* , only one path for the third) in dungeons. Hodgins is not a particularly great example of an NPC escort, IMO. Compare him to say Dolyaks in WvW (who virtually never bug out). Main difference? Dolyaks never stop moving and never contribute in combat. Protecting Dolyaks from would-be yakslappers is a challenge for sure.

*:Fractals aren’t a dungeon path

rotten.9753:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

Variety is good for a game. Different content having different optimal group combinations (professions, traits, skills, and yes, gear) is very good! You want to keep running 5-zerk speedruns? That’s fine, it just may not be the optimal choice in a new (or modified) path, but it still is in another. If you want to be optimal at everything, then you better invest yourself in getting prepared to switch to whatever is optimal.

So perhaps my suggestions don’t benefit someone as one-track-minded as you. You know, if you’re bored with dungeons, you could do something else. Many other players will welcome the change because their setup is now optimal for a small portion of content. Besides, perhaps in those mixed-paths, you play a Zerker setup that will still likely be vital to speedruns. Hey look! Now variety is encouraged and you still get to play what you’ve been playing for the last 2 years.

Why something that’s easier to play should reward more? That’s not exactly a good design and we already have it (silverwastes > dungeons > fractals).

Who said it’s easier to play? For example, Sinister and Rampager’s gear are both significantly harder to play than Zerker due to split damage stats, but having the same lack of defensive stats. Yet neither are seen as “optimal.”

“Easier to play” varies drastically with content. For example, in most PvE, Zerker is the easiest thing to play because enemies don’t live long enough to actually do anything. Does this mean they shouldn’t be rewarded in open world? In comparison, Zerker is vastly harder to play in PvP scenearios. Should it be rewarded more than anything else, then?