Guild Wars 2

Avead.5760:

The reason is that offencive stats also enhance the player passively by reducing the time it takes that he needs to survive before he manages to win.

By “passively” I understand you to mean “indirectly”, as otherwise your statement doesn’t make sense.

I comply with that active play should be more effective than passive play, but you happen to neglect the importance of active defensive in your reasoning.

Avead.5760:

And in a perfect balance those would be equally effective..But this game is about conquest and fighting in small circles ,it has something thats called downstate ..and stalling time is very effective since its entirely points based system.

Effectiveness is not necessarily in a direct cause and effect relationship with skill, however I do support that in good systems, it should be.

Player skill is a mix of knowledge and adroitness.

If you want to specifically argue GW2 setups, Berserker is more skill dependent because it attributes active play, whereas defensive stats enhance the player passively; not dependent on skill.

I feel your argument targets offensive vs. defensive effectiveness, which (while interesting) depends on specific game design, but I suspect a perfect system would support them equally.

I suspect the underlying reason why you feel cheated is because of the power of GW2 reviving, where the relative ease/cost/risk is too advantageous.

It seems to only delay targeting which in-turn delays AI controlled attack.

I forgot to factor in the +10% tool belt recharge but remembered straight after posting. :P

I could continue arguing points, but truth is your points are as valid as mine.
Opting for different traits/utilities has trade offs, but I stand by my selection as I think it better suits my playstyle.

I encourage players to sub utilities where they see fit, because ultimately it probably better suits their playstyle, regardless of potential performance.

- Yes I played that card Vaught. ;P

Thanks for your feedback!

To argue just a few points:

Trading Modified Ammunition for 30 points in Tools lowers damage slightly attribute-wise from trading Critical hit for Critical damage, and Modified Ammunition alone adds potentially higher damage than Enduring Damage, let alone Target the Maimed.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Critical_hit — 3/5 down the page for easy to read graph

Here’s my build: http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/?fcAQFAUlIqyUX7SXF17IyIFkGnB6hd5Xj4HF0FbB-ToAg0CnI4SxljLDXSuscNs4AB

Pros

• Ridiculous burst damage
• Ridiculous control
• Arguably good support
• Fun

Cons

• Condition removal
• Durability
• Mobility
• Stomping

Master Tools trait is more-or-less a throwaway.

You can swap Utility Goggles for Slick Shoes or Elixir Gun, taking advantage of Inertial Converter for the tool belt reset/double stun break, in which case you should change Speedy Gadgets to Leg Mods.

I don’t recommend Med Kit, but it does take advantage of Inertial Converter and would actually make the second Tools trait useful, but I find the speed, burst healing and knockback of Healing Turret to be far superior.

Combos for this build revolve around first immobilizing your target for Sitting Duck proc, which increases your damage through vulnerability and Modified Ammunition before chaining your tool belt skills for added static discharge damage.

When anticipating combat (i.e standing on a point), it’s never a bad idea to lay down Rifle Turret for a few free hits. Usually you want to detonate your turrets the first chance you get for added control, but if someone’s actually moving to attack your turrets let them waste their time.

Jump Shot hits like a truck!
An easy combo is dropping Net Turret next to an opponent — promptly overcharging to stun/immobilzie, and then Jump Shotting while spamming all tool belt skills.
Because of ability queuing, Detonate Turret won’t trigger until after Jump Shot, which is useful for maintaining range.

If you’re not used to it already, try placing Healing Turret near enemy players for the knockback.
Also time allows you to drop another turret immediately after Healing Turret to benefit from an additional Water Blast Field combo for higher burst healing. You’ll need a bit more setup if you plan on detonating a third turret as well.

Also note that Net Attack (which isn’t getting nerfed!), Analyze & Surprise Shot all don’t require you to be facing your target, which is just really convenient!

p.s. I know the topic title is a little arrogant, I’m just using it to attract more views. ;P

They directly nerfed me and maybe two other Engineers!

Honestly I chuckled after reading it, thanks for the laugh ArenaNet!

I would like down state to be replaced by something that doesn’t demote skill.

Reviving can stay, but it needs to be extremely difficult/risky/costly to make up for the potential gain.

Ameno.6813:

You’re misconstruing my words a bit there.

How? You basically implied glass cannon isn’t effective against non glassy opponents in reply to Jackalrat claiming glass isn’t effective against tanks now, which means the only way it would become effective is if no one built for durability.

Erebos.6741:

I’ll take time to think about your views and might post back tomorrow.

It turns out I had enough time tonight, so I’ll post this now.

Lopez.7369:

I think that’s when the passive vs. active argument gets a bit carried away. There are going to be major mechanics in the game that are passive. Health is passive. Armor is passive. Downed state is part of that framework.

Yes, they are all passive defenses, so how come competitive games include passivity if it isn’t a fair derivative of skill?
I believe the reason is to help inexperienced players learn by increasing their exposure time.

I have two problems with down state in this regard:

1. Switching skill sets nullifies the point of passive defense, because players can’t apply their knowledge and it further expands the learning curve.
2. Passive influence should be demoted with increasing levels of competitive play to promote skill.

Lopez.7369:

I really don’t see it as too much of an unfair mechanic, even in outnumbered fights, because both sides have to deal with it and build for it.

Anything is considered balanced if all sides of the equation are equal, but respective to combat down state breaks this rule intermediately with varying player capability.

The same could be said for chess, however that’s not a fair comparison because fruitlessly losing a chess piece could have been prevented, whereas disabled capability in GW2 via down state can not.

Lopez.7369:

It’s also a matter of balancing the good and bad. In general, healing and support mechanics — and I count downed state in this category — are going to favor the side with the bigger numbers. That’s just the slight drawback involved with all of these kinds of abilities.

You hit the nail on the head!
- Nothing to add here that I haven’t covered already.

Thank you Lopez — I appreciate your feedback!

I’ll take time to think about your views and might post back tomorrow.

Lopez.7369:

It would be boring because players would have very little to think about beyond just spamming damage and trading off the point. Downed state adds a layer of gameplay that forces everyone to rethink “turns” — as in the time necessary to use certain abilities — and positioning just when a fight might be reaching its climax.

I think most high-level players likely feel the same way. While just mastering a rotation or positioning might be enough for most players, after a certain level the game needs extra layers of depth to remain interesting and raise the skill cap.

I somewhat agree. It’s hard not to increase the skill ceiling of games with added complexity.

Challenge establishes reward. It’s no surprise top-end players like yourself welcome difficult challenge.

Success reflects competency and competence is possession of required skill, but how does skill determine the success of combat if down state triggers passively, lowers the capability/skills influence of the afflicted and presents unfair vantage by rewarding the falling side with reviving capability?

Lopez.7369:

The game would risk being genuinely boring without downed state. It adds a layer of support-based gameplay that’s sorely missing from a game without healers.

Why would it be boring? Granted I acknowledge downed mechanics adds depth and influences strategy.

What do dedicated healers and down state have in common?
- They both offer healing-esque support.
Not saying that’s a bad thing, but how is it a good thing (for the game, not game-specific scenarios)?

Melding the supportive role into every profession means everyone has increased proficiency and supportive responsibility, but how does that cater for a larger demographic?

Could a game exist with dedicated and blended roles? Yes. Would it appeal to a larger audience? Yes.

So you can’t say it’s more enjoyable for everyone in this regard.

Jackalrat.5493:

4) It slows the game down

Assuming a faster pace is better.

What is the ideal pace of play?

Ameno.6813:

Without down state everybody would have the mentality of “kitten everything, I’m going to build as glassy as possible to burst down whoever I’m fighting as quick as possible”.

Ameno.6813:

Jackalrat.5493:

You don’t see glass cannons constantly putting everyone in downed state now

That’s because not everyone is running full glass nowadays, taking away downed state basically incentivizes more reckless play-style because when the opponent runs out of health they’re dead

You assume people would optimize burst because players become easier to kill. You conclude this effective because most people will build burst/glass cannon specs.

This is circular logic/illogical; the basis for your premise exists in the conclusion.

Ameno.6813:

The other really annoying thing would be conditions. Imagine having a really close fight with a necro, and ultimately winning but using all your condi removal in the process.

Ameno.6813:

It also forces you to play smart and save your blinds/immunities/stabilities for a stomp.

The same could be said for managing condition removals/healing. ;-P

1. Do you think it’s fair or good game conduct to degrade player skill/adeptness as a factor in the determination of combat? (y/n)
2. How do you think down state influences player skill/effectiveness?
   – From the downed perspective?
   – Stacked odds (e.g. 4v5)?

snacktime.1082:

Power and skill do not scale on the same curve.

By power do you mean effectiveness?

If so, skill is directly proportional!
The higher skilled a player the better they perform/affect the match. This is common sense.

snacktime.1082:

If you took out the down state, skill would become much more of a factor in most fights.

At least we agree on something.

Opc.4718:

If you’re playing competently in an out-manned group, you know that the people rezzing are going to be free kills doing no damage.

I’m not going to back & forwards argue about different counter abilities that could fit the scenario.
What I will argue is that down state (mechanically), demotes skill as a determining factor of combat, which is unhealthy for the competitive prosperity of the game.

Opc.4718:

Also, necro has very little access to stability while guardian has stability godmode, that’s not fair we should make all the classes the same, amirite?

Profession specific ability is not the same as game-wide mechanics.
…

Tibstrike.2974:

I hate to say this, but its a l2p issue. Learn to fight with downed-state in mind and you will have an easier time. If not, go to fight clubs or duel locations and feel free to just down people and back off. Don’t take on 3 people and expect them not to rez eachother. This is not a fair game. Especially WvW.

What did you mean by “This is not a fair game”, in the context — speaking about down state?

Or did you take it out of context? In which case I have no idea why you mentioned it.

snacktime.1082:

[1] Down state is a mechanic to cap the power of highly skilled, experienced players. [2] If power scaled with skill, then 10 mans would be wiping 60 man zergs. Ditto for aoe caps. [3] A game that lets experienced/skilled players completely dominate would end up driving most people away, and become a niche game with a much smaller population.

1. Down state isn’t needed to cap player power. Limited player capability already does this
2. Power does scale with skill. But because players have limited capability, skill isn’t the only factor for determining combat and therefore quantity yields an advantage
3. True! However segregating players based on skill directly solves this problem

Thank you for that link Calae!

It’ll make a valuable resource.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

strength in numbers.
the party with less numbers is not suppose to win the battle and come out alive. especially in a 1 vs 2 situation.

You’re naive if you believe numbers should be the principal factor for determining combat.

Skill promotes quality over quantity, meaning numbers have variable value, so you can’t reliably judge the outcome based on numbers alone.

CMstorm.8679:

I really love the downed state mechanic in any aspect of GW2 whether it be Pve, Wvw, Pvp, dungeons/fractals.
I really like it because you have that chance to revive/rez an ally and potentially change the outcome of a match.

I like things about the mechanic too! Conversely there’s also things I don’t like about it.

However, considering you love influencing match outcomes, it may be troubling to learn that down state actually limits individual combat potency!

This means that even if you’re more skilled than another player it may not noticeably show! Because down state demotes skill as determining factor of combat!

piffdaddy.8014:

At least now it can be countered with a rez utility or a skill such as shadow refuge to revive.

No. It’s countered by a passively triggered effect which bestows vantage to the affected player.

lynnhood.8270:

being downed is not in a necessary relationship of cause and effect with skill or intelligence.

Basically you’re implying the results of combat has elements not determined by skill or intellect, and player skill doesn’t necessarily grant control of the situation, thus, skill is an unfair gauge to hold players accountable for being downed.

I agree skill isn’t the only factor for determining combat, but I think your conclusion is… lacking data — to put it nicely.

Before I really consider your notion, please explain a fun & fair way to determine combat without using skill as the principal factor.

Erebos.6741:

Is it fair if one player dies from an overwhelming number of enemy players?

There are limits to player capability. If skill was the only factor for determining combat than characters would be immortal at high skill levels! Trivializing combat!

lynnhood.8270:

Another implicit claim that is often made that being downed is a necessary and direct reflection (or consequence) of the intellectual capabilities of the downed player.

Player skill is a mix of knowledge and adroitness.
It is the best means for determining combat outcome.

Hi Marcos,

I just have a question about your quiz:

1. How do the results help the devs discern why people ranked professions the way they did?

Also would like it if Overcharge skills reset turret rate of fire upon activation. ^^

Hello Swagg! Nice post [+1]

Swagg.9236:

New trait: Elixir-Packed Turrets

• Master (Major)
• Turrets explode when killed. When your turrets explode, they cure 1 condition on allies in the area and create a healing field.
• Condition cure radius: 360
• Healing per pulse: 325
• Pulse: 1 second
• Healing field duration: 3 seconds
• Healing field radius: 240
• Combo Field: Water

I like the idea behind turret explosions curing 1 condition on allies, as condition removal outside of elixirs is lacking for us, whereas condition application and reapplication is rich between professions.

I think the water fields are overdoing it a little, especially considering Healing Turret already provides x2 Water Combo Fields.
And besides, particle effects would be CRAZY combining the Blast finishers! ;P

Hello and thank you for your reply Runeblade!
Because I’m lazy here’s a past quote explaining the purpose of my quiz:

Erebos.6741:

So about my quiz. I focused on the restricted ability to defeating enemy players as the key motive for my hatred towards the state – a disability it attributes, and how the effectual satisfaction of the amount of players is relative to the difficultly.

The point I was trying to make is that I feel combat potency is lacking in regard to PvP – undoubtedly hindered by down-state.

I think this is because the difficulty in finishing combat is set too high to help distinguish and accredit the weight of players, a trait which would be further appreciated by the viewers.

p.s. Gotta love those Cow finishers!

Appreciate the bump Bil!

I would be incredibly humbled to hear Anet’s thoughts on the subject!
Coincidentally that would make an unbelievable birthday present!

24 tomorrow!

Richy Lao.8346:

what will happen if 2 guys are down by the same skill (AOE?)? Who will rally first?

Whoever most deserves/earns it.

Justin ODell.9517:

Hey, what can I say? I’m not a designer. ;P

Sorry — I don’t have a problem with your authority in the matter, I actually really appreciate your concern! Thank you!

Only something tells me this isn’t exactly a new idea, and I’d be surprised if the devs missed that.

Justin ODell.9517:

I really like this idea! Just sent an email to the team about it.

: |

Swagg.9236:

I mean, sure, making a change like the one you suggested would really change turret play (and, in my opinion, for the better), but what turrets really need beyond better mobility are traits to capitalize on their varied skill chains.

I agree that improving Turret portability isn’t the most crucial issue (at least from a Conquest PvP perspective), personally I would just like to see some recharges lowered /shrug

What Turrets need?
— To be competitive? — Honestly? I lack the credentials/experience to justify such an opinion.
The only testament to my skill is the odd compliment I get from friendly players in Hot Join/Solo Queue, nevertheless I feel Turrets are somewhat effective as compared to our other utilities/builds.

— To be fun to use? — I currently enjoy them as is, but the small condition removal and situational stun breaker can be frustrating.
The problem with Rumble is how (like all Turret Tool Belt skills) it gets replaced by Detonate ‘x’ Turret while the Turret is active.
This isn’t such a problem with other Turret Tool Belt abilities however, because they all happen to mirror their respective Turret’s talent, i.e:
Healing Turret applies Regeneration, Regenerating Mist applies Regeneration, Net Turret Immobilizes, Electrified Net Immobilizes, etc.

This means that the player doesn’t normally have to sacrifice anything, unlike the Thumper Turret which requires you to trade utility; impeding effectiveness.

I have to go soon so I won’t have time to brainstorm possible fixes just now, but If there’s any one fix I could choose for Turrets in a future patch, it would have to be the aforementioned rate of fire reset upon Overcharge skill activation.

Thanks for reading! ^^

Hello Swagg,

Nice thread btw and thanks for the feedback!
To clarify a few things: saving HP is the drawback to removing Turret pickup Cooldowns.

The drawback is needed because Turrets (as all skills) need weakness/counters to excuse their potency, otherwise players could just pickup and redeploy their Turrets with full health to exploit the lack of Cooldowns.

Even with saved HP there is further counter-strategy where players could pick up their turrets upon impending damage, only to redeploy them immediately after.
Despite rewarding skillful play there is no counter to this maneuver, which creates imbalance (important in PvP), so I thought to include a long activation time to discard the possibility in order to maintain fair play.

This also promotes (or rather doesn’t demote) Tool Kit Turret repair utilities and the Autotool Installation trait, which could persist in effect to stowed Turrets as an additional suggestion.
I also like the suggestion to merge Autotool Installation with Metal Plating suggested in another thread by MonMalthias, even though I personally still wouldn’t take the combined trait as being a strict SPvPer ;P

TL;DR: The motive behind these proposed changes is to allow greater Turret activity by affording them better mobility to comply with exploration requirements, etc.
And confine counter-strategy to maintain balance in PvP.

This is an alternative to other increased Turret mobility suggestions previously mentioned throughout the forums.

Hello Nretep,

Nretep.2564:

- (Assuming there are not other effects present, ) Condition durations are not rounded (up) and they only tick on full seconds, making 2.99998 seconds of bruning ticking twice.

I suggest you test this.

e.g. +30% Condition duration increases a 3 second condition to 4 seconds despite the sum falling short of the 4 second mark (130% * 3 seconds = 3.9).
Damaging Conditions tick 4 times.

Sorry if this has been brought up before but I couldn’t find it through Google and the forum search function isn’t working.

Rune of the Forge 2-piece bonus isn’t adding 15% Burning Duration like the tooltip ascribes.

Here is a short video showcasing the fault:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcGuWkX5JTs&feature=youtu.be

As many of you likely know, Conditions round off to the nearest quarter of a second.
@ +48% Burn duration, the base 2 second Burn on Flame Turret should have increased to 3 seconds ((133% + 15%) * 2 seconds = 2.96 seconds).

I test my Burn duration again after increasing it by an additional 5%.
Assuming the Rune bonus is without effect, Flame Turret Burn duration would be (133% + 5%) * 2 seconds = 2.76 seconds, which isn’t enough to produce a third Burning tick.

This means that Rune of the Forge adds at least 5.75% to make it above 2.865 seconds to round it up to 3 seconds, but less than 10.25% to account for falling short of 3 seconds (stacking only with Napalm Specialist).

Thank you.

TURRET AND OVERCHARGE SKILL SUGGESTIONS
General

• Picking up turrets no longer invokes a Recharge/Cooldown.
• Turret pickup activation time increased to 1.5 seconds.
• Turret HP saved upon pickup. Redeploying turrets resumes saved HP amount. HP resets to full after 5 minutes of non-activation time from the utility bar.
• Destroyed turrets still incur a recharge time.

Rocket Turret

• Burning damage component removed. This skill now applies 5 stacks of Torment for 3 seconds.

Explosive Rockets (Rocket Turret overcharge)

• Animation changed to incorporate faster projectile travel time.
  OR
• Explosive Rockets now deal AoE Knockdown.

Flame Turret

• Burning duration increased from 2 seconds to 3.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Swagg.9236:

TURRET OVERCHARGES (OPTION 1)

• A utility skill turret’s overcharge now interrupts its respective turret’s current skill queue upon activation (it triggers immediately the second that you press the button).

Erebos.6741:

Overcharges enhance/replace the turret’s regular bolts, meaning the effect won’t activate until the time the turret fires.

This lack of effect activation control makes overcharge skills unreliable (including Cleansing Burst), so don’t be so quick to detonate/pick up!

A simple yet effective solution is to allow overcharge skills to reset turret rate of fire upon skill activation.

Effectively the same result so I support this idea! [+1]

lynnhood.8270:

Erebos.6741:

Down-state aims to counterbalance my mistakes; punishing those that outplayed me,
and snares my capability, in fairness of vantage…

The perspective underlying this claim is that getting the opponents health bar down to zero before he/she gets down yours down to zero equals outplaying the opponent and is a measure of your skill and this is where it should end. Anything that comes after in downed state is not a measure of skill.

The view focuses on punishment and reward.
My angle discerned down state as a milestone (or turning point) whereby combat logistics strongly favour the non afflicted. Even though death is far from certain, I consider going downed as a loss in and of itself, because the battle of comparative skill-instigated ability ended.

I’m not of the opinion that this is where skill does or should end, rather skills influence becomes of little value to leverage a comeback.

p.s. As passionately as I feel about this topic, it stacks fairly low on my list of other priorities – hence my delay ;P
Thank you for your patience! And you can expect further discussion

Sorry lynnhood but I wasn’t able to finish compiling my reply tonight

I’ve spent about 2.5 hours so far (sadly this isn’t too uncommon among my posts) evaluating and formulating my opinion (I’m still on the first point ;P ).

I don’t have as much time to spare tomorrow but I promise I will eventually get to answering all your contentions

p.s. I agree with a lot of what you said ^^

Hey lynnhood~ holy crap that’s a lot of text!

Just wanted to say thank you – I’ve never had such technical feedback before!
I’m anxious to analyse your points and reevaluate my assessment
However I’m busy tonight and won’t have the time till tomorrow after work.

You can expect a proper reply then ^^

Conan.8046:

jmatb.6307:
I think eliminating passive crap from PvP will instantly make the game more polarized between good and bad players, which favors people who actually earn their production

While what you say is true, i don’t dispute that stupid passives and passive boons being too powerful is a huge downer on skill.. they are so built into the game they are impossible to remove.
Huge NPC spam – Pets/minions/ect also detracts from skill…however also they are too important to some classes to remove.

jmatb was a little harsh, but it’s 100% true, only some passivity is needed to serve as a buffer to lower combat difficulty to cater to the masses, and it also allows expansive depth to be added

Also less experienced players need time to learn from encounters.
Otherwise if they die too soon, they may feel as though there was nothing they could have done! Which is frustrating! And leads to rage-quit moments ;P

Dual.8953:

Personally I love downed. I’ve never heard anyone in game complain about it.

I hope that’s not your empirical evidence that down state is fine.

To clarify, I never grumble to other people about downed in-game, but that doesn’t mean I don’t like it (as a whole).
Also I’ve seen people whine plenty of times, so what?

Dual.8953:

Like it or hate it, I doubt it’s going anywhere.

As far as I can tell changes are warranted.
If ArenaNets fails to recognize this, than I’m just disappointed is all.

Dual.8953:

Best way to handle it is accept it, and plan for it.

Do you mean “handle it” as in strategy advice? Or the associated problems?
Because we’re not talking about strategy here.

Otherwise, the best way to handle problems is to rectify them.

Jordy [+1]

You raise good points!
I don’t have any end-game PvE experience myself, so I don’t know how true this is, but it definitely sounds like poor design

KrisHQ.4719:

The problem with downed state is that it’s almost impossible to win a 1v2, and yes, that is actually a problem, since outnumbered fights are exciting for spectators.

Erebos.6741:

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

I think this is because the difficulty in finishing combat is set too high to help distinguish and accredit the weight of players, a trait which would be further appreciated by the viewers.

jmatb.6307:

I think eliminating passive crap from PvP will instantly make the game more polarized between good and bad players, which favors people who actually earn their production

KrisHQ.4719:

Furthermore, ress-abilities make for a very interesting gameplay, and can turn the tide of a whole fight.

Erebos.6741:

Cymric.7368:

Yes, reviving is very powerful however, it also put the reviver at a HUGE risk to himself. You are basically a sitting duck in that few seconds and if you can’t absorb that much damage, you are downed as well. Risk vs reward, I can’t count the number of times I am downed while trying to revive.

This is somewhat true, however because you can easily overcome the risk this nowhere near justifies the reward. This isn’t always the case however, and the degree of difficulty fluctuates depending on precursors.
Fixing this will also correct why reviving unjustly counter-objectifies the reward of outplaying/downing players

I’m happy to provide simple examples if you so wish

CrossedHorse.4261:

There are elements of risk/reward and wild card revives thrown into the mix, which means you can’t just look at the team list and go “oh, no point playing” etc. There’s always the chance you could pull off a victory because of the downed state, and I like that.

I think the risk unfairly licenses the reward, degrading skill as a determining factor of combat.
What do you think?

KrisHQ.4719:

Without downed state in this game, the meta would be revolving around burst even more than it already does.

Erebos.6741:

Gandarel.5091:

Downed state is ESSENTIAL FOR PVP. Since we have no healers, if you get spiked, you can get downed in a blink of an eye. With downed state, your teammates can pick you up, thus surviving the spike.

Gandarel, are you asserting that it is too difficult (e.g. not well telegraphed) or beyond player capability to counter spike damage either or for sustained intervals?

Edit (to save you a reply):

If yes, than the core of the problem lies in the lack of player capability and/or failure in design to cater for human debility.

If no, than you got outplayed, which normally inflicts a penalty (death) to advantage the player towards winning the match, promote skillful play, and give meaning to/reward combat!

[rant]

Instead GW2 implemented down-state, which degrades the capability of the afflicted, which means the fight is biased; not appointing to skill! Or a corrupt loss due to unfair vantage set up by the downed player; also not pertaining to skill!

This demotes skillful play which in-turn degrades combat and befouls the fairness of competition.

[/rant]