Guild Wars 2

I imagine it’s very, very difficult for someone to pop an ANet tag and not draw a crowd. Whether that be enemies or friendlies.

In an ideal PvE scenario it might be sub-optimal. I think it’s got some potential out in WvW, particularly smaller scale, where you’re not always going to be able to setup a specific might stacking combo in the middle of a skirmish.

Some red would still be welcome here.

So it’s a question of risk vs reward, and it’s a question of limiting min-maxing.

It’s worth noting that trinkets also provide significantly higher non-percent stats than most pieces of armour. And though I don’t want to get into a debate about it, it is still worth mentioning the existence dire.

The point remains that they should have preserved the potential. The maximum amount of burst damage from a crit build was not at all unreasonable assuming that the player was actually glass. Or that they sacrificed some measure of their damage to gain some measure of survivability. Because of the distribution and ratio of ferocity the ceiling for all power builds is lowered.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

There is something you aren’t considering, though: Zerker and Assassin’s gear have three stats that multiply each other. A seemingly small increase in one can be significantly stronger than you would expect. Bunkers do not multiply in that way.

Bunkers do have a multiplier in the form of boon duration, though admittedly they can’t stack it much higher than they can inside sPvP. They’re are however capable of significantly higher defensive stats in WvW.

The greater concern is the much more significant multiplier condition duration, which is very easily more than doubled by a single piece of food… And taken even further by runes that aren’t available in sPvP.

The fact that the those stats aren’t typically built into armour types doesn’t lessen their potential outside sPvP.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

And only the amulet/rings/backpiece/trinkets are actually getting significantly nerfed. Other pieces of gear will result in the same or even slightly higher crit damage (due to extra stats above the cutoff adding together) than before.

Which is why the change is actually a much more significant nerf to hyrid builds than the full zerker PvE meta that they claim to be combating.

However, if they had redistributed the stat somehow or provided an alternative while retaining it’s potential, those hybrid builds would likely have adjusted. Instead, they simply take a straight nerf.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Khalic.3561:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I said the primary reason, not the only reason. Because those particular pieces were so horrendously over-budget, it meant that the only way to bring it in line was to nerf the overall amount.

There are other reasons for the change to Ferocity as well.

By giving ferocity to crit damage a better ratio than 15->1% they could have allowed for a higher maximum.

They could have, but as I already said, those pieces were over-budget and horrendously so. This means the total crit damage was too high. Ergo, the total needed to get nerfed as well.

And… I’m arguing that the maximum was not too high with regards to WvW. They brought it down to around 60-70% I believe. Which is near what you can reach in sPvP, and they’re happy with that level in that game type.

However, every other build type has the potential to go above and beyond their stats in sPvP. Bunkers and condi burst in particular. If the level of direct damage burst was fine compared to the potential of other builds in sPvP then there’s a good chance it will now be off in WvW.

Regardless of whether jewelry pieces were giving a larger amount of crit damage than they should or not, there were options to normalize the stat and limit min-maxing without doing an across the board nerf.

Black Box.9312:

Khalic.3561:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

The primary reason of the Ferocity change was bringing these in line. These weird imbalances between slots don’t exist in PvP, so nothing has to change there.

If that was the case then they would allow you to reach the same maximum amount of crit damage as before, but the amount per piece would be more uniform.

It was done to normalize critical damage and bring it in line with other stats. Being able to directly scale a percentage modifier made the game too vulnerable to power creep.

Such as boon duration or condi duration?

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I said the primary reason, not the only reason. Because those particular pieces were so horrendously over-budget, it meant that the only way to bring it in line was to nerf the overall amount.

There are other reasons for the change to Ferocity as well.

By giving ferocity to crit damage a better ratio than 15->1% they could have allowed for a higher maximum.

EDIT: They also could have given ferocity on armour pieces a different allotment than the standard minor stat value. Or they could have introduced a ferocity major stat type with the release as well. Instead they decided to nerf the build type across the board, for an undecided amount of time.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

The primary reason of the Ferocity change was bringing these in line. These weird imbalances between slots don’t exist in PvP, so nothing has to change there.

If that was the case then they would allow you to reach the same maximum amount of crit damage as before, but the amount per piece would be more uniform.

nightwulf.1986:

This is where the people are coming from who keep trying to beat into everyone’s heads that Ferocity is not the end all solution the community at large is making it out to be. They say that they had to make this change to crit damage calculation before they could move on to the other changes and they can’t make all of the changes at once. They haven’t even said what those other changes are yet and people assume they know what’s coming. They have been intentionally vague on their long term goals. I really feel that these posts on how Ferocity alone will not change the zerker meta are pointless. Of course it won’t! You know it won’t, arenanet knows it won’t, even your zerker armor knows it won’t. Everyone is in agreement! Stay tuned folks!

edit: added time code to twitch link for easier access.

There are two reasons why those statements are not comforting to me:

1. They’ve already stated that crit damage is in a good spot for them in sPvP. Which makes me wonder why exactly they think it’s in such an awful spot in WvW.

2. Other changes may be coming, but it’s been was more four months between the last balance patch and this feature build. Four months under a very strong condi meta, and judging by a number of changes coming with the feature build they are only looking to make condis stronger. How long will it be until the next part of their plan rolls out? And will those change only provide more buffs to support, while direct damage falls to the wayside in non-zerg fights?

The zerker meta problem is only relevant to PvE gameplay. And the choice of gear is purely a symptom of mob mechanics rather than the stats themselves.

In any case, there was no need to restrict direct damage burst in WvW. If the goal was to make crit damage function the same way as other stats, then they should have make the ratio better than 15->1%.

Being locked out of WvW after transferring during the season is understandable. What is confusing is that a number of people who transferred during the season were able to enter WvW immediately, and are only now being restricted.

Travis the Terrible.4739:

It seems people forget that ele also has the most skills because of attunements….

The greater number of skills are balanced against the ability to play at several ranges and roles, as well as many skills having less compact effects and longer CDs.

• EX. If you’re a D/D ele you fight within a 0-600 range at all times. If you’re a warrior, you may fight within a 0-600 range with a hammer then swap to a longbow and fire from 1200.

• EX. If you’re an ele, you may have a focus skill that chills a target at range. If you’re a necro you may have a focus skill that chills a target, strips 3 boons, and does decent damage

The skills overall are balanced without factoring in sigils. Before, while other classes could equip more sigils, each of them would be bound by the same ICD. Now that the ICD restrictions have been lifted, having access to a greater number and wider variety of sigils at any given time is a significant buff.

Best of luck Allie! Really appreciate all the time and insight you’ve given us here.

Please consider sharing your thoughts with regard to the balance of crit builds in WvW and why you felt they needed adjustment in that gamemode in addition to PvE.

Is it wrong if I’m slightly annoyed that they feel the need to tease this instead of just saying something?

We’re going to need something with ferocity as the primary stat. Preferably ferocity/power/precision.

oZii.2864:

Dub.1273:

The 10% they called are a joke, it’s actually 22-36% depending on your profession, build and buffs (assuming you’ve been and will stay full offensive specced). But even *if*it was just 10%, that’s a pretty huge nerf. Especially considering all the passive play-buffs anet likes to spew out, it’s probably going to kill a majority of the last few direct damage builds there are.

You have any calculations or link to show the 22-36%? Everything I seen shows 10% or less. I believe fadeway did one for all the meta guardian builds (pve) and it was 10% or less. I actually don’t think I have seen one for any of the other classes but I havent actually looked for them except ele.

There’s some confusion about the potential loss in overall DPS compared to the loss in actual crit damage. It’s very easy to calculate your loss in crit damage simply by adding up the ferocity that will be on your current gear, using the 15->1% conversion, and comparing that to your current crit damage. Many builds are looking at a 30-40% reduction in crit damage and that is very significant. Even if your DPS over an extended period of time may still be fairly high, a lot of power builds rely on the spike damage to survive.

DiogoSilva.7089:

New Sigil of Bloodlust’s description

Only one attribute-stacking sigil can be active at a time.

Pretty sure that’s just refering to the fact that you can have two types, like perception and bloodlust, at once.

NinjaEd.3946:

They dont need to nerf condi dmg, it already has restriction in play and can be removed by condi clear which prioritizes DoT conditions.

Conditions are removed by last in, first out. The most recently applied is removed first. This is one of the issues with fighting a condi class. If my skill only removes a single condition (as so many do) and the 15 stacks of bleed are covered by a couple seconds of vuln, then I’m going to be stuck with the bleeds.

Astralporing.1957:

Craywulf.5793:

Please officially label Tarnished Coast and Piken as official roleplaying servers BEFORE you implement this Megaserver system.

They would never do that. Officially labelling those servers as “RP” might cause problems – namely the “RP or GTFO” mentality some people would show then (thinking they have Anet backing).

Could take the LotRO approach and label them “RP encouraged.”

Zine.2136:

I wonder if some sort of free tagging system could be added to this. Then on top of the other metrics it could help accommodate other on the fly communities that may not be easily represented in the game engine. Then the community could help self organize around those tags.

For example in your lfg interface, a text field. Enter space separated key words. Then players with similar words are weighted higher to be placed.

Some tags that could be used may be:
Roleplay
Zerg
Events chain
Living story achievments

That seems like the solution that’s most like to fit into their system. Though I think it would be smoother if they added specific categories of their own, rather than having players fill in the blanks. Ideally it would simply be another variable that weights which instance you end up in, though how simple it actually is, I have no idea.

MrDmajor.7084:

I don’t understand what the problem is, and why RP’ing trumps the overall health/population of the the games thinned out areas.

The two are hardly mutually exclusive. If they had gone with a district system such as GW1, rather than arbitrarily assigning people based on metrics, they could have had players combined to increase the population of most zones while still allowing other instances to be used for organized events and things like RP.

Kyon.9735:

Omega.9601:

They could at the very least reduce the CD to 30 secs while you dont make contact, and remove immobalize, cripple, and chilled. The range on rtl got a pretty big nerf since they raised the cd.

I think making it remove immobilize, cripple, and chill would make it too strong. Cripple and Chill doesn’t affect RtL range right now. Even warriors need to trait for it if they want movement skills to remove immobilize.

They do have a weapon skill on the horn that removes them, with a 15s base CD and 9 target AoE. While it gives swiftness, it’s not a true movement skill though, so maybe the implications are different.

If you allowed RTL to cure soft CC, I imagine a lot of people would complain about it’s strength for escaping again. And it would make that a bit easier, true. But the high CD would still be there. And it would help you stay on a target that is trying to kite you as well. And even if you weren’t having trouble staying on an opponent, it would give a legitimate reason to use the skill in close combat beside just doing a small amount of damage.

IDK if it’s really my preferred solution, but it’s something to think about.

killahmayne.9518:

The main problem is quickly focusing and bursting targets using power that gets dramatically less effective. If you lose 25% crit damage, suddenly a 10K Backstab becomes 7.5K, which is the difference between a target staying to fight, or a target being forced to blow cooldowns and panicking. A 6K Arcing Arrow becomes 4.5K, etc. Over time, the damage you do normalizes due to non-crits but the element of “oh kitten he just hit me super-hard with one attack” is significantly nerfed. Which is what people fail to consider when talking about these changes, the instantaneous critical burst which sets up a snowballing effect of pressuring your enemy.

This is my concern here. I run fairly high crit builds on a lot of my classes, but mostly I’m thinking of my ele. In a glassier D/D setup, I rely on being able to hit someone hard and fast and force them to back off of me. My offense is my defense. If I can’t kill or discourage them relatively quickly, I’m going to have problems. Particularly against the increasingly strong condi builds that are already prevalent in small scale WvW, and from the changes it only looks as if I’ll be seeing more of them.

NinjaEd.3946:

Why is thief always brought up?!?! Idgi, people get upset and run out of things to say so they just toss us into the mix of things so people will have a common enemy.

Thief is not op, its a class that requires experience to counter, just like every other pvp environment in every game ever. Also most thieves are terribad, even in tpvp.

The thief is brought up in this instance because they are exceedingly good at sticking to their opponent when they want to, as well as staying out of range. The counter to this is good mobility on the part of the opponent. Particularly when the opponent is as glassy or glassier than the thief.

And mesmers were mentioned as well for the same reason. They may not have great landspeed, but they’re very good at kiting in combat with their various teleports. A problem when you’re locked into a close range weapon set without a reliable gap closer. And RTL is anything but reliable against many mesmers, considering how often PU procs aegis and puts it on double CD. Not even to mention the distortion or normal dodges.

Q: When making the changes to sigils for the feature build, was there some consideration for the classes that have access to less weapon slots (IE eles and engis)?

cheese.4739:

Ash, your link was wrong – the thread might’ve hit the full page of posts, and be directing you to page #2 when you try to open it because it thinks you’ve read all of page 1.

Anyway, this link should work if you want to read it:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Sigils-Ele-and-Engineer-punished/page/1

And that link works… But went I was in the profession balance forums a bit ago, and went a couple pages back to find the thread itself, it still came up blank. IDK.

Regardless, it still seems like a topic that deserves an answer to explain their reasoning. Given that it is a significant disparity between classes that they’re introducing.

runeblade.7514:

Prenerfed RTL is the reason why D/D Ele were the king of PvP. You can do wreck things up, run away, heal up and then go back to kill some more. No amount of condis will hold them down because they have too much condi removal. Then they’ll just escape before you can pop up another snare.

Okay, you failed in your RTL, now what? You use Lightning Flash and then try again. Failed that time to? Use Mist forms. Hopefully this time, RTL will work in your favor.

Low risk with high rewards. Sound like warrior.

D/D eles are no more 30/30/30/30/30 than warriors.

If you’re running enough cleanse that no condis will lock you down, then you’re deep in water and likely arcana, and won’t be doing much damage. If you rely on ether renewal then you’re not going to be staying on a point, since it’s so incredibly easy to interrupt now that it can no longer be used in mist form.

ANY ele that isn’t bunkered to high heaven always has high risk for their reward.

ArmageddonAsh.6430:

Though seeing as how it has conveniently bugged out and not showing (for me at least) any of the posts in it. I wouldnt be shocked if Anet broke it on purpose.

Huh. I can’t see anything either, even though if I manually look up the thread it says it has nearly 50 posts and isn’t locked. Never seen anything like that before.

Other classes are fully capable of, and in many cases even encouraged, to swap weapons whenever they’re off CD. That’s particularly true for warriors with 5s swaps. So eles and engis swapping more frequently isn’t much of a reason.

Our greater number of skills is balanced by their higher CDs and the smaller number of effects most cases.

Having less sigil slots after this update is absolutely an indirect nerf to eles and engis. And a fairly significant one at that.

EDIT: I would really like to see a red comment on whether this was considering at some point.

NinjaEd.3946:

Non-ele player: “Here comes an ele, with rtl, and updraft… dodge…”
Ele player: “aww man how did I miss?”

Scene.

Lightning flash → updraft → laugh.

Seriously though. Prenerf RTL’s ground speed wasn’t any better than a warrior’s GS, or the new rocket boots, or just about any thief’s setup. Even rangers can match it with swoop and sword 2, though that would take two weapon sets.

If they wanted to nerf RTL, they should have done it in a way that was consistent with every other skill in the game. The double CD on miss is still a ridiculous penalty, since it triggers on blind/block/evade/invuln as well as simply out of range.

They nerfed it because they wanted it to be used to engage targets, rather than run away from them. Well, if the attack was blocked, then I was trying to engage with it. So why am I still being punished so harshly?

I do feel like this is another step away from underwater combat in the game as a whole, when it’s already pretty neglected compared to how it was talked about before launch.

JonathanSharp.7094:

By removing it, it’s one less thing a new player needs to learn.

As long as the jewels come with the amulets, a new player shouldn’t have to worry about anything. And unless they’re completely new, they should have some experience with jewelry or upgrade slots in general. I’m not sure how this is different than runes or sigils, which they’ll encounter in every gamemode.

Unless you’re relying on traits/sigils/runes that require crit to proc, the damage increase from precision on a build with less than 2400 attack is pretty minimal. Dire builds in general can hit very hard for the amount of survivability they’re given. Especially compared to how much survivability many crit builds have to give up to do the same damage a bit quicker. Let’s be honest, while it’s not instantaneous, there are plenty of condi builds out there that can deal damage fast enough to be called “burst”.

With the reduction in crit damage, I definitely expect to see even more condi setups in small scale WvW.

As someone who runs a knights/zerker/valk mix for a DPS D/D build, I’m much more worried about the nerf to crit damage than the boon duration. If ferocity is equal to the minor stats on valk/zerker gear, and the 15 points to 1% conversion is right, I’m looking at a 37% crit damage loss.

Combine that with the fact that if I want to keep my stacks, I’ll be getting no additional damage from new sigil combinations… And things aren’t looking great.

It does seem fairly dull. Still, we can’t just look at this in a vacuum. There are likely to be a lot of trait changes besides the new GMs, alone with other balance changes and the sigil/rune updates.

Xillllix.3485:

Khalic.3561:

Thanks for the insight Devon.

DevonCarver.5370:

Firstly, something that I’ve seen in more than one proposal and something that we just can’t do in our game, is the idea of consolidating maps or making larger maps. It is a problem on multiple fronts, but the most obvious issue is that we simply can’t fit more players onto a map than we already have, so even if we were to make a larger map, we couldn’t have a corresponding increase in the number of players on that map. Proposals that rely on that idea are simply untenable.

I think there’s something to be said for increasing map size without having a corresponding increase in player population. Greater distance between objectives and less options to traverse that distance quickly (WPs) puts more emphasis on larger groups being aware of where they are, and where the enemy is… Since it will take more time to reach an objective to defend or assault it. Of course you do run the risk of making the map “feel” empty, but there could be some merit to the idea from a gameplay and tactical sense.

In any case, I agree with the idea that more specific changes to the maps are a better place to start. Unique terrain, like that tower before a narrow canyon, can influence fights in such drastic ways. It really makes everything so much more interesting.

It needs choke points guarded by towers, like in EOTM, instead of flat huge surfaces like the BL maps. What makes EOTM so much better is that it also is vertical. Changing the BL terrain (removing the flatness of it) and adding forts would be a good starts.

Definitely agree. In fact more verticality is a good way to get more “distance” without simply having miles of terrain between points of interest.

Thanks for the insight Devon.

DevonCarver.5370:

Firstly, something that I’ve seen in more than one proposal and something that we just can’t do in our game, is the idea of consolidating maps or making larger maps. It is a problem on multiple fronts, but the most obvious issue is that we simply can’t fit more players onto a map than we already have, so even if we were to make a larger map, we couldn’t have a corresponding increase in the number of players on that map. Proposals that rely on that idea are simply untenable.

I think there’s something to be said for increasing map size without having a corresponding increase in player population. Greater distance between objectives and less options to traverse that distance quickly (WPs) puts more emphasis on larger groups being aware of where they are, and where the enemy is… Since it will take more time to reach an objective to defend or assault it. Of course you do run the risk of making the map “feel” empty, but there could be some merit to the idea from a gameplay and tactical sense.

In any case, I agree with the idea that more specific changes to the maps are a better place to start. Unique terrain, like that tower before a narrow canyon, can influence fights in such drastic ways. It really makes everything so much more interesting.

Prysin.8542:

Khalic.3561:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Think of it this way: You’re building a house and a 2×4 breaks while you’re trying to screw it in to something. Do you scrap the house and completely rebuild it because that one piece broke, or do you grab a new 2×4 and use that instead? Which do you think would be more efficient?

This is closer to a cracked foundation I think.

in that case, it is easier to chop off a portion of the cracked foundation that took the most damage and pour a new piece (what devs are doing) then chopping up the entire foundation and re-pouring that.
(FYI i work in construction, trust me, chopping up a full foundation is a major job way way way way way way bigger then fixing the part that is damaged)

Fair enough. Still, it seems like more changes need to be made than a simple patch job. Maybe not to the extent of tearing everything down and starting from scratch, but a major rework none the less.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Think of it this way: You’re building a house and a 2×4 breaks while you’re trying to screw it in to something. Do you scrap the house and completely rebuild it because that one piece broke, or do you grab a new 2×4 and use that instead? Which do you think would be more efficient?

This is closer to a cracked foundation I think.

Difference being a fire grab is visible, telegraphed, and has an actual cost (CD) when the target blocks/evades/invulns through it. No such sacrifice to something like backstab. If I manage to predict someone’s timing and evade their backstab when I can’t even see them, it doesn’t matter. They’ll just tap one until it lands, or at best, back off and refresh their stealth.

VitalSuit.1980:

Khalic.3561:

Primordus or Mordremoth, I think it’s safe to say a lot of people have been predicting a dragon for a very long time. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad we’ve come back to the original plot and I hope it goes somewhere exciting. It just wasn’t exactly a twist.

Uh it’s definitely not Primordus. Primordus is still in an all out war with the Dwarves, he wasn’t sleeping. Actually Primordus was the first dragon to awaken well before the events of GW2 (last expansion of GW1 was when he awoke).

We know he’s capable of moving around underground, and there’s nothing to say the Dwarves have been in constant conflict with Primordus himself over the full course of the last 200 years. In fact I believe the only real contact we’ve had with the Dwarves at all during GW2 is Ogden, and he remained on the surface and out of direct conflict. We also know that Primordus has minions active in the Dominion of Winds, Mount Maelstrom, and the southern Shiverpeaks at the very least.

Of course it’s obviously Mordremoth now, given the cut scene. But Primordus was a valid possibility as well.

Primordus or Mordremoth, I think it’s safe to say a lot of people have been predicting a dragon for a very long time. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad we’ve come back to the original plot and I hope it goes somewhere exciting. It just wasn’t exactly a twist.

Chrispy.5641:

Heres a Signet idea from earlier in the thread that I posted. I tried to keep the burst potential there, while also adding group support capability, and expanding on our options for survival and condition removal. It quickly got buried in other posts, so it was never discussed after that post. Maybe you have an opinion on it?

Link:::
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/3699949

I would rather go this direction than the dull approach of simply providing boons for support as some others have suggested. I have to say that this proposal makes me think of a power based version of venom share (which is also pretty undesirable in organized WvW by most groups). However, the effects seem overall fairly weak and directed towards a more sustained approach. Which I suppose is in line with ANet’s vision for the ranger, though I can’t say I agree with it. I don’t think the effects need to be reduced so drastically on account of you being able to share them, take aura share for example.

Chrispy.5641:

Stone Skin – You take 100% less damage when struck. (Stacks 5 times when using Signet of Stone. Also Stacks 5 times when traited with Instinctual Bond, making for 10 stacks total on you or your pet)

This in particular would be an incredible nerf. We’d go from having one of the longest invuln skills to one of the shortest. Any skill that blocks only a set number of attacks becomes useless very quickly in any team fight, and even against quite a few solo builds.

As much as I agree that rangers need better group support tools, I don’t think I’d be willing to sacrifice their only true burst capability in order to achieve it. Losing the damage boosts on hunt and wild is very unappealing.

I run something very similar for roaming on my ranger. Though with less toughness, more vit, and rampage rather than a racial.

The burst is quite strong if you can land it. I’ve landed a fair number of 7-9k mauls on squishier targets, even 80s. Easy enough if you can pull into the hilt bash, but otherwise you have to make sure they’re slowed. Even if they’re running away and you swoop up behind them, the stun often won’t land. I recommend running with the jungle spider for the 4s immob.

Sword/axe is absolutely incredible if someone decides they just want to run. Once you’ve got them crippled they’re not likely to get away (stealth aside). I also run sigil of rage oddly enough, and find it helps quite a bit when it procs for sword auto attack or axe 5. The reflect, by the way, is actually pretty strong once you learn when to time it. Very satisfying to send a warrior’s pin down back at them.

Against a single opponent, I feel like the mix of blocks, dodges, and leaps make it easy enough to kite for CDs if you need too. And in larger fights, I really do enjoy being able to pop absolutely everything and just juggernaut through.

Taushullu.6180:

Going back to traps:

Another solution would be to simply increase the direct damage component of traps (could be anywhere between 50-200%) and making them scale better with current skirmishing stats that way. This would also make them more viable choice for power oriented builds.

I would like to see this made viable as well. Though it would have to be much more significant that 50-200% increases. At current, even with a very high power build, they only have a base of 40-150 damage.

Allie Murdock.8152:

For example: One class could, in the span of 30 seconds, do 15k damage in say 5-10 seconds, but then their burst skills go on cooldown so they have to wait out the rest of the time before they can try again. A sustained class should be able to do that same amount of damage in that same amount of time, but the damage is more spread out (hence sustained). This can be better in certain situations, and allows for the sustained class to fill a hole in a team comp.

Except that the majority of burst builds for other classes are capable of maintaining comparable sustain even once their burst rotations are down.

thefantasticg.3984:

Allie Murdock.8152:

jewishjoyride.4693:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Hey everyone,

Before things get out of hand, I want to address the aspect idea so we can move on. First of all, it’s a great idea, but there are many current issues with the profession that need to be addressed first. Our priorities to make the pet a more viable option will likely remain higher than giving an option to “permastow” the pet.

We recognize there are a number of issues with the pet AI and general functionality, so that is something that will come first. Rangers are first and foremost a pet class, but they are also great skirmishers and some of the best sustained long range damage.

I don’t want you to think we’re going to ignore the idea or the feedback around the pet, but it could very well be the case that fixing some of the major nagging issues with the pet would make it a more desirable aspect of the Ranger.

That said, if you would like to consider discussing the aspect idea, I ask that you start a thread outside of the CDI to brainstorm.

Thanks so much for all the great, constructive feedback everyone! Let’s keep it coming!

If rangers truly are seen as the Pet class of GW2 then the devs need to be devoting time to handing more active control of the pet to the player. Currently if you look at other classes that are able to summon minions we really only have maybe one more level of control compared to them. This biggest difference between us and them is that our pets are mandatory.

Please please please give us more active control of our pets abilities in combat. Current f keys could be redesigned. You could also more closely link weapon skills to pet behaviour/ability (some weapons already have this a little bit). You could do a combination of these 2 ideas (that would be really exciting). Or who knows how else you could solve the problem?

As long as the pet is 90% tied to an ai though Rangers will be seriously kitten.

That is exactly my point. We want to make sure we’ve done everything we can to make the pet desirable before we consider any options for those that don’t want to play with the pet as much.

Doing everything y’all can to make the pet desireable means rewriting the pet AI to be independent. If y’all aren’t welling to do everything that you can, then give us the option to opt out. Y’all have been tweaking with band-aids since launch and it seems the box is empty.

That’s the question. Is the team willing to make drastic changes to improve pets, or is it going to be a tweak here and a buff there? Would they attempt a significant overall of the system?