Guild Wars 2

This thread is funny. I like it though, it would be good if people did follow the link, might clear up a misconception that is apparently quite common. I suspect this is against the forum rules though >.<

unleashed.8679:

Condition damage also needs direct contact, just because there are numbers poping up, doesn’t mean you still do full damage
Conditions can also be dodged, blocked, blinded, … and additionally be cleansed. Its the dame as above just because there are numbers poping up doesn’t mean you hit the target right now

Conditions apply their damage over time, and not instant. So the damage you see their was done “earlier”.

On topic with some math:
A Necro scepter auto attack hits for ~500 crit (could be to high) + 10s bleed + 4s bleed (66% trait ) + 10s (60% sigil) [best conditions] with 130 damage per second per bleed you have a autoattack of 3700 damage. unfortunately we can’t crit all the time and traits and sigils have a proc chance, resulting in much less damage.

lets say we have 50% crit chance we get:
416 direct damage (average) + 10s bleed + 4*0,66*0,5 bleed + 10 * 0,6*0,5s bleed
= 2584 damage per attack
ignoring every internal CD, attack speed and cleanse.

And 2,5k is nothing a Zerker can’t beat. The strength of conditions is their immunity to toughness making them bunker killers, where Power would fail. But on the other hand killing low armor enemies is slower.

Here’s some numbers from the other thread. Necro scepter average damage = 1109:

Scepter auto = 189 power damage, 42% crit chance, 170% crit multiplier = 245 power damage + 617 bleeding = 862 damage.

Sigil of earth, 0.67s attack speed+aftercast, 2s ICD, 42% crit chance, 60% proc chance = procs every 4.3 seconds (6.4 attacks) applying 721 damage worth of bleeding. 721/6.4 = 113 extra damage per attack. 113 + 862 = 975 damage per attack so far.

Barbed precision 0.67 attack speed, 1s ICD, 42% crit chance, 66% proc chance = procs every 3.3 seconds (4.9 attacks) applying 103 damage worth of bleeding. 103/4.9 = 21 damage per attack. 975+21 = 996 damage per attack.

Dhuumfire 0.67 attack speed 10s ICD, 42% crit chance, 100% proc chance = procs every 11.2s (16.8 attacks) applying 1890 damage worth of burning. 1890/16.8 = 113 damage per attack. 996 + 113 = 1109 damage per attack.

That’s a 30/20/0/0/20 necro with rabid amulet, carrion jewel, 4 nightmare, 2 lyssa, and signet of spite passive.

Amplifier.1704:

Pure RNG, and it takes tons of time to open rank/tournament chests, salvage them and then create the dyes. The last I opened about 300 chests it took approx +2 hours to convert them to dyes. And again, it’s just RNG.

Man, it took me 2 hours just to open 500 chests the other day. After that I couldn’t even be bothered converting to dye, I just left a ton of powder sitting in my inventory. You’re fast.

tarcheg.4872:

Since 90% of the people who have posted agree with the op and myself I really don’t see the need to waste even more time.

You will disagree no matter how simple it is (I already learned that) and you will come up with some made up bs —> like a linked combat log line showing your dmg from an attack which is highly affected by buffing and debuffing though I stated that my example does not include such things just so you can prove you point under false circumstances.

Sorry but I don’t see the sense in that.^^ If you do not agree you can with me, the op or pretty much everyone else that’s your problem not mine.

All that says is that 90% of people haven’t done the math. I’d be surprised if they had. Really surprised considering the general lack of game knowledge this forum tends to demonstrate.

And please don’t pretend to yourself that your fairytale 1 in 101 attacks example is somehow better than my self buffed example simply because it relies on random procs happening all together instead of activating abilities. If you want to talk sustained, talk sustained. If you want to talk peak, well, we already did.

tarcheg.4872:

8.3k is possible but even when you’re not that lucky to get it all at once your dmg is still very high which makes my example not even deal more dmg but also much more realistic or are you always auto attacking with signet of the hunt active?

and edit: 4080 dmg coming from a 6s burning proc is in my world 680 dps but I don’t know where you went to school…
If you’re saying it’s weak cause of the 10s icd than you call a single trait doing 400dps weak – which would make you look even more stupid…

Yeah it’s less than 400 dps including the ICD. Now, since you seem to want to talk about sustained damage instead of christmasland, go ahead and post that engi builds dps. How much damage does each hit get from procs on average? What is the biggest single attack it has when you factor that in? How does that stack up to any random power build?

Once again, do the math, then tell me if the sustained damage is high, not the other way round, because if you’re counting solely on that 400 dps trait to get good sustained damage, I’d suggest you look at those ranger screenshots again. When you’re talking facts, no one is interested in what you feel to be the case, only what is the case.

tarcheg.4872:

Even though you have 0 proof for that – your dmg over time is significantly lover either way and the fact that your dmg needs several buffs and my dmg is mostly coming from a burning proc with 10s icd still remains the same.

0 proof of what? 4080 damage from a burning proc is less than 400 dps btw. If we’re talking ‘over time’.

‘Mostly’ isn’t good enough either. It’s either 8.3k or it’s not. Do you want to count the triple proc and incendiary ammo or don’t you? You can’t have it both ways.

tarcheg.4872:

lol ? my cond example came from a light golem? Ever heard about conds being unmitigatable?
First I never said anything from light or heavy golem and second all you showed us was auta attacks…

It’s irrelevant. You want potential damage, that means no cleanses? It also means 1836 armor, which is actually less than the light golem.

Oh sorry btw, my mistake. A condi necros biggest hit averages 3.9k plus 250 from procs. 4.15k total. But power builds do less right? Not sure about engi, maybe you could do the math on that one.

tarcheg.4872:

Which is not true as our numbers have shown. You had an example of doing 4.6k dmg with certain buffs vs the cond example of 8.3k dmg.
We showed you as another example pin down which is a single attack with 1/4 cast time and doing 20k+ dmg.

Your 8.3k was on a light golem. On a light golem power ranger with air rune does the same. Pin down doing 20k isn’t “way higher” than kill shot, it’s on par. And you’ve done nothing to address the “general” part of the statement, where I showed you that condi necros hit for 1109 damage on average with AA, a number that any power build kittens on, including hybrid staff guards. Their biggest hit averages ~3.5k, plus 250 from procs. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing. Everything you have posted has proved the statement under discussion to be untrue.

tarcheg.4872:

And that’s why you see pvp flooded with power rangers. So much ignorance is rare…

I’m not the one saying damage is everything. Once again, for the slow, all I have said is that this statement:

The general potential damage of a condition applying attack is way higher than that of a single power attack

is untrue.

Not to mention that the number of misinformed people in this thread who think that condis hit harder probably goes a long way to explaining why condi builds are actually seeing play again. What’s the phrase? Perception of balance?

1st page page bug.

It’s not general potential damage, nor is it way higher. Gz for not understanding? Power hits harder, even on 2600 armor targets. In fact, that ranger would hit harder on 3k armor. It’s doing over 50% more damage (average including crits + non crits) than a necro, on 2600 armor. It’s doubling necro damage on 2k armor.

Right now it seems like you’re deliberately choosing to ignore the facts.

tarcheg.4872:

Duuuuude!!! That’s the whole point – potential dmg – so no cleanse!
I think you might be getting it very slowly.

OK, so you posted an ability that will never do as much as killshot, but hypothetically can. Well done.

Now for this:

The general potential damage of a condition applying attack is way higher than that of a single power attack

tarcheg.4872:

Good that the game isn’t only made out of aa…
See: http://www.imagebanana.com/view/pkqsw87r/PinDown.png

Sure, if they don’t cleanse or kill you in 20 seconds, that’s as good as http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Kill_Shot.

So, let’s take a standard necro.

Scepter auto = 189 power damage, 42% crit chance, 170% crit multiplier = 245 power damage + 617 bleeding = 862 damage.

Sigil of earth, 0.67s attack speed+aftercast, 2s ICD, 42% crit chance, 60% proc chance = procs every 4.3 seconds (6.4 attacks) applying 721 damage worth of bleeding. 721/6.4 = 113 extra damage per attack. 113 + 862 = 975 damage per attack so far.

Barbed precision 0.67 attack speed, 1s ICD, 42% crit chance, 66% proc chance = procs every 3.3 seconds (4.9 attacks) applying 103 damage worth of bleeding. 103/4.9 = 21 damage per attack. 975+21 = 996 damage per attack.

Dhuumfire 0.67 attack speed 10s ICD, 42% crit chance, 100% proc chance = procs every 11.2s (16.8 attacks) applying 1890 damage worth of burning. 1890/16.8 = 113 damage per attack. 996 + 113 = 1109 damage per attack.

Now let’s compare.

tarcheg.4872:

1. you showed us that power can hit hard when using certain buffs. When you would read my post where I calculated the engi attack I said you could use the f skill from flamethrower which would add another 4k which would lead into almost 10k dmg outshining your “once in a blue moon example” by far.

2. You can try…^^

4s of burning is 4k damage and 5.5 + 4 = 10. I think I understand why you think condis hit harder.

Both of you used once in a blue moon examples, when I showed you that power hits harder under those conditions you both suddenly want to use averages. Are you sure about that? Because power hits harder on average too. We can if you want.

tarcheg.4872:

If you could acutally understand what you are trying to read you would have noticed that 80%+ of the dmg I showed you is coming from the burning proc. So there is no need to proc sharpshooter and earth sigil to outperform every power dmg coming from an aa. I just added it to show you what’s possible but as I already said – the topic seems to be a little too hard for you.^^

Ok, so now you want to talk about more realistic situations. Makes sense I guess

tarcheg.4872:

Mammoth.1975:

tarcheg.4872:

Mammoth.1975:

Sure. 4515+sharpened edges. Sigil of air would be another 1350+. No need for 25 vuln stacks.

Yeah that show a lot. Nothing at all to be honest.
What are your buffs? What are the debuffs on the target? You can power up every attack to do 300% it’s normal dmg when creating a certain environment for it.
But that’s not the point of this thread.

It’s not? BTW, when I say 1 in 100, I’m being kind and giving you 100% crit chance. Your example was actually worse than that.

Buffs and debuffs = 10 stacks of vuln from opening strike.

Why was my example worse? Because I used an attack which crits while using a rabid amulet? Alone the crit and burning proc (which is 100% on crit fyi) is enough to do ~5k dmg… But maybe you can somehow attack 100 times in 10s, which is the icd of the burning trait – then yes it would be an 1 out of 100 example. If not you can reproduce that dmg every 10s with an auto attack.

Because you can proc burning every 10s with 100% crit chance, or once every 20 attacks, but to get sigil of earth and sharpshooter to proc on the same attack it will take you nearly a minute on average. Math, it’s good.

tarcheg.4872:

Mammoth.1975:

Sure. 4515+sharpened edges. Sigil of air would be another 1350+. No need for 25 vuln stacks.

Yeah that show a lot. Nothing at all to be honest.
What are your buffs? What are the debuffs on the target? You can power up every attack to do 300% it’s normal dmg when creating a certain environment for it.
But that’s not the point of this thread.

It’s not? BTW, when I say 1 in 100, I’m being kind and giving you 100% crit chance. Your example was actually worse than that.

Buffs and debuffs = 10 stacks of vuln from opening strike.

Or do you want to stop playing ‘look what I can do when the stars align’ and be serious? I think it’s safe to say we’ve established that peak power damage > peak condition damage, do you want to compare averages now? Because average power damage is also > average condition damage.

Sure. 4515+sharpened edges. Sigil of air would be another 1350+. No need for 25 vuln stacks. Or frost spirit. You do it with signets. Hey, you wanted to use 1 in 100 examples

tarcheg.4872:

hint maybe your argumentation is a little bit of made up BS hint

At least almost everyone else seems to agree with op but you always have to have the contra people in every thread no matter how easy it is to understand the pros of the point you are making.

You can’t BS maths sorry dude. Well, except statistics :P

6k > 4.5k. Which part of that statement is BS? You could actually get over 6k if you had 25 vuln stacks and sigil of air too. Over 7k in fact.

Sorry for interrupting the feels going in in this thread with facts I guess?

Med.6150:

Using an Earth sigil in a 30/20/0/0/20 build my bleed from the scepter #1 will deal around 750 damage over time. On a critical hit using an Earth sigil, Dhumfire and Barbed Precision, I can turn my potential damage up by an additional ~1500 (Earth sigil), ~325 (Barbed Wire) ~1690 (Dhumfire). Coupled with the ~325 (heavy golem) power damage this attack will do (Rabid), the total potential damage this attack can do can scale up to ~4590 damage.

Haha you are talking about crit peaks. Rangers can hit nearly 6k with longbow 1. The heavy golem obviously favours condition damage, because it has high armour but no cleanses, nonetheless, a 30 second test on it produced a 4600 damage crit, already higher than your scepter example. Power just does more damage per attack, both on average and with once every 30 attack situations like you’re proposing. That’s the way the game is.

tarcheg.4872:

Unbelievable how many trolls seem to take their posts actually serious…

Ohai. Even your once in 100 (you’re literally using a 1 in 100 attacks example, (10/attack speed)/0.6)/0.33 = 101, and yes, I lol’d) stars align attack on a light golem is outdone by a ranger with a longbow. You sure I can’t find a melee attack that does more?

Would be a fair bit stronger than burning simply due to putting an extra cover condi on the target when someone else in your team has burning. Also more damage compression, once again, due to no conflict with burning from your teammates. Intensity stacking has a few implications, numbers may need tweaking accordingly.

jportell.2197:

However math does not=effectiveness genius. Damage=/=performance. Get it?

Again, except the whole argument is predicated on this:

Med.6150:

The general potential damage of a condition applying attack is way higher than that of a single power attack

When the reverse is true.

You quoted it and disagreed, but hey, go ahead and change your mind. Learning is good.

If you frame the discussion as opinions on condis, fine. As they say, everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, they’re just not entitled to their own facts. All I’m doing is pointing out that something was said that is simply untrue. One party getting the facts wrong is a pretty big barrier to constructive discussion, and the fact is that in a vacuum, condi attacks just don’t hit as hard as power attacks.

Against a guy with 4k armor and no cleanses, condi performance is going to kitten on direct damage of course. Likewise against a guy with 2k armor and a cleanse every 3 seconds, you’re going to be better off with a power build. We’re just talking about the abilities themselves though. ‘Potential damage’ is the term, and that potential is lower on condis, even when you’re just talking about averages, not crit peaks. No ifs or buts, it just is.

jportell.2197:

Lol really? not even close to true at all. Conditions have always been strong just not quite as strong as power. Now they out shine power in every single way possible.

Once again, math. Half the threads on this forum simply wouldn’t exist if people would bother to learn a little bit about the game before posting.

Astos.3609:

I don’t think its fair to say X attack is better against Y class in Z situation.

Sure, except the whole argument is predicated on this:

Med.6150:

The general potential damage of a condition applying attack is way higher than that of a single power attack

When the reverse is true.

Dhuumfire is about 2k damage every 11 seconds or so. As much damage as a thief auto or ranger pet crit.

~180 dps. Not what I’d call a gamebreaking grandmaster trait.

vinceftw.5086:

Lol, he is correct.

Same applies to you. If you’d done the math you wouldn’t have posted this. The only condi attack that ‘is way higher than that of a single power attack’ is warrior sword 1 (discounting ele earth scepter as unplayable here, if you want to include it we can, nothing changes). Of course, ‘way higher’ here means ‘way higher if you don’t have any damage percent traits or crit chance, otherwise use axe. Or GS. Or anything except condis’.

Most other condi attacks deal slightly less to significantly less than power attacks. The highest damage attack a standard condi necro has is ~3.5k over 15 seconds (assuming it isn’t cleansed), on a 25 second cooldown. Necro scepter auto does ~750, and excluding warrior sword it’s by far the best condi auto. For comparison, thief sword does ~2k once you factor crit chance. Guardian staff does ~1k+ with a ranged cleave on hybrid builds. Both of those numbers are after average armor is factored, while the necro scepter is before cleanses are considered.

Med.6150:

The general potential damage of a condition applying attack is way higher than that of a single power attack

OK, you put a lot of effort into writing this, so I’m trying not to be too dismissive, but this is as far as I made it. The correct approach here would have been to do the math, then decide on your position, not the other way round.

Gallrvaghn.4921:

Mammoth.1975:

So you lost a 2v4 and it’s the games fault. Did you think this one through?

That’s technically a 2v21 not 2v4. And yes, it’s the game’s fault.

No, it’s a 2v4, unless your skill puts you on par with a ranger pet or iduelist.

Let’s drop the necros and make it a 2v2. Now how many pets are attacking? The ranger pet, and a couple of phantasms. Clones too of course, doing about 7-8 dps each. Too much to handle?

No wonder they survived quite a while vs 4.

So you lost a 2v4 and it’s the games fault. Did you think this one through?

Competitive environments are for competition. I get that competition alone isn’t enough for the average MMO player though. In fact I’d say competition is the main reason pvp has a lower population than pve in every game. People just want their shiny pixels, they don’t want to vs anyone. Other games force them to vs people by making some of the pixels only available in pvp, but I’m pretty sure there are better solutions than that.

Sounds good, as soon as we get collision. Or equalize all attack times.

Dancing back and forward half an inch through the middle of someones model still isn’t skill. It is fun though :P I remember abusing the everliving kitten out of it when fighting casters on my wow warrior. When I could perma lock someone with just pummel, there’s a problem. Oh sorry, I mean, no problem, I’m just really amazing, because it was so incredibly hard to do. Took lots of ‘skill’.

In fairness, gw2 doesn’t really need it, while wow really did. GW2 never mechanically shuts you out from making sure your facing is correct when you could be attacking except for immobilise. Of course, making sure you’re facing within 180 degrees of your target still isn’t skill either, unless you’re really kittening bad at games, so it’s just kind of a way to help bad players stomp hopeless players, and increase the effect latency has on performance.

1. PvP accessability
2. PvP incentives
3. -

I’d be interested in discussing ways to make the pve>wvw>spvp>tpvp>team tpvp path clearer and more accessible.

As far as incentives, despite the gameplay being quite hybridized, the game is regarded simply as an MMO. This means that your playerbase is made up of MMO players, who are, bluntly, skinner box addicts. If there are no dings, they don’t want to know about it. I wouldn’t mind brainstorming solutions to that which don’t actually require implementing even more farmville/wow style reward mechanics. If the game does need that crap to get more players interested in pvp, discussing ways to implement them without driving away people who pvp because they actually enjoy pvp would be nice.

Ezzyz.6045:

Mammoth.1975:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Real question is, do you all play warriors?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

HEY YOU’RE ALL WELCOME FOR THIS BTW

Haha yeah, no one ever heard of that study till you, thanks!

Treborlavok.3504:

I’m going to take a wild guess and say none of them play eles.

I’m also assuming they all play… Wars, thieves, necros, mes mainly.

I’ve seen 2x engi, war (in wvw), necro, ele mains, all good players, but I’ve seen them play every profession. Once again:

Mammoth.1975:

I like your line of reasoning though. ‘A Warrior beat me therefore the devs rigged the game in favour of warriors’.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Strong necro.

FowS.1684:

“All that matters, and all that ever will matter in a competitive game is who wins and who loses.” I cannot disagree with this statement, however, maybe 90% of the population of GW2 plays for FUN. If you think that winning no matter what is fun, that’s your opinion. Your post is aggressive and doesn’t take in perspective other gamers’ thoughts. Your elitists arguments makes you a winning ore instead of a QQing scrub. What you see as QQing is what other people see as a barrier to their fun, which makes them quit, and that’s bad for a game. I believe that the players have the right to speak their mind for anyone to sees as long as it’s done properly. If you dislike seeing what you call “QQing” posts, then your free to avoid the forums where they are posted.

However balance complaints don’t fit that category.

Firstly, each of us can only provide balance feedback relative to our own ability (remember people complaining about 100b? or better yet, deathblossom spam?). Someone may find an ability OP, but the fix is in fact for them to learn to deal with it instead of changing the whole game because they’re a bit behind the curve. Often, said ability is in fact be extremely easy to deal with. Once they learn the trick, the problem no longer exists. A more recent example would be ‘condi meta’ complaints when warriors were always in the wings waiting to stomp all over it.

Plus, a lot of the time, complaints are just kneejerk reactions. Something changes, someone loses to someone who uses the changed ability, they blame the change, when in fact they may have simply been outplayed.

Secondly, a game doesn’t need to be balanced to be fun if winning isn’t your goal. The core of a balance complaint is rooted in the fact that someone feels it is reducing their chance to have an equal shot at winning. Anyone who makes balance complaints is by definition playing to win. To the extent that they’ll take it out of the game and play the forum metagame in the hope that it will improve their chance of winning in the actual game.

Unless they’re pointing out something they find overpowered about the profession they spend most of their pvp time on, or underpowered about a profession they never play. Those are the only kind of complaints that hold any real weight, and they do so for a couple of different reasons.

Master of Timespace.2548:

jmatb.6307:

This isn’t WvW we’re talking about though…

Same ideas apply though. For example, by this “play to win” logic, one should have abused the hell out of the mesmer fall trait bug.

There are a couple of schools of thought on this. The one I like is that you should always be playing the game as well as you can, but exploits don’t fall within the game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming

“Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game.”

The other is that the more something gets exploited, the faster it gets fixed. Rather than a few bad eggs taking advantage, everyone should, keeping the playing field level even if it means the game is broken for a while, because it results in a faster fix. In this way people who are willing to exploit never gain an advantage over those who would prefer not to.

Mathias.9657:

Hamstorm warrior

Frenzy healsig is legit now. Hamstorm needs a buff.

Every map. PvE too.

30+% of necro scepter auto damage comes from expertise, not malice. Dhuumfire reads ‘BLANK’ without precision. Condis require 3 stats too. The main problem with this forum isn’t whining, it’s lack of game knowledge, which leads to whining.

I appreciate you trying to provide constructive feedback, the problem is that you need to actually spend some time figuring out how the game works or you just look a little bit silly.

‘And of course those crappy conditions … only 1 stat is needed to burst some1 down’

PizzaSHARK.2741:

Django.5923:

They ignore the request of the good players and listen to the casuals.

There are enough players who could fix pvp with just a little tweak of numbers, if given the chance.

Here’s a hint: Listening to your players is never a good idea.

No one knows everything there is to know, or can see something from every single angle. You’re kidding yourself and dramatically overstating your own importance if you think otherwise.

Not to mention a handful of them stomp all over the ‘top players’ trying to tell them how to do things every time they play anyway.

Master of Timespace.2548:

Real question is, do you all play warriors?

A few of their best players main classes that get steamrolled by warriors actually.

I like your line of reasoning though. ‘A Warrior beat me therefore the devs rigged the game in favour of warriors’.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Chaosky.5276:

I’m the kinda guy who takes my melee out when I see my opponent do so in TF2, and uses my fists in Dark Souls if I see someone else using their fists.

If winning is so important to you that you’re gonna take your rawket lawnchair back out, or swap to a rapier and do a Hornet Ring roll backstab, that’s fine – I shouldn’t expect that others adhere to my unspoken rules of combat.
When I encounter someone who pays along, though, it’s a lot more fun for me than winning could ever be.

Interesting. I am the opposite. If my opponent ‘plays down’, I’m left disappointed, win or lose, at missing out on a match where each participant is giving it his best shot.

Losing to someone who isn’t using every tool at his disposal is frustrating, in an ‘I can beat you with one hand tied behind my back’ kind of way, and beating someone who isn’t using every tool at his disposal is just as frustrating, in a ‘you will never know what the outcome would have been if I was trying my best’ kind of way.

I find it really bad mannered when anyone plays at less than 100%. For those reasons and for denying their opponents the opportunity to really push themselves past that autopilot stage and find out if they can still pull out a win in adverse circumstances.

If I find myself in a disadvantageous situation, my opponent presses his advantage, and I still win, now that is fun.

Not calling you out here, but I often find it kind of timid too. ’I’m afraid of giving it everything and still losing, so I’m not going to give it everything. That way I can tell myself that’s why I lost if I do happen to lose’. That’s the kind of mentality that takes winning far too seriously in my opinion. The one whose ego is so affected by losses that they start preparing their excuses before the game even starts.

There there, it’s all gonna be ok.

Group hug! Everyone gather round!

Whiners will whine. No, I don’t like immob stacking. I’m not going to have a kittening hissy fit about it though, I’m going to adapt and continue having fun.

Just for laughs, run 5 venom share/expertise thieves. That’s enough to perma immob the entire enemy team. You’d still lose horribly because 5 thieves and bad builds but kitten it would be funny.

Hahaha!

This is NOT a good idea :P

It’s possible for them to be aware that warriors were significantly stronger than the community realised, without realising exactly how insane they could be in the hands of a very skilled dedicated warrior player. Similar to how most people would know off the top of their head that 3.019376942 ^ 2 > 9 without knowing exactly how much greater.

It’s also possible for them to be aware of it without realising that the skill floor is too high. If game devs had perfect knowledge, no balancing would ever need to be done on any game. Whether either of those was the case in this situation, I don’t know, because there are countless other answers to your question as well.