(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get your point … sword needs a fix or not and why? The fact is that we have swaps and a multi target weapon NOW, not what happened in the past. If those weapons need to be reworked to acknowledge that, so be it but let’s not pretend that can’t happen because of history.
2 and 3 are bad? OK, so do you agree with the OP that damage should be moved from 1 to 2 and 3 to balance that out? I mean, arguing with me isn’t the point of the thread. The point is that the OP wants to nerf 1 damage to boost damage and effects on other skills. Is that agreeable to you?
I think that’s a bad idea and someone suggested it needs to be fixed because of “situational”. So you are disagreeing with that or you think it should be changed to what the OP wants because of ‘situational’?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If all symbols turned into walking AoE fields that follow you like the Berserker Torch, it would be a good change.
Agreed. If the point of Guardian is to buff team and be frontline pillars, leaving your symbols so they can be left behind on the ground by moving away from them is a rather silly implementation of them, offensively or defensively.
It’s not me you disagree with, it’s Anet; they established the class is in a good place, not me. The lack of critical thinking is the correlation maked by cherrypicking a few under performing skills and observing there are unhappy players and concluding the class doesn’t hit Anet’s desired performance target based on those things.
On the other hand, it’s not hard to see that even though there are some under performing skills and unhappy people, the class can skill hit whatever performance targets Anet may have. Furthermore, there are other classes that people would consider quite good, and those classes also have some under performing skills and unhappy people. In conclusion, some under performing skills and unhappy people should not make anyone that has applied critical thinking to the topic to conclude Guardians don’t meet Anet’s targets or that those two things are necessarily significant factors to a classes ability make those targets.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That’s fine. My original statement was that sword skills aren’t situational; he questioned that statement based resulting 1 vs X scenarios with the sword. Unfortunately for him, it turns out that if his own statements and your data is correct, that the weapon itself is not situational, not just a few skills. This means we are all in agreement.
I don’t think there is any way sword will get buffs and if it’s indeed as good as it sounds in 1 vs. X … might be inline for a nerf IMO.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Whether staff is a DPS weapon or not is irrelevant; it is the weapon that is intended for 1 vs. X encounters; this is not debatable, it is obviously the case. Whatever your assessment of how it performs or whatever label you decide to make for it does not change the fact that it exists and its purpose. It’s absolutely ridiculous to claim sword needs changes because of 1 vs. X scenarios just because you dismiss the staff. If anything, if sword has as strong a multi target ability as you claim along with all the other great things it does, it needs a nerf, not a buff.
Makes me wonder what you’re even complaining about. Good single target skills. According to you, lots of multiple target goodness even better than the intended multiple target weapon. Sounds it’s too good.
Yeah yeah whatever. You disagree with OFFICIAL blog made by Roy about staff being a support/utility weapon to throw your little opinion.. that completely miss the reality but.. whatever.
Its ok, please provide me official source about staff being an intended weapon to 1vX. Ill be waiting, hf. And no, if you cant provide that then dont post here anymore.
I don’t disagree with that official blog; being support and utility doesn’t exclude staff from being intended as a multiple-target weapon; another bad leap in logic you’re making there.
Don’t worry, I won’t keep you waiting too long, especially when I’m right. The proof is simply looking at the skills; every staff skill hits multiple targets, lots of them. Not sure if that’s ‘OFFICIAL’ enough for you though, but it is created by Anet to be that way … You don’t need to be a genius to see that, which is why someone from NA, as stupid as you claim we all are, can see that a weapon where all skills hit multiple targets … is intended to be a multiple target weapon. It’s simple to see unless you decide to purposefully not see it.
It’s no matter anyways … you already acknowledged you agree with me that sword isn’t situational because it’s good for every situation, apparently ones I didn’t even know about (thanks for that!) which is my original point.
Now we have established we agree that sword is too good at everything, I would love to hear what you think needs to be nerfed on it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Whether staff is a DPS weapon or not is irrelevant; it is the weapon that is intended for 1 vs. X encounters; this is not debatable, it is obviously the case. Whatever your assessment of how it performs or whatever label you decide to make for it does not change the fact that it exists and its purpose. It’s absolutely ridiculous to claim sword needs changes because of 1 vs. X scenarios just because you dismiss the staff. If anything, if sword has as strong a multi target ability as you claim along with all the other great things it does, it needs a nerf, not a buff.
Makes me wonder what you’re even complaining about. Good single target skills. According to you, lots of multiple target goodness even better than the intended multiple target weapon. Sounds it’s too good. If that’s the case, then the OP is right … except the solution isn’t move sword damage around to other skills, it’s to outright nerf parts of the sword weaponskills so that weapons intended for use are used for those purposes.
What side of the coin are you this time? I’m not sure if you realize this or not but at this point, you agree with my original point; sword skills aren’t situational. You’re even going further saying the weapon itself isn’t situational; you’re using it for everything. Therefore, no reasonable person would claim it needs improvements. Not sure where what you are trying to do here, other than be difficult and argumentative.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Too bad cause sword behaves like it want to be multiple target weapon. I mean just look at this sword.. its full of aoe
So when you were challenging my statement that sword wasn’t situational by pointing out that it’s the only weapon that punishes you in 1 vs X situations … you were lying to me?
I mean, I can’t follow you. You tell me sword punishes you in 1 vs X situations, but then turn around and point out sword is full of AoE attacks, which are clearly intended for 1 vs X situations and that you prefer it over staff because of it’s AA damage, even though staff is intended for 1 vs X situations. You don’t see how contradictory those two statements are?
At this point, the only conclusion I can come to is that you’re willing to make any negative statements, even if they contradict themselves, just out of desperation that Anet sees them and ‘fixes’ everything. Not a sound plan.
Sword aa is getting stronger with more enemies in front of you. PS/UA is trying to act like aoe but works in opposite direction by punishing you in 1vX. Yeah how that makes any sense? Am i contradictory myself? No, sword desing does that already on it own.
Again, you were the one that called out sword as situational because it’s not a good 1 vs. X weapon, not me. I really can’t follow your discussion. Feels like you are arguing with yourself at this point. You haven’t provided any convincing evidence to make me think I was off track here.
Like talking to a kid. No matter what devs have to say in this matter, sword right now act as aoe weapon but unlike other weapons (any in this game) it loses damage to single target the moment you press 2 or 3 drastically lowering your dps. Meanwhile your autos deals more damage to a group of enemies. Sword desing contradicting itself in current state. Its needs reclafication to either keep it as current aoe weapon and fix it damage on 2&3 to not cause damage loss on a X target or rework it into pure 1v1 weapon. Im done with you btw so bai, i bet you coming from NA and you guys arent know for being.. smart. Pointless to continue discussion at this point.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask that people follow a discussion. My point was that sword weapon skills aren’t really situational when sword is used in the proper way … then you interjected by arguing that sword is situational because it’s not a good weapon 1 vs. X weapon, then proceeded to contradict yourself by claiming sword is your preferred 1 vs. X weapon because it has multiple target skills and good AA damage … /shrug
I can only say that if you’re accusing me of being a stupid NA child … I will gladly take that as a compliment at this point.
Sword 2&3 are situational and i believe i already discussed it so why you keep asking for it? You can only use them in 1v1 situation, anything else they are useless if you want to deal damage. Thats bc these skills are situational. And i woulndt consider sword my fav 1vX weapon, its just that it happen to be the only weapon rev has in the first place with no alternative.
I’ve already addressed that … sword 2 and 3 is not deficient because its not effective in 1 vs. X scenarios; its conceptually not the goto 1 vs. X weapon. Anet has addressed 1 vs. X scenarios for Revs by providing a 1 vs. X weapon and access to swapping. Whether you think that staff is the ‘not-alternative’ in that 1 vs X scenario is irrelevant; it was clearly designed with that intention.
The ‘deficiency’ (or advantage, since you’re arguing both sides of the coin here) you point out is actually an intended game design feature that isn’t unique to Revs. Therefore, being deficient (or again, advantageous, depending on what side you choose this time) in 1 vs X situations it’s not a reason to address whatever is wrong with sword because it’s not the intended 1 vs X weapon by concept, which is my point in the first place.
If its not intended by concept then please explain why sword autoatk is better in 1vX, why 2&3 act like aoe? .
That’s an illogical correlation and I don’t even think that’s true. If it is … then I’m still right … sword doesn’t need a fix because of 1 vs X situations; if it’s 1 vs. X capability is as good as you say, it needs another massive nerf. In addition, sword having some some very limited multiple target capability does not mean it was the goto multiple target weapon for Revs.
I mean, your going to tell me sword is the ranged weapon too because #2 has a longer than melee range? I think if you want to be taken seriously, being sensational doesn’t help you. It’s obtuse to try to claim Anet designed sword to be the multi target weapon for Revs because of 2 skills that can hit multiple targets, especially with the existence of an obviously 1 vs. X weapon like staff. I’m not surprised Anet and other game devs don’t listen to players; this is the kind of discussion they would have to have with them.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Too bad cause sword behaves like it want to be multiple target weapon. I mean just look at this sword.. its full of aoe
So when you were challenging my statement that sword wasn’t situational by pointing out that it’s the only weapon that punishes you in 1 vs X situations … you were lying to me?
I mean, I can’t follow you. You tell me sword punishes you in 1 vs X situations, but then turn around and point out sword is full of AoE attacks, which are clearly intended for 1 vs X situations and that you prefer it over staff because of it’s AA damage, even though staff is intended for 1 vs X situations. You don’t see how contradictory those two statements are?
At this point, the only conclusion I can come to is that you’re willing to make any negative statements, even if they contradict themselves, just out of desperation that Anet sees them and ‘fixes’ everything. Not a sound plan.
Sword aa is getting stronger with more enemies in front of you. PS/UA is trying to act like aoe but works in opposite direction by punishing you in 1vX. Yeah how that makes any sense? Am i contradictory myself? No, sword desing does that already on it own.
Again, you were the one that called out sword as situational because it’s not a good 1 vs. X weapon, not me. I really can’t follow your discussion. Feels like you are arguing with yourself at this point. You haven’t provided any convincing evidence to make me think I was off track here.
Like talking to a kid. No matter what devs have to say in this matter, sword right now act as aoe weapon but unlike other weapons (any in this game) it loses damage to single target the moment you press 2 or 3 drastically lowering your dps. Meanwhile your autos deals more damage to a group of enemies. Sword desing contradicting itself in current state. Its needs reclafication to either keep it as current aoe weapon and fix it damage on 2&3 to not cause damage loss on a X target or rework it into pure 1v1 weapon. Im done with you btw so bai, i bet you coming from NA and you guys arent know for being.. smart. Pointless to continue discussion at this point.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask that people follow a discussion. My point was that sword weapon skills aren’t really situational when sword is used in the proper way … then you interjected by arguing that sword is situational because it’s not a good weapon 1 vs. X weapon, then proceeded to contradict yourself by claiming sword is your preferred 1 vs. X weapon because it has multiple target skills and good AA damage … /shrug
I can only say that if you’re accusing me of being a stupid NA child … I will gladly take that as a compliment at this point.
Sword 2&3 are situational and i believe i already discussed it so why you keep asking for it? You can only use them in 1v1 situation, anything else they are useless if you want to deal damage. Thats bc these skills are situational. And i woulndt consider sword my fav 1vX weapon, its just that it happen to be the only weapon rev has in the first place with no alternative.
I’ve already addressed that … sword 2 and 3 is not deficient because its not effective in 1 vs. X scenarios; its conceptually not the goto 1 vs. X weapon. Anet has addressed 1 vs. X scenarios for Revs by providing a 1 vs. X weapon and access to swapping. Whether you think that staff is the ‘not-alternative’ in that 1 vs X scenario is irrelevant; it was clearly designed with that intention.
The ‘deficiency’ (or advantage, since you’re arguing both sides of the coin here) you point out is actually an intended game design feature that isn’t unique to Revs. Therefore, being deficient (or again, advantageous, depending on what side you choose this time) in 1 vs X situations it’s not a reason to address whatever is wrong with sword because it’s not the intended 1 vs X weapon by concept, which is my point in the first place.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Too bad cause sword behaves like it want to be multiple target weapon. I mean just look at this sword.. its full of aoe
So when you were challenging my statement that sword wasn’t situational by pointing out that it’s the only weapon that punishes you in 1 vs X situations … you were lying to me?
I mean, I can’t follow you. You tell me sword punishes you in 1 vs X situations, but then turn around and point out sword is full of AoE attacks, which are clearly intended for 1 vs X situations and that you prefer it over staff because of it’s AA damage, even though staff is intended for 1 vs X situations. You don’t see how contradictory those two statements are?
At this point, the only conclusion I can come to is that you’re willing to make any negative statements, even if they contradict themselves, just out of desperation that Anet sees them and ‘fixes’ everything. Not a sound plan.
Sword aa is getting stronger with more enemies in front of you. PS/UA is trying to act like aoe but works in opposite direction by punishing you in 1vX. Yeah how that makes any sense? Am i contradictory myself? No, sword desing does that already on it own.
Again, you were the one that called out sword as situational because it’s not a good 1 vs. X weapon, not me. I really can’t follow your discussion. Feels like you are arguing with yourself at this point. You haven’t provided any convincing evidence to make me think I was off track here.
Like talking to a kid. No matter what devs have to say in this matter, sword right now act as aoe weapon but unlike other weapons (any in this game) it loses damage to single target the moment you press 2 or 3 drastically lowering your dps. Meanwhile your autos deals more damage to a group of enemies. Sword desing contradicting itself in current state. Its needs reclafication to either keep it as current aoe weapon and fix it damage on 2&3 to not cause damage loss on a X target or rework it into pure 1v1 weapon. Im done with you btw so bai, i bet you coming from NA and you guys arent know for being.. smart. Pointless to continue discussion at this point.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask that people follow a discussion. My point was that sword weapon skills aren’t really situational when sword is used in the proper way … then you interjected by arguing that sword is situational because it’s not a good weapon 1 vs. X weapon, then proceeded to contradict yourself by claiming sword is your preferred 1 vs. X weapon because it has multiple target skills and good AA damage … /shrug
I can only say that if you’re accusing me of being a stupid NA child … I will gladly take that as a compliment at this point.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get the problem here or the warning … spinning things on a screen can have negative effects on all kinds of people; as the OP and others say, it’s probably MUCH worse effects on more severe afflictions.
I can’t see how Anet would even attempt to address this without significantly sterilizing onscreen animations. Such a request to do so would be unreasonable.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Too bad cause sword behaves like it want to be multiple target weapon. I mean just look at this sword.. its full of aoe
So when you were challenging my statement that sword wasn’t situational by pointing out that it’s the only weapon that punishes you in 1 vs X situations … you were lying to me?
I mean, I can’t follow you. You tell me sword punishes you in 1 vs X situations, but then turn around and point out sword is full of AoE attacks, which are clearly intended for 1 vs X situations and that you prefer it over staff because of it’s AA damage, even though staff is intended for 1 vs X situations. You don’t see how contradictory those two statements are?
At this point, the only conclusion I can come to is that you’re willing to make any negative statements, even if they contradict themselves, just out of desperation that Anet sees them and ‘fixes’ everything. Not a sound plan.
Sword aa is getting stronger with more enemies in front of you. PS/UA is trying to act like aoe but works in opposite direction by punishing you in 1vX. Yeah how that makes any sense? Am i contradictory myself? No, sword desing does that already on it own.
Again, you were the one that called out sword as situational because it’s not a good 1 vs. X weapon, not me. I really can’t follow your discussion. Feels like you are arguing with yourself at this point. You haven’t provided any convincing evidence to make me think I was off track here.
Too bad cause sword behaves like it want to be multiple target weapon. I mean just look at this sword.. its full of aoe
So when you were challenging my statement that sword wasn’t situational by pointing out that it’s the only weapon that punishes you in 1 vs X situations … you were lying to me?
I mean, I can’t follow you. You tell me sword punishes you in 1 vs X situations, but then turn around and point out sword is full of AoE attacks, which are clearly intended for 1 vs X situations and that you prefer it over staff because of it’s AA damage, even though staff is intended for 1 vs X situations. You don’t see how contradictory those two statements are?
At this point, the only conclusion I can come to is that you’re willing to make any negative statements, even if they contradict themselves, just out of desperation that Anet sees them and ‘fixes’ everything. Not a sound plan.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’ve been playing Guardian since launch, I’ve seen fellow guardian players have high hopes each time a patch drops. Only for most players to be disappointed by lack of changes. Anet will tell everyone, guardian is in a good spot!
Looks at signets, spirit weapons and consecration
The state of a select few skills is not indicative that the class does not perform or if the class is hitting Anet’s desired target for performance. It pains me to see people make this ridiculous claim all the time. It demonstrates a lack of critical thinking.
This has less to do with desired performance and more to do with build variety. Arguably one of the reasons we fare so poorly in the current pvp meta is our lack of effective builds. It’s pretty much meditrapper (or a fairly similar variant) or go home. Even if we were performing at Anet’s desired performance for guardians (whatever this means), it doesn’t excuse the fact that these “select few skills,” which by the way constitute nearly half of all our utilities, are next to useless in all game modes. They need buffs and/or reworks, period.
Build variety is not necessarily correlated to performance. You can have a class with a single build and that build could be absolutely killer, or a class with EVERY build and they all suck. I won’t argue that ‘the few’ builds we have are good or bad, but we already know what Anet thinks. It’s clear that people are talking about relative performance … that doesn’t necessarily mean Guardians get buffs or that it’s even class driven assessment. Anet might take the approach that a set of skills is in need of buff or nerf. Who knows.
I can only tell you that Anet thinks it is because they have told us we are in a good place. I can only suspect that means that all the other classes need more work to achieve whatever targets Anet has for those classes than Guardian does.
Maybe people are delusional but … that’s what matters here. Balance is relative and there are no set rules for fairness or equality between classes, as nice as that might be. Anet sets those targets, Anet decides what work and what path to take on their timetable to achieve them.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
#logic
Do you even understand the difference between aa and PS/UA or are you mentally challenged? Just curious
I can tell you that I understand a weapon made to hit multiple targets like the staff is better suited in 1 vs X situations than one that is not …
Why would I not swap to my staff in that situation?
Cause Sword aa has higher damage than anything junk staff has to offer.
That makes no sense .. I can’t follow this contradicting logic you’re presenting … you’re saying that sword suffers in a 1vs X environment in one post, I question why you would even use a sword in that 1 vs X situation and now you’re contradicting yourself by saying you would use sword over staff in that situation because sword AA does lots of damage, even though staff hits multiple targets and sword doesn’t? Are you just arguing whatever side of the coin you feel like here as a way to make waves?
I can’t discuss a topic with a person that presents several, contradicting points of view and chooses either on a whim simply to be disagreeable.
The fact is this; there is no good reason whatsoever for sword to get enhanced capability for multiple targets as long as Rev has access to swapping and the staff. Weapon diversity IS the solution to deficiencies on specific weapons. Rev Sword is not excluded from that solution.
If you are actually going to suggest sword is better than staff in 1 vs. X situations, for whatever reason, then it’s completely and utterly ridiculous to suggest sword is deficient compared to staff in those same 1 vs. X situations. #logic
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Professions are unique and those justifications are not sensible. lf you’re going to push for RS buff, it’s going to be based on the fact that it’s necessary to fulfill the concept of the class. Through the concept of Guardians, Anet decided that the buff wasn’t needed. Nothing has changed there if Anet didn’t change the class concept.
This is where our views differ. Pre HoT, I would have agreed with this statement. This is the whole reason ANet originally designed guardian without the +25% movement speed. However, things change over time, and that includes the range of capabilities a class possesses. Pre HoT, not every class had access to it. But now, every class except for guardian has access to a +25% movement speed util/trait. From a pvp and wvw balance standpoint I think that is a very compelling reason to give guardians a +25% movement speed buff somewhere.
Here’s a simple analogy to explain my argument: Mr. Anetto goves you 100$. That’s great right? Yeah! Free money is great, of course. Now then, imagine that at the same time you got that 100$, 8 other people around you get 200$. The value of that 100$ hasn’t decreased, but the disparity between you and those 8 others has. For the sake of fairness, I think it’s pretty obvious what Mr. Anetto should do.
You analogy assumes that across all professions, things are equal. They are not. It’s irrelevant if it’s fair … MMO’s are also not fair. There is nothing fair or equal between professions in any MMO I have ever played. Perhaps you are an idealist that thinks that is how it should be, but I prefer realistic expectations.
Obtena in other games, classes differ roles, in gw2 classes diffeer by being playable and not playable due how gimmicks are far stronger than a non gimmick builds and some classes gimmicks are completelly a joke i feel super carried when playing them, except when playing guardian, they have no strong trade offs, they cant play anything else as medi trapper or medibuild on 2 vs 1 against decent players, if u play any other build on this class well… you will be ending a burden for your teams and that is what is wrong, due how other classes have been overbuffed.
The thing is there are to much classes with speed boost, and the class that does not have it, also does not have any trade off, in other games those tade off exist.
-Low surviability.
-poor combos outside medi traper builds.
-poor of team support.
-DH virtues are easilly interrupted.
- traps dont work outside spvp need to get 2+ vs 1 due stats and some classes were overbuffed over time, while they dont sacrifice much damage, in guardian u cant be as sturdy as other classes and that will kill your damage also, some classes still have surviability due the 25% speed bosst + overbuffed skills + damage output of that class still good.
I don’t see anything there that disputes anything I said in the previous post you quoted. Classes differences are not fair or equal, REGARDLESS of what differentiates them in this or other MMO’s; if there wasn’t that differentiation, then classes would be different in name only. If that differentiation is seriously a problem for players, they have options to choose from for playing (or not) the game.
1. Quit the game altogether
2. Suffer with the class concept they like with diminished performance
3. Play a different class concept to get the performance they are after.
Anyone who has played MMO’s long enough knows that the more classes a game has, the less likely that a given class will meet a particular player’s requirements for both performance and conceptual appeal. It’s a fool’s errand and a questionable return on a developer’s investment to even try to deliver that to players. Hence, it’s partly why there are so many QQ threads about class performance, even when the performance is good.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I can’t think of a situation where I DON’T want those abilities. In fact, the stuff that Sword 2 and 3 are made of are the opposite of situational … I want to spam them all the time because they are always good.
Sword 2 and 3 are good vs multiple targets? So you run into a group of 5 mobs and instead of aa them to death in 2sec, you prefer to cast UA and tickle them? Sounds good.
I can’t comprehend how not being a multi target weapon makes sword skills 2 and 3 situational … EVER. If I encounter 5 mobs on a Rev, why would I use a sword anyways? Why would I not swap to my staff in that situation? Not being THE weapon of choice for every situation that can be conceived does NOT define situational, otherwise EVERY weapon skill is situational and therefore, being situational is the lamest reason ever to justify a fix. The same goes claiming a weapon is deficient because of thoughtless play; obviously various weapons play specific roles and sword isn’t intended to be a primarily multi target weapon; staff does that. This isn’t a unique feature to the Rev class, so again … a poor excuse to fix any particular weapon on any class.
I mean, let’s pretend you’re right … are you suggesting that sword needs multi target capability? Correction … MORE multi target capability? (Let’s not pretend 2,3 and 4 don’t have the ability to hit multiple targets) Even if you are right, how does that have anything to do with the OP’s suggestion to take damage from AA and spread it over skills that cost energy, just to add flavour to the sword? Do you think that moving that damage to less frequently accessible but multi target capable weapon skills addresses the not-multi target nature of the sword? That’s a stretch. How much damage do you think would be reasonable to move from AA to achieve making the sword a good multi-target weapon? i’m going to guess that based on the CD’s of 2 3 and 4 … probably have to transfer 90% or so of damage from AA to those skills to achieve a decent multi target capability on the sword … now is it clear why the ‘multi target’ argument on sword is just silly?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Why do people think it’s acceptable to complain they want something in an MMO but turn around and say that they aren’t willing to do what is necessary to get it … and somehow, that’s a completely reasonable complaint in their mind.
It’s time to stop the ‘participation medal’ BS. You don’t like crafting, then don’t complain if you can’t get the gear that needs you to craft it. It’s ridiculous. Paying for game access does not entitle you to ‘win’ or ‘choose your own adventure’.
I can see why people would be afraid of HoT. Core sets the expectation for game knowledge and mechanics WAY too low; I got people that don’t know how traits work … STILL ><
It’s definitely going to scare anyone that considers that expectation at their threshold of capability.
From a marketing/business POV, I see why Core and HoT are what they are, but from a game perspective, it is a bit of a tragedy that Core fails GW2 gamers in preparing them for content so badly; even pre-HoT content like dungeons and Fractals.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’ve been playing Guardian since launch, I’ve seen fellow guardian players have high hopes each time a patch drops. Only for most players to be disappointed by lack of changes. Anet will tell everyone, guardian is in a good spot!
Looks at signets, spirit weapons and consecration
The state of a select few skills is not indicative that the class does not perform or if the class is hitting Anet’s desired target for performance. It pains me to see people make this ridiculous claim all the time. It demonstrates a lack of critical thinking.
I’m not defending using the same attack 80% of the time … don’t make up things I never said or try to read into something to make your case look good. if you don’t like the concept that most of your attacks are from AA, start looking for a new MMO … that’s just how the game works.
I am defending the notion that Sword is more than an only AA weapon and all other weapon skills are more than just situational.
See, the problem with the OP’s original complaint with Sword wasn’t sword lacks damage, yet he’s ONLY assessing damage to make his point … so the whole argument that Sword needs a ‘fix’ for not-lacking-damage things because, as he claims, Sword AA by itself is the highest damage rotation … is nonsense to begin with.
I mean, let’s not beat around the bush … it’s not that non-AA skills are bad on sword, it’s that AA packs the most damage. If there is a REALISTIC fix to that, it’s to nerf AA and distribute damage to other skills … because anyone asking for more damage or effects to make non-AA skills more attractive to use as a fix to ‘AA does too much damage’ problem is just dreaming!
I get the OP is doing that but the flip side is that he just made accessing SAME damage cost energy with his proposal, all for the goal of accomplishing what? Is better DPS distribution over all weapon skills REALLY a problem here that is worth paying more energy to achieve? Um, I think lots of Revenants would not agree with that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That could be said about most weapon skills. That doesn’t make Rev Sword uniquely boring or lazy.
On the other hand, it’s not a stretch for me to think someone is being obtuse when they tell me a weapon that has a skill that teleports, evades, gives good damage and might is ‘situational’.
… or that an attack with high damage, mid range and inflicting chill is also ‘situational’. Do you think those are honest assessments? I can’t think of a situation where I DON’T want those abilities. In fact, the stuff that Sword 2 and 3 are made of are the opposite of situational … I want to spam them all the time because they are always good. I think mine and your definitions of what defines situational are quiet different.
Again, if a player views such things as situational, they just aren’t aware of how the game mechanics work and how those various abilities on those skills help you out in the game.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
At the risk of sounding ignorant, what needs fixing?
We’re the least viable, least forgivable class in competitive pvp. This needs fixing.
We have a plethora of traits & utilities thats utterly unviable. This needs fixing.
I could go into detail how it’s more difficult playing Guardian against a competitive team who knows how to shut them out if you like. But yea, we need fixing.
Well, to be fair … EVERY class has traits and utilities are that ‘unviable’, so that really doesn’t need fixing, otherwise it’s not a Guardian-unique issue, it’s gamewide. I also don’t think Guardians being THAT class for competitive PVP means a fix is in order either.
If it’s too hard or challenging to play, there are other classes. This is exactly why those other classes exist in MMO’s; to give players access to styles and difficulty levels that fit their own skills.
Frankly, we already know what kind of fixes we will get, if any and that’s not due to exasperation, it’s because we know Anet already set the expectation of where Guardians are with relation to game balance. If this continues to bother people … just another reason to find a different class to play.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Professions are unique and those justifications are not sensible. lf you’re going to push for RS buff, it’s going to be based on the fact that it’s necessary to fulfill the concept of the class. Through the concept of Guardians, Anet decided that the buff wasn’t needed. Nothing has changed there if Anet didn’t change the class concept.
This is where our views differ. Pre HoT, I would have agreed with this statement. This is the whole reason ANet originally designed guardian without the +25% movement speed. However, things change over time, and that includes the range of capabilities a class possesses. Pre HoT, not every class had access to it. But now, every class except for guardian has access to a +25% movement speed util/trait. From a pvp and wvw balance standpoint I think that is a very compelling reason to give guardians a +25% movement speed buff somewhere.
Here’s a simple analogy to explain my argument: Mr. Anetto goves you 100$. That’s great right? Yeah! Free money is great, of course. Now then, imagine that at the same time you got that 100$, 8 other people around you get 200$. The value of that 100$ hasn’t decreased, but the disparity between you and those 8 others has. For the sake of fairness, I think it’s pretty obvious what Mr. Anetto should do.
You analogy assumes that across all professions, things are equal. They are not. It’s irrelevant if it’s fair … MMO’s are also not fair. There is nothing fair or equal between professions in any MMO I have ever played. Perhaps you are an idealist that thinks that is how it should be, but I prefer realistic expectations.
When the sword aa is the only true attack of the weapon set is a problem not everyone wants lazy boring aa style.
That’s why other weapons with more interesting styles exist for all professions. I think it’s also disingenuous to say that sword AA is the ‘only’ true attack of the weapon. #2 and #3 are really quite good even in their own right. If players can find opportunities to use them, that’s not a ‘lazy boring’ weapon problem, that’s a ‘players not good enough’ problem.
The bone to pick is arguably anyone (ANet included) who disagrees that guardians should have access to +25% movement speed. Before HoT, guardians really didn’t need that +25% movement speed; the logic that has been mentioned in this thread applies to that time, but it no longer applies now.
Once HoT struck, the mobile classes became even more mobile (case and point: druid and daredevil), and at least one class which was originally equally or less mobile than us also surpassed us (chronomancer) for no good reason. Reaper is even in a better spot (mobility wise) than base guardian. And if you want to bring up our supportive aspect, well other classes out there can provide support that is equally important (druid, tempest, herald) yet still be far more mobile than us. Like the only thing we do better now than other classes is provide strong aoe stability. This is NOT by any stretch of the imagination a decent reason to deny guardians +25% movement speed.
I don’t see how mobile classes becoming even more mobile post-HoT changes whatever logic that determined Guards didn’t need a 25 movement buff, pre or post HoT. If anything, the concept of traps and access to LB has diminished the ‘need’ for the buff in a competitive environment.
The argument that Guardians should have a RS buff is not compelling by comparison to other classes, nor any other class for any other skill or ability in any MMO ever. Professions are unique and those justifications are not sensible. lf you’re going to push for RS buff, it’s going to be based on the fact that it’s necessary to fulfill the concept of the class. Through the concept of Guardians, Anet decided that the buff wasn’t needed. Nothing has changed there if Anet didn’t change the class concept.
It is sad to see so many Guardians constantly recommend that other Guardians use retreat, save yourselves, or staff to compensate for our sluggish movement speed. Why should we have to sacrifice utility slots for “certain” skills? Retreat is good, but we shouldn’t have to rely on it. Please stop recommending those skills to other Guardians. We NEED to be revamped!
Because in turn you fart out stability in a way nobody else can, you provide aegis to the group in a way nobody else can, you provide frontline lockdown in a way nobody else can, and alongside revenants you are the backbone of any melee group.
That’s why guardians don’t get mobility. Because their defenses and CC and defensive boon support added to the light fields that cleanse conditions right and left mean you can’t be a warrior with mobility.
I mean, are you really complaining? You could be as useless as a frontline necro, who also can’t escape/move around worth a kitten and does only a fraction of your damage, cc, and utility.
Guardian doesn’t need help. Dragonhunter, now that one does.
So you’re saying guardians don’t get mobility because they have some cc and defensive capabilities that are situationally useful? You know, I’d agree with you if elite specs didn’t exist. Fact of the matter is that literally every other class has a way to move at least 25% faster (through trait or non-activated utility) and at least 3 even have perma swiftness out of combat without sacrificing anything. It wouldn’t be a balancing issue to give guardians this same kind of access to +25% mobility, it would be qol.
Actually, that’s a good paraphrasing of Anet’s explanation so it seems your bone to pick is with Anet, not other people disagreeing with you.
Multi or single target? Over longer periods of time or just burst?
Single target, burst
But from what I have gathered thus far, Ele appears to be
Has anyone determined what the highest ranged profession/build is?
Why is this a surprise? Have you played other MMO’s? Sometimes it’s years before bugs are fixed or even never if they aren’t that big a deal.
Regardless of the answer you get and what you decide to do, remember that ‘your’ account is property of Anet, so if they decide to revoke your privilege to use that account, they can. Don’t give them a reason to do that.
Yeah or just go farm it. Or don’t farm it and still get piles of it just playing/salvaging everything. Trying to “balance” the trading post is lol worthy.
Have you even tried farming it? It’s not effective at all. It’s painfully rare from salvage, regardless of the salvage kit. Loot bags aren’t much better.
ANet has even acknowledged the problem in this reddit thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4plkkw/is_it_just_me_or_are_t6_leather_prices_insane/
But that’s really a better response than the quoted comment deserved, so feel free to ignore it and look at this one instead:
no ur lolworthy
Hold on a moment … I’ve reviewed that Reddit and I don’t see anything that should surprise anyone; it says Anet doesn’t like mats that aren’t stable in price and they act on that. That’s not really saying much though; we already know Anet acts on the markets where they see something they don’t like. JS also acknowledges the need for leveling characters to get value for the mats they collect as well, so if I had to guess, I would say that whatever happens, T6 leather is going to maintain some ‘expensive’ price relative to it’s vendor value when it wasn’t as widespread in recipes.
Regardless, I don’t see anything in that reddit that makes me think there will be a change to leather farming as we traditionally think about it so I wouldn’t read too much into what is being said there.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Sword doesn’t need changes. It needs the nerfs reverted.
What needs reworks is useless weapons like staff (which only see use for 5 and 3, and then you want to switch asap) and mainhand mace.
Staff is pathetic, its autoattack neither does damage or healing (150 heal orbs at the end of the chain, just terrible), and all its skills cost a crap ton of energy.
I didn’t get the opportunity to play sword prior to the nerf but I can say with confidence that where it’s at now feels very reasonable when compared to damage of other classes and their weapons
…. SO, whatever the nerf was probably put sword right on target for damage. If my memory serves right, the nerf was a 40% decrease in damage? I mean, if I had 40% more damage on my sword, it would be stupid.
Not useful in the slightest.
RNG is RNG and no amount of MF will change players having no good RNG.
As someone with 310% base MF and around 400 with food/boosters, I can sadly say this above statement is 100% true,
No you can’t. You see, a long time ago, someone proved you and all the other naysayers wrong with something called statistics. Do I have a link? No, but it wouldn’t matter anyways would it?
All someone proved was there RNG was better than someone elses,
I capped that MF out a few months after it was introduced, and if it made as much of a difference as your trying to make out, I would be worth a fortune in game, fact is it doesn’t make a difference, whether im farming SW, CS, FGS, fractals/dungeons, the game rewards drops based 100% on RNG if your account rolls a good RNG roll you win, if it doesn’t you get nothing, having 300%+ MF has NOT IMPROVED my drops at all, I get no more rares, exoctis ( fat chance ) or T6 mats than my friends with 100% MF.
Magic Find works amazingly well in old maps (especially Orr) when doing events with lots of mobs.
In the newer areas, most mobs have had their drop rates scuttled in order to justify all the chest loot, and many event mobs are set to drop no loot at all. This significantly limits the usefulness of Magic Find in HoT content.
Problem is that older maps are having the events that are farmed heavily changed so that mobs don’t drop loot, CS is a great example of this, many events have been changed so that mobs drop no loot (fish farm on beach), or mobs have been removed from the event ( Arah pre south beach, had all the Risen removed completely ) other mobs have been changed to spawn vets which drop no loot, or very little loot,
The new HoT maps really made MF useless, a lot of enemies drop no loot or the chest/bags instead which are not affect by magic ( I am aware that some are affected by MF, but even with 300%+ I haven’t seen any change in drops from them )
I would say going forward you will see more and more loot from chests/bags and MF will be phased out completely.
Having maxed Magic Find at 300% long before the HoT containers affected by Magic Find were introduced, how can you ascertain there is no difference in the drops from said containers? You would have to have experienced the drops from the containers before having little to no Magic Find. Also, you would need a statistically large pool of drops from those containers to average out the results from both before, and after.
Good questions. if it was me that did the test, I could answer them. And yes, it would require a statistically large pool of drops, which is why some random dude saying he didn’t notice more rares from a bunch of random activities doesn’t mean MF doesn’t work. If a rare drop from a mob is in the tenth of a percent range, you would need to kill 10’s of thousands of THOSE mobs to see the difference statistically; the more the better.
If I was to do this test, it wouldn’t have been on opening containers because Anet made it pretty clear from the beginning that container opening isn’t affected by MF; AFAIK, it’s only recently they introduced bags affected by MF.
While I did not collect my own data and quantify the impact of MF myself (I didn’t feel I needed to because I believe Anet has no reason to lie to me like other people do), I can definitely report that from killing 10’s of thousands of trash mobs in Orr on a buffed and non-buffed MF character, a difference in quality of loot that drops is noticeable.
It would be, in fact, easier to test it now because of bags affected by MF … Collect LOTS of those bags, open half on a full MF character, open the other half on a no-MF character. Collect results. The problem … it’s LOTS of work and people would rather spout off about how Anet is lying to them about MF then do that work. /shrug Science and math is a hell of a thing if you understand it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Not useful in the slightest.
RNG is RNG and no amount of MF will change players having no good RNG.
As someone with 310% base MF and around 400 with food/boosters, I can sadly say this above statement is 100% true,
No you can’t. You see, a long time ago, someone proved you and all the other naysayers wrong with something called statistics. Do I have a link? No, but it wouldn’t matter anyways would it?
All someone proved was there RNG was better than someone elses,
I capped that MF out a few months after it was introduced, and if it made as much of a difference as your trying to make out, I would be worth a fortune in game, fact is it doesn’t make a difference, whether im farming SW, CS, FGS, fractals/dungeons, the game rewards drops based 100% on RNG if your account rolls a good RNG roll you win, if it doesn’t you get nothing, having 300%+ MF has NOT IMPROVED my drops at all, I get no more rares, exoctis ( fat chance ) or T6 mats than my friends with 100% MF.
I’m simply saying it DOES make a difference and that someone proved it in the past using statistical analysis, unlike your ancedotal statement saying otherwise. I never qualified or attempted to qualify what that difference was because I’m not into making claims without statistical data to back it up, unlike some people here.
Here are a few things that aren’t debatable:
1. You get MF whether you think it works or not so it’s pretty irrelevant what people speculate
2. Understanding how something works is not a prerequisite for it working. Even if you didn’t perceive a difference, does not indicate MF doesn’t work. It just shows you associate what you perceive as truth without understanding it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Not useful in the slightest.
RNG is RNG and no amount of MF will change players having no good RNG.
As someone with 310% base MF and around 400 with food/boosters, I can sadly say this above statement is 100% true,
No you can’t. You see, a long time ago, someone proved you and all the other naysayers wrong with something called statistics. Do I have a link? No, but it wouldn’t matter anyways would it?
To be fair that works both ways besides didn’t someone already confirm doesn’t really work on most chests?
I don’t get you … Statistical analysis works … anecdotal vitriol does not. I won’t comment on if MF works on specific things like this chest or that chest. I know it works for what it has been proven to work on; drops from mobs. For someone to say it doesn’t work is just silly.
Not useful in the slightest.
RNG is RNG and no amount of MF will change players having no good RNG.
As someone with 310% base MF and around 400 with food/boosters, I can sadly say this above statement is 100% true,
No you can’t. You see, a long time ago, someone proved you and all the other naysayers wrong with something called statistics. Do I have a link? No, but it wouldn’t matter anyways would it?
You guys are all confused and focusing on choice words out of context. When I say earn your leather I didn’t mean did you work for it. The people who farm gold certainly did work for that gold. But they were never farming leather itself. By forcing players to farm gold and then buy leather off the TP, Anet has removed any ability to truly farm leather in this game.
Yes they have and I don’t think that’s not on purpose either. So what’s the problem here? There are plenty of games that allow players to farm mats … if that’s truly what appeals to players, they should play those games.
You are entirely correct … you can’t farm leather in the traditional sense. In fact, you can’t really farm much of anything in this game. There are good reasons for that, primarily that killing a specific mob for hours for specific rewards is a tired, shallow and lazy way to present content to gamers.
It’s obviously the intention of Anet to prevent that kind of gaming behaviour, so complaining about it is obtuse.
You can farm metal ores and wood quite easily in this game, and plants to a lesser degree. GW2 has farmable materials. But I never once complained, I was pointing out a fact that people often overlook. Farming gold != farming leather.
No, that’s not farming in the traditional sense you find in MMO’s from yesteryear … you aren’t killing specific mobs to get specific mats in that case; it’s just there for you to literally pick up off the ground. In fact, I think that’s a bad move that Anet has done, but an altogether different discussion.
What I find funny (or ridiculous more accurately) is the contrast that people want to ‘work’ directly to obtain leather by farming it, then associate that with literally picking up mats off the ground like we do for metal or lumber … like WHAT? Let’s call THAT for what it is … people just want more leather easier. I mean … picking something off the ground is NOT working for it, so please recognize that differentiation if we are going to discuss ‘farming’.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You guys are all confused and focusing on choice words out of context. When I say earn your leather I didn’t mean did you work for it. The people who farm gold certainly did work for that gold. But they were never farming leather itself. By forcing players to farm gold and then buy leather off the TP, Anet has removed any ability to truly farm leather in this game.
Yes they have and I don’t think that’s not on purpose either. So what’s the problem here? There are plenty of games that allow players to farm mats … if that’s truly what appeals to players, they should play those games.
You are entirely correct … you can’t farm leather in the traditional sense. In fact, you can’t really farm much of anything in this game. There are good reasons for that, primarily that killing a specific mob for hours for specific rewards is a tired, shallow and lazy way to present content to gamers.
It’s obviously the intention of Anet to prevent that kind of gaming behaviour, so complaining about it is obtuse.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t want a 2H axe … but I will take some GS skins that look like 2H axes, a more likely ask to get fulfilled.
I think it’s a massive secret … Sword is ineffective in PVE? Hardly. It’s boring? I guess if you’re just doing AA, sure.
Only problem I have is that it seems #3 uses the shadowstep style targeting. Oh what’s that, your target is just barely on a stairway? Sorry, won’t work.
/shrug … that’s a player awareness thing. We know that’s how it works, so good players will know when they should and shouldn’t use #3. I know, it sucks to have skills that restrict play in subtle ways. Those kinds of skills are all over the place though, so I don’t actually see a problem with it.
Now, if it were a BUG, then sure, please fix it. Frankly, I can’t believe of all the weapons, someone complaining about sword? I mean …. I guess that Mace is working out for them or something?!?
To all the people who assume farming gold and buying leather on TP = farming leather…… they aren’t the same thing. Not even close. Farming gold is one thing. Farming a material is another.
We have ways of truly farming wood, metal ores, and plant stuff in this game. We have no way to farm leather outside of map rewards occasionally. You can tell people to farm gold and buy leather on TP all you want, but don’t pretend like that is the same thing as actually farming leather. Farming leather can only happen if there is a reliable way to obtain it yourself, ie some type of leather nodes. TP isn’t earning it yourself. And salvaging is not guaranteed to be leather.
I don’t think anyone is assuming that but ….
I do see people complaining that they can’t farm efficiently assuming Anet designed the game so they could farm efficiently. It is not and if that’s a problem for people, those people need to decide if GW2 is still the kind of game they want to play DESPITE the inefficiency of farming materials in the traditional MMO approach.
This is not a deficiency with the game, it’s a mindset of players. Anet did not design their game around ‘traditions’ from other MMO’s. That’s what makes it GOOD. There are LOTS of games that provide the gaming experience of ‘farming’ if it’s really what players want; go play those.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I think it’s a massive secret … Sword is ineffective in PVE? Hardly. It’s boring? I guess if you’re just doing AA, sure.
Boons doesn’t make the guardian a guardian, the ability to tank and heal itself does.
Tank? only in pve… meanwhile some classes can do that and do way more damage.
I don’t see a contrast with that. If the concept is team-based boon dispenser, why would that automatically make the class awesome at using boons? I don’t think it does, unless of course you’re just another person that complains about anything they can think of as a way to show the class isn’t performing how you think it should.
That is true, but class besides meditations or traps, doesnt work, but that might be due other classes have to much compared with this one.
Ive been fighthing changing chouts and traps…. ive been sold to the thing i hate more to play in guardian… traps, cause shouts are being just stack buff bots for groups.
Of course the class ’doesn’t work’ if you start excluding the things that are good about it but being selective in an analysis if a class is good or not in PVP really doesn’t make much sense to begin with. It’s pretty unreasonable actually … ONLY having traps and meditations as ‘good’ skills in PVP doesn’t make Guardians a bad PVP class.
My point being … if such a thing were implemented, it wouldn’t be to fix problems or deficiencies with professions. If we are going to talk about solutions and be taken seriously, let’s focus on those most likely to happen. Frankly, if that’s even a solution to runspeed issues, it’s not a good one. Ability to change strategies on the fly with build swapping or whatever isn’t going to make people forget they want even just one build with a passive runspeed buff option. Let’s not delude ourselves.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I think it’s about time something was done to get this under control. Add a way to farm it, increase drop rates, adjust the recipes, anything to bring it back in line.
Go to Cursed Shores.
Farm events with lots of mobs.
Open Heavy Moldy Bags.
Have plenty of leather to use and sell.It’s easy if you are willing to put forth the effort.
I tried that.
10 hours of pure stupidity and I got… 36 t6 leather sections.
Gave up on any new gearing plans and sold them.
As to using silver-fed salvage-o-mat… I tried that for some time, but there was no increase in getting t6 mats. Takes quite some faith to keep on believing that after hard facts suggest otherwise. I dont have that faith.
Or patience or awareness … what did you do with all the OTHER mats you got from your 10 hours of farming? Sold them and used the gold to purchase more T6 leather? No? OK … then you’re doing it wrong. No reason to refuse playing along with how the system is intended to be used.
I think we should be careful about making assumptions about build templates; there are MANY ways these could be implemented and not make it easier to change gear quickly. I don’t believe anyone should hang their hat on that as a solution to deficiencies in a class.
I play how I want EVERY day. I must have missed the memo.