Guild Wars 2

“stacking conditions” is only nice if you’re running with a condition group where extra condition coverages is sought for. Even then, this is no where close to a condition stacking build.

-Don’t use the same weapons. They stack cooldowns, reducing your overall performance.
-Go all in Valor, all in Honor, or both. Going half and half doesn’t benefit you in any way with the setup you currently have.
-You don’t offer burns on block, aegis heals, or shouts cleansing, making your shouts a wasteful utility.
-You have 1 skill, on a high cd, that cleanse 3 conditions. This would be fine for a heavy burst class but not for a sustain cele build. A heavy condi thief (or any condi class) would demolish you.

To summarize, your toughness, vita, and mediocre damage does not outweigh your lack of condi cleanses, sustains, and team support.

1. Add 2v2 gamemodes w/ a mmr leaderboard.
2. Add 3v3 gamemodes w/ a mmr leaderboard.
3. Fix the current leaderboard so that a 100 win 0 loss mmr is the same as 400 games played. High mmr is equivalent to high amounts of games played.

Bleed effect stacking
For duration effects, if the same effect is present from multiple sources, the source with the greatest intensity will be used up first. When that effect expires the effect from the next most powerful source will resume and use the amount of time it had remaining when the more powerful effect started (which can be its entire time if it started while the other source was on top of the stack). Most effects have a stacking limit, which means that the effect can only last so long, and further stacks cannot be applied while the stack is at the limit. This limit applies to each source independently, as multiple sources can stack the effect for longer than a single source.

The above is what we don’t want burning to be.

What we could do is have the burn condition effect enemies they touch, by splitting up the multiple stacks that person may have. For example; I cast two burn durations from two individual skills on Player A. If that player comes within the range threshold then the bottom stack will immediately leave Player A, onto Player B, his teamate. This makes for a player to carry multiple burn conditions at the same time, as usual, while having the ability to effect his teamates.

I haven’t quite determined if this is good or bad. Long duration stacks through multiple burn applications can easily get cleansed. losing much burn damage. On the other hand, the burns you apply can be split towards other players, reducing focus damage but not losing any damage either. Burn skills that effect multiple targets, can effect multiple targets.

There’s two ways we could implement this mechanic.

1. Every second counts as a stack. Each individual second could be split amongst others evenly.
   If there’s a group of three and one person in that group gets hit with a 7 stacks (five seconds) worth of burns, he will immediately split the stacks in half amongst the person who’s closest to him. The stack splitting occurs in 1 second intervals.
   Example:
   -Player A has 7s worth of burning. He immediately splits half to Player B because he’s the closest.
   -Player B has 3 1/2s burns. Player A has 3 1/2s burns.
   1 sec passes – burns proc for each player.
   -Player C receives the split from player B because he was closest, so both players have 1 3/4 worth of burns.
   -Player A does not share his burns to people who already have burn effects. He has 2 1/2s burns
   1 second passes – burn procs for each player.
   -Player A splits his 1 1/2s burns to Player B.
   -Player B has 3/4 burns and Player A has 3/4 burns.
   The burn cycles completes.
   Only burn durations greater than 1 second can be split. That’s why Player C cease to either share or receive conditions.
2. Each proc is a stack of its own, regardless of its duration.
   Example:
   -Player A receives 3 procs of burning. 2s, 2 1/2, 2 1/2, in that order.
   -Player B immediately gets 2 1/2 seconds.
   -Player C (being in the same range) immediately gets 2 1/2 seconds.

The spits are even but sequencial, depending on who was closer to Player A. Procs are only given to players who don’t have burn conditions.

I’m leaning towards #2 because it’s simple… the first scenario gets more complicated as well as the damage gets nerfed in a way due to all the “splitting” being done. The burn damage gets watered down, sort of speak.
I imagine the radius has to be at least 240 for this to have a noticeable effect.

TL:DR
Have burn stacks split when ever people are near each other. Make the split occur in one second intervals and at a 240 radius so this mechanic can have a noticeable effect.

I have the worse internet in the history of internets. Seriously, 56k is probably better than the kitten that i’m using. That said…

The Server respone time in this game is terrible. I’ll give Anet a benefit of a doubt and say that its due to all the intricate mechanics like condi ticks, buffs, damage etc that’s all pinging at once… I feel the servers can do better at relaying this information. I don’t know anything about MMO servers in comparison to, say, call of duty’s dedicated servers. But I don’t lag on those games under heavy 10v10 matches. In GW2 I lag under 2v2 matches!
Somethings gotta give.

silvermember.8941:

Saiyan.1704:

RoRo.8270:

No cause that would require resources and people would whine that x class/build is op and anet can’t balance between teams and 1v1

People already wine that x class/build is op. There has been a nerf thread regarding every single class on this game. That’s just from Conquest.

There will be more drama if there were 1v1’s but 2v2 and 3v3 gamemodes would be great.

true but now Arenanet will be compelled since they officially provide an official mode. When people QQ, all arenanet has to say is “lol, our PweP isn’t balanced for 1v1, it is balanced for 5v5 and that is the end of it”.

By providing a 2v2 or 3v3, Arenanet cannot use the good ole 5v5 excuse. Yes, people complain about it now but it is like 10-30 people at most, now more people will be complaining.

Conquest is built around 2v2 and 3v3 skirmish’s.
2 far
1 mid
2 home
Mix and match that however you prefer.

Dahkeus.8243:

GW2 has the best PvP in any MMO…I find that reason enough to play.

+1 too.
I’ve dabbled with other mmopvp’s and i’m disgusted with the tank, heals, dps trinity. GW2 offers the best pvp hands down.

It lacks competitiveness for sure. This is due to the game’s lack of competitive elements like 2v2 and 3v3, duel functions (out of combat is a pain in custome arenas). The biggest of these is lack of leaderboard. Its been bad since launch. I feel for you because these are frustrating elements for any competitive player.

To be honest; however frustrating, I still enjoy this game’s pvp nature in spite the lack of competitiveness in Ranked. Competing in Tournaments is frustrating because it’s hard finding a 5man team and setting up schedules. That’s why most MMO’s did away with 5v5 and concentrated more with small skirmishes like 2v2 and 3v3.

RoRo.8270:

No cause that would require resources and people would whine that x class/build is op and anet can’t balance between teams and 1v1

People already wine that x class/build is op. There has been a nerf thread regarding every single class on this game. That’s just from Conquest.

There will be more drama if there were 1v1’s but 2v2 and 3v3 gamemodes would be great.

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Saiyan.1704:

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Saiyan.1704:

Obtena.7952:

I think it would be reasonable to have ticks be able to crit … same rules as direct damage crits. I don’t believe durations/stacking should be changed as that’s the flavour of condition damage you get with burning.

Adding more “lucky procs” to the game is never a good idea.

As for burning on other classes, I can only tell you about burning from a Guardian’s perspective. These are the responses I get.
“Other classes do condi better”
“Your burns will be masked by Warriors, Ele’s and Engi skill rotations.”
“You lack condition application, you only have 1!”

I’ll say it again, change the rotation of burn stacks so that Highest Burn Damage has priority on the stack.

That wouldn’t solve the problem though. Burning alone still would not be viable & it would still push someones damage out of the way thus negating them.

It’s not neccisarily negating their damage, just pushing that persons damage below the stack while our burns are placed on top of the stack. Everyone’s damage is still there within the stack.

That depends on how often your applying burning.

With a torch You could easily apply it often enough that their burning never actually ticks thus negating it.
Or if they stack enough + condition damage they could end up doing the same to you.

The person with the lower + condition damage still gets the short end of the stick.

This is why I advocate either changing burning so each person gets their own stack or giving it some type of proc mechanic that converts it to another condition (like torment) (as well as removing the torment cap) if burning is applied to a target that has over X seconds of burning already.

This way nobody gets shafted, & after all that is what they want to do right.

We already get the short end of the stick when our single target, highest damaging condition in the game, is at the bottom of the stack. The people with low burn damage aren’t counting on their conditions to win. They in fact supress other classes who may deal more damaging conditions. This is only a positive change for everyone.

Ragnar the Rock.3174:

Saiyan.1704:

Obtena.7952:

I think it would be reasonable to have ticks be able to crit … same rules as direct damage crits. I don’t believe durations/stacking should be changed as that’s the flavour of condition damage you get with burning.

Adding more “lucky procs” to the game is never a good idea.

As for burning on other classes, I can only tell you about burning from a Guardian’s perspective. These are the responses I get.
“Other classes do condi better”
“Your burns will be masked by Warriors, Ele’s and Engi skill rotations.”
“You lack condition application, you only have 1!”

I’ll say it again, change the rotation of burn stacks so that Highest Burn Damage has priority on the stack.

That wouldn’t solve the problem though. Burning alone still would not be viable & it would still push someones damage out of the way thus negating them.

It’s not neccisarily negating their damage, just pushing that persons damage below the stack while our burns are placed on top of the stack. Everyone’s damage is still there within the stack.

Yet in pvp, it’s still one of the best utility skills we have. It’s an essential gab closer for a class with 0 mobility.

Andred.1087:

Spirit weapons are bad… Guardian elites are bad except Elite Focus… I don’t see this working.

Even elite focus is terrible out of meta when you have no vurtue support.

I want Tomb of Wrath to be as deadly (and wanting) as Lich form
I want Tomb of Courage to be as wanting as warrior’s res banner.

There’s a reason neither tombs are used in tpvp.

I am curious what would happen if we had an Elite that summoned 3 spirit weapons on top of your additional three. At a 120s cd, that would be an interesting gimick.

Obtena.7952:

I think it would be reasonable to have ticks be able to crit … same rules as direct damage crits. I don’t believe durations/stacking should be changed as that’s the flavour of condition damage you get with burning.

Adding more “lucky procs” to the game is never a good idea.

As for burning on other classes, I can only tell you about burning from a Guardian’s perspective. These are the responses I get.
“Other classes do condi better”
“Your burns will be masked by Warriors, Ele’s and Engi skill rotations.”
“You lack condition application, you only have 1!”

I’ll say it again, change the rotation of burn stacks so that Highest Burn Damage has priority on the stack.

There’s no reason to pursue the engi once all his turrets (especially crate) is on the point. Just roam elsewhere and help your team out. If he follows you he’ll die easily. If not, he’ll stay on point while his team on the other points gets handicapped.
Out rotating them is easier than debunking them.

Two bunker engi’s were in this game.
|
v

Slyther.1297:

As for why you (Blue team) got the ‘win’, in the event of a tie the team with higher personal scores gets the win.

I didn’t know that o_o

I think one of the players thought we were going to lose, I thought he went afk because he was sitting in base when we were down by 150 early game. It wasn’t until I asked did he started to move from spawn point. We some how managed to make a comeback mid game for the “win”.

Just goes to show, just because you’re down by lots doesn’t mean you can’t make a comeback. It can be equally difficult for a team to come back after being out rotated. That’s exactly what happened, we managed to out outnumber them on certain nodes to win fights. They weren’t able to regroup and recover from their initial wipe after that.

They were at 499 when we were at 497 but we managed to get a kill or cap at the last second. I guess there can’t be “draws”? Moral of the story, don’t go afk!!
#inspirational #don’tgoafk

Like you said, Guardians heavily lack not just condition application but aoe conditions as well. The way Burn stacks currently work, just makes things even more difficult in team fights.

-Doesn’t matter if you do 1k burns per tick, your burns will be added at the bottom of the stack. If it’s a high stack (thanks to eles and engi’s) it will be cleansed off before yours see the light. It should be Highest damage ticks first on the stack instead of lowest. Highest burn gets priority.

-Guards needs more access to burn application rather than burn duration. Lack of other condition coverages is “ok” as long as we have high condition applications. But we do not. Again, high burn durations does not remedy this

Because of the above, condition builds do well 1v1 but lack considerably in groups. The reason we do fine 1v1 is our burn applications via blocks. In 3v3/4v4/5v5, our 6’ish blocks gets split up among everyone else, being ineffective. The best aoe burn block we have is Shelter because anyone can hit you in that 3s time frame.

Guardian Changes

1. Replace (the broken) radiant retaliation with “Blocks burn targets around you in a 240 radius cd 1s”
2. The aoe in Permeating Wrath needs to proc On Target instead of self. Currently you will sacrifices traits for this extra utility, lacking either sustains or damage. If this was changed you’ll be able to do decent dps from range with the bow and scepter.

Condi changes

1. If you get burned with a 400 degree flame, then a 800 degree flame right afterwards, what will you feel first? Give highest damage burn priority above all others. Followed through with second highest, third highest, etc.
   Keep the cap at 9. If 9 stacks of burns is reached but a class applies a higher damage burn, that proc will override which ever burn it is greater than on the stack.
   Example:
   max stack is 5 for simplicity
   460 top of stack, currently ticking damage
   430
   400
   312
   300 bottom of stack, waiting in line.

I cast a 450 burn
460 still top of stack
450 my burn is still added.
430 This got pushed to third
400
312

As you can see the 300 burn proc that was 5th, got pushed down. Since it was already the very last stack, it got removed completely.
Good: Highest damage will always be applied first. You no longer have to wait for an ele’s long 10s duration, 300 burn ticks to end!
Bad: That 300 damage duration could have been a 7s burn, out damaging one of the higher burns in the stack.

Regardless, this would be a very nice change for us Guardians.

insanemaniac.2456:

Saiyan.1704:

Other MMOs like that shall not be named have weekly caps instead of monthly. How is this any different? Currently this game’s leaderboard is terrible so it’s actually a good suggestion and i’m not the first one who suggested it.

the leaderboard being terrible doesnt make it a good suggestion. telling people they cant play is stupid.

You miss understand. They can play till their hearts content. Once they reach their alloted game count, the additional games they play wont be accounted for on the leaderboards.

People will obviously still play because of the reward tracks, helping their friends, etc.

ArrDee.2573:

It’s not allowed because you might get dishonor while in a loading screen when the queue pops, even though there is no dishonor feature enabled! #anetlogic

Wahoo! Bye frands!

That was their excuse before. Now it’s somewhere along the lines of…. it’s too hard to implement thanks to the nature of the new UI.

I like the new UI and all but it can be an inconvenience compared to the old “queue and roam” system like before. Inconvenience is not worth the eye candy

insanemaniac.2456:

Saiyan.1704:

insanemaniac.2456:

Saiyan.1704:

insanemaniac.2456:

what if an account is only added to the leaderboard once they pass a volatility threshold for their mmr. new accounts start with higher volatility to help them find their placement quicker, and the volatility is a function of games played, time since last game played, and win/loss of the last 50-100 games played. then also add permanent slowish decay so you have to keep playing to keep your position. and just use mmr as the leaderboard score.

That’s only useful for Team Queue. This will have a number of issues when tpvp and spvp is merged together.

why? the old team queue is the same as the current ranked.

Old teamQ is vastly different than the current rank.

1. Current rank now has twice the number of players thanks to the merge of solo and tpvp.
2. There are five times the amount of solos than there are teams.
3. Solo’s are harder to manage because they’re on their own schedule. They make up the current leaderboard now. Top 25 is all solo players.

If you add MMR back like old teamq, you’ll see teams on top of the leaderboard while solo players will get the shaft. It’s proven that solo players are more succeptible to having very very low MMR due to hving done many games and not being on a team.

That’s why your system will never work on the current teamq. Anet can easily fix the leaderboard problem by adding a monthly cap(like other rps do) give casuals a “buff” if they’ve been inactive for X amount of time (like what starcraft does).

i dont have confidence in your comprehension. :/

the old team queue was… anyone could queue up with any size group (even solo). that hasnt changed. player pool size is irrelevant to how matches are made. current leaderboard measures primarily number of games won instead of primarily who games are won against. my idea is a way to shield the standings from brand new accounts and a way to force people to keep playing to maintain a standing, both of which are concepts league uses.

a monthly cap is a bad idea. theres no reason to tell players “you cant play cuz you play too much”. thats stupid and bad business.

a buff for casuals is a bad idea. i dont even.

“Buff for casuals” is what starcraft does for casuals who’ve been inactive in the season for X amount of time.
Other MMOs like that shall not be named have weekly caps instead of monthly. How is this any different? Currently this game’s leaderboard is terrible so it’s actually a good suggestion and i’m not the first one who suggested it.

Player pool size completely effects how that player is scored. Ex: Player plays with the same group of people numerous times, based on luck, he will either do good or worse depending on these people. There’s not a huge pool of people for an ELO or Glicko system to work. Saying that population doesn’t play a factor is naive thinking.

Zodian.6597:

Exedore.6320:

Up until December 2014, leaderboards were based on rating, with a decay filter applied. They had problems, notably:

1. There was (maybe still is) a flaw in the rating calculation or the parameters, as evidenced by someone that was 2-11 being rank1 for a few days. Similarly, you had people who were 11-0 or 10-1 making it to the top of the leaderboards, often with troll names like “fix leaderboard”.
2. The decay was too extreme on the leaderboards and did not affect actual rating. As a result, players who went inactive for a couple days would drop hundreds of spots on the boards. But when they would play one game, they would suddenly jump up a few hundred. Ironically, the decay was intended to filter the 11 game troll accounts off the top of the leaderboard.

This kind of sounds like a player population issue, where you’d only have a few players queuing at non-prime time hours and the rating spread of each match maxing out to accommodate the queue timers. Decay should kick in after a week or two of inactivity (like LoL’s old S2 elo system). I think with rating you already do have games played being a factor, since rating is built up in such linearity (and by winning). You’ll eventually reach this point where it takes a certain number of games to push the rating threshold.

The problem with Gw2 has always been player population, there simply hasn’t been enough ppl queueing ranked at all hours to create matchups within reasonable MMR spreads. So the highest MMR guy looses to some low MMR scrub on an unlucky game at 3:00am and gets his rating tanked before he can push the threshold to make games played matter. Meanwhile, some low MMR scrub just got propelled to the top of the ladder, which will cause his new teamates to loose and propel some other noob. It’s just a cycle. When morning hits and everyone loggs back in, the ladder has been shuffled and no one is where they should be.

Like, I’m currently 95% on the ladder and I queued into Noob Engi (who is ranked #1 in north america) like 3 times after midnight tonight.

Population issue shouldn’t be an argument. Parameters can be set so that these same players are impossible to play with or against. A “team shuffle” for example; intead of that player being on your team twice in a row, you’re on opposite teams instead. That can be governed by whether or not you lost (or won) with that person. Thresholds like score differences can be set. It’s really quite simple.

That’s one of many solutions to the problem but Anet don’t want to put in the extra programing to make that happen… it is a population issue but that shouldn’t matter if proper algorithms were in place.

It wouldn’t matter too much because people won’t listen same as map chat and not every solo player has a headset. Uncoordination will still be there when it’s solo vs premades.

That said it’s an additional feature and that’s always wanting.

Is this another way to show highest mmr?
Whats stopping a guy from not playing once he hits a high index like16 – 1? This is your classic Old Leaderboard system where playing a few lucky games will yield you top rank. Once there, all they have to do is go afk.

Make a system where 100 w/ 0 l = 500w/430l
You have to cater high mmr players with players who has high amounts of games played. I tried making a post about that here.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/pvp/Leaderboard-Idea-Please-give-input/first#post4817150

It’s going to take a lot of math and ingenuity to find the right equation where MMR = High amounts of games played. I think this is a route that we need to look into… but i’m no mathematician so i cant offer anything more than an idea and a simplistic outline.

Random Weird Guy.3528:

Jasher.6580:

What I would personally like to see is a leaderboard that represents Character and not Player.

Example: Everyone knows that style.6173 may be an amazing player on his Thief: Ichigo who is ranked 5th on the leaderboards.

Nevertheless, he is borderline garbage on his Engineer though he gets carried sometimes by his friends so his Engineer: Inspector Gadget is ranked 987 on the leaderboards.

This way the introduction of a class icon would be useful. It would also be a lot more telling.

The only way what you just said would work if there was an individual leaderboard rank for every single character a player runs in PvP…

There doesnt have to be. Since each character already has different mmrs, Anet can just pick the one with the highest mmr. That character can be shown on the leaderboard.
It’s also possible that if you switch characters frequently, they’ll have similiar mmr levels. You’ll likely see two different characters every other day.

Solution
List the top three highest MMR characters that person owns and place these character icons side by side with each other. From highest mmr to lowest mmr. Double characters types can’t be shown.

Done.

insanemaniac.2456:

Saiyan.1704:

insanemaniac.2456:

what if an account is only added to the leaderboard once they pass a volatility threshold for their mmr. new accounts start with higher volatility to help them find their placement quicker, and the volatility is a function of games played, time since last game played, and win/loss of the last 50-100 games played. then also add permanent slowish decay so you have to keep playing to keep your position. and just use mmr as the leaderboard score.

That’s only useful for Team Queue. This will have a number of issues when tpvp and spvp is merged together.

why? the old team queue is the same as the current ranked.

Old teamQ is vastly different than the current rank.

1. Current rank now has twice the number of players thanks to the merge of solo and tpvp.
2. There are five times the amount of solos than there are teams.
3. Solo’s are harder to manage because they’re on their own schedule. They make up the current leaderboard now. Top 25 is all solo players.

If you add MMR back like old teamq, you’ll see teams on top of the leaderboard while solo players will get the shaft. It’s proven that solo players are more succeptible to having very very low MMR due to hving done many games and not being on a team.

That’s why your system will never work on the current teamq. Anet can easily fix the leaderboard problem by adding a monthly cap(like other rps do) give casuals a “buff” if they’ve been inactive for X amount of time (like what starcraft does).

insanemaniac.2456:

what if an account is only added to the leaderboard once they pass a volatility threshold for their mmr. new accounts start with higher volatility to help them find their placement quicker, and the volatility is a function of games played, time since last game played, and win/loss of the last 50-100 games played. then also add permanent slowish decay so you have to keep playing to keep your position. and just use mmr as the leaderboard score.

That’s only useful for Team Queue. This will have a number of issues when tpvp and spvp is merged together.

The system will work better if it was tpvp only, instead of solo players thrown into the mix…

Teams are easier to track. They act like 1 player. They will almost always perform the same with very little outlying results.

Solo players will have mixed MMR because they are all rated between each other. Your rating should be the average of the best players and worse players on your team. As this averages goes on, it will eventually tell you what your ratingn is depending on how high, or low, this average tend to lean. It’s only after 1000 games will you see a difference between one player and the other. This is why MMR is so screwed up. Players are not playing large amounts of games, (nor do we want to) and we’re often playing the with and against the same players. The time invested to make the system work is too low. Not to mention certain KEY elements are skewing the results. Like build swapping between meta and off meta, heavy casual play, bad matchmaking due to low population, etc.

My point is, maybe Anet are setting themselves up for failure because key features havent been in place, or quite simply, they’re using a system that doesnt mesh with this game very well.

Why spend their time and resources on a game mode that was never near close to being popular? 2v2 and 3v3 small team skirmish TDM does work, have been working, in other MMOS. If they were going to seek a TDM gamemode, they would lean more on these.

A “smaller” Stronghold isn’t completely out of the question either. If Stronghold is a huge hit, they’ll likely look into “single lane” variants of the same gamemode… but that could quickly go south too if it’s not done right… it could end up like Courtyard.

What if there was a reverse threshold point system that’s based on average games per day between the top 25 players of the previous ladder?

Game average per day should be taken from the top 25 players. The sequence should be split in thirds, each representing the top 25 players in previous ladder seasons:
Top 3 players. (rank 1-3
Top 10 players (rank 3-10).
Top 25 players (rank 10-25).

Example how this might work:
Lets say top 3 players average games per day is 30
We’ll say they’ll accomplish 30 games in 7 hours
Top 10: 18 games in 7 hours
Top 25: 13 games in 7 hours on average.

-If games played is less than 13 games in 7 hours, your point system is increased by a factor of 3.
-If games played is more than 13 but less than 18, points are increased by a factor of 2.
-If games played is more than 18 but less than 30, points increased by a factor of 1.
-If games played is 30 or more, points earned will not have that “bonus” increase.

Now completely remove rank decay. That’s no longer needed because you’ll naturally derank yourself by allowing people below you to catch up if you’re inactive.

Players with unlimited amount of time on their hands will still see their rank points increase as usual. Casuals will see a bigger increase in their rank points as well.

Just a thought I had. If nothing else maybe the devs will get a random idea from it.

The above is a rough example of point increase and point decreases depending on games played. Proper data from previous seasons needs to be taken into account to better calculate this new system.

Tomerant.2701:

I’m lvl 70 atm and I joined unranked arenas to tryout some pvp.

I found myself fighting besides lv 20, lv3, lv80 while other team was full 80.
I couldn’t use any of my utility skills that I use in leveling.

We ofc were eaten alive, I was getting 3-4 shotted.
Where is the sense there?
Can someone explain how this stuff works? I was reading that “everyone is equal” in pvp here and this system is actually good.
It’s not what I got as my first impression.

Once you join pvp you will gain all of your utilities and skills as if you were level 80. That includes Amulets and Sigils, with the exception of certain PVE exclusive ones. You have to buy your Grand Master traits at the class trainer, make sure it’s PvP and not PvE… I think they’re separated but I haven’t checked in awhile…

“Rank” just shows time played, it isn’t a measurement of skill per say.

A lot of factors is taken into matchmaking… in is simplistic form… bad matchmaking is bad matchmaking. You either:

1. Got faced against a higher skill team. These teams are usually premades or they’re all veteran players, playing on Meta builds
2. Your team is far from being veterans and you were all using off meta builds.
3. There was a huge rotation issue from start to finish. That mean you were all going in one at a time and dying without offering support and not supplementing each other in any way.
4. There was a class stacking issue, Example: 2 Thieves is not as wanting as 2 Eles, etc.

There are many other factors but these are the most common ones. I’m sorry you had a bad PvP experience but I HIGHLY recommend you playing Hotjoins then Unranked in that order.

Currently there’s no restrictions to Ranked pvp but hopefully the Devs will learn that little feature, even if it’s a minor one, needs implementing.

Ryu.5801:

Title of the thread reads ‘Longbow Confirmed’.. Is this really confirmed or still just speculation based on the short clip?

It’s confirmed based on speculation from the short clip.

O.o

Ellewind.9640:

it’s happening…again. Kick me out and now i can’t go in :/

Vrita.7846:

According to Reddit, other people are having issues too. I guess the servers are down?

Yup servers are down >.<

A night shift must have spilled coffee.

May have been everyone because I just dropped from the game.

Sirendor.1394:

Hey guys, thanks a lot for your responses!

First off, I am rather interested in a build that works around burns. I had a friend who ran that really long ago and it was really awesome (I think that must have been january 2013), I also ran it after that but haven’t touched it much since that time. The gear I still have is rabid though, would that work as well as carrion?

Also; is it possible to try play on both direct damage and burning?’

For the other suggestions here;

• signets need some love indeed, they lack the sustain on the other two skill sets, maybe useable in a combo with shouts?
• spirit weapons: not sure, I might try to run something new with them, i’ll post results later.
• consecrations: maybe they can get a spot with WoR?

Hope to get more suggestions!

Greetings and happy gaming.

Quick edit: just roamed with rabid/zerk guardian and it seems viable. Still utilizing meditations, but at least it’s something else and I can use torch for this. ;D Killed couple of other roamers with this, no horrible deaths yet (except from getting ran over by a zerg).

You’ll actually lose raw damage potential because Guardians lack proc on crit effects. Unless you absolutely like Sigil of Earth, Carrion would be better suited for your hybrid purposes. Carrion also does better against condi thieves . They are abundant in WvW.

Josh Davis.6015:

Thanks for writing up your concerns so succinctly.

This test season is intended to test an algorithm that’s tailored towards ranking players higher for better W/L ratios, in addition to using points gained from playing (meaning games played does not become valueless). The algorithm we’re using this time around is completely different than what was previously tested, and they both have different purposes. We’re already having internal discussions on how we can adjust this season’s algorithm to better suit the goals we stated on Thursday – rewarding players who play well, not just play. These discussions will continue into the next week, and now we have an entire weekend’s worth of data that we can look at and extrapolate on.

An important thing to keep in mind is that these events are tests, and the only thing we’re testing right now is the formula behind ranking. We’re gathering a lot of useful data that we can use to help us make better decisions. These “test seasons” not a final product by stretch of the imagination.

A post like this always keeps me at ease, knowing you and your team are intently trying to make the system better. Appreciate the response!

Hunter.4783:

There are only 2 viable builds for the guard right now, meditations and shouts.

Everything else is trash.

If you haven’t done so already, you can try a burn hybrid meditation guardian, but you will need to change all your gear to carrion or dire depending how condi heavy you wanna go. Keep in mind most people will use condi reduction food so you need to account for that.

Pretty much this. Hybrid builds is a nice alternative from your average meta. It’s not uncommon to 1v2 baddies like Rangers and Thieves simultaneously. Especially if you Shelter a Ranger’s Rapid Fire, adding 12s work of 1k burn ticks usually does the trick.

Try the 62600 with sword/torch sc/focus, full carrion.
-Koi Cakes
-Tunning Crystals

We have a whole year until Justin deems the current system a failure, according to one of his earlier posts. We have to endure and hope for the best.

Basket of Boxes.1976:

Mogar.9216:

I think that guy with 27-2 record yesterday must be pretty good don’t you and he was #1 for a while.

That is good but the guy also played 30 games haha. Having someone like that on the top of the ladder is okay, people don’t like seeing all the people with 50% win ratios up there. Personally I realise the reason it is like this is because of the mixed solo and team leaderboard so I am fine with people at low win rates being up there as long as they are playing good players and not losing to brand new players.

I think the suggestion of capping games per day or total was a good idea. If someone can play 40 games on a Friday there is a good chance they can play that many everyday and anyone with a job has absolutely no chance at this leaderboard.

I agree, people with an unlimited amount of time on their hands will always yield 10x more points than a person who works 40hrs a week. Solo players will easily outrank premades.

Jasher.6580:

Please use MMR. Check out the link in my signature.

If it was based purely on MMR then it will be bad for solo players.

1. Solo and Premades will need to be seperated within the same ques so it’s impossible for them to play each other.
2. It needs a more strict degenerated rank system, people would have to keep playing, more than a few times a week to keep their rank position. Unlike the old leaderboard.

Fashion Mage.3712:

They’re mostly just underrated imo. If their cooldown started on cast (like it should), I think they’d be extremely good.

If a spirit weapon elite was made, I think it should be a powerful pet rather than something like Fiery Greatsword.

I’m annoyed by the fact Ranger’s Spirits are twice as better. They stick to the Ranger 100% and they only attack when the Ranger tells him to… which is almost always a hit because the spirits are always beside him!

But no… our spirit run around all crazy. The sSword stalls to hit sometimes! They’re just bad compared to everyone else’s AI.

Also want to add that this is the same for 1s durations (0% condition durations.)

Not that it’s a big deal… i’m just confused o.o

Khezekiah Bellamy.5016:

I gave it a test and it appears occur specifically when you apply burning within about half a second since it goes away, tried with multiple weapons applying burning right when as the icon dissapears. can also narrow it down to not being Supreme Justice. Also tried this method with only 6 autos where u would expect to see 4 secs of burning, so 4 procs, however it procs 5 times but all the dmg is there +/- 1.

in attached photo at 10:01 i hit a golem with 1 proc of virtue of justice passive for control dmg test. i then hit the indestructible golem 2 procs using scepter auto chain, which applies burning right after the last one stops. test taken with average 92 ping.

tldr; all the dmg is there within the same amount of time. not duration bug, application timing bug

I’ll take your word for it that fraction damage is there after 100% duration.

I’m not understanding the 100% duration auto attacks, where numbers are varying. Are you saying that’s working as intended? At exactly 100% duration and supreme justice and auto attacking with scepter,

The damage sequence is the following
421
421 full 2s duration ended from first proc
253 This should be the start of a new proc of 421, it’s a fraction instead.
422
253
422
338
repeat

This is 4 F1 procs or 8 ticks of burning. The numbers shouldn’t be changing unless i’m missing something.

GhOst.4019:

Saiyan.1704:

The issue with GW2’s is, you will ALWAYS gain rank points after X amount of games played. You can’t derank yourself if you lose against a low MMR player/team like Starcraft. If you have a 50% win ratio, you’ll almost never lose points in X amount of games.

This is not true at all…… If you loose to a team with lower MMR you DO loose rank points.

What IS true is that if you have a 50% ratio, all you have to do is grind games all day to be top rank of the leaderboard. That’s true with the past seasonal ladder, that was the point I was trying to make.

In any season event, participation will always yield more. The same is said for Starcraft, LoL, etc.

The issue with GW2’s is, you will ALWAYS gain rank points after X amount of games played. You can’t derank yourself if you lose against a low MMR player/team like Starcraft. If you have a 50% win ratio, you’ll almost never lose points in X amount of games.

Hopefully the new ladder system with do a better job.. I still think a “cap” is a more viable solution.

I want this trait to be fixed. I also want it replaced with a grandmaster trait that’s on the same level as Amplified Wrath or Monk’s Focus… you know, something useful.

Sagat.3285:

Nikaido.3457:

That trait in itself was pointless even if it was working, condition guardian just can’t become a thing unless they add more condition application to the class.

Revenant looks like it’s going to be what condition guardian should have been.

We found it!!! Someone else found a proof of how they listen to forums but won’t apply it to the game and rather sell it. I am still hoping LB is condi with skills like Blinding Blade and decent healing,let’s see how benevolent they are.

I think LB is going to have slow auto attacks, who’s damage scales will be equivalent to warriors. With the exception of warriors burst F1 skill and his huge fire burning skill… we’ll be leaning on support; probably some type of regen or protection, to go with our damage. I think we’re getting 1 fire skill.
Our bow’s fire wont outdamage a warrior’s fire skills unless it’s some type of concecration ground effect and we can immobilize people on it.

Yea I agree with silver… our spirit weapons are mediocre as it is. I don’t trust Anet enough to give us a Spirit Weapon Elite…

Is our teleport really going to be nerfed in future updates? Right now it’s buffed if anything.

Ele’s have always hard countered guardians, it’s nothing to be ashamed about. Eles have a hard time with shattered mesmers.

Power Rangers are one of the best 1v1 players in the game. They can still be outplayed in tpvp. I recommend using your shelter to block their rapid fire, even if you have full health. You’ll block over 4k damage and gain huge stacks of might yourself. Use line of sight, try to get the drop on him first with judges intervention + gs #5 binding grasp

We usually don’t have issues with engi’s unless they’re some form of turrets. Even then, they’re quite beatable. When they pop crate try peeling off and attacking with your scepter at ranged until a few of his turrets are gone or until he comes to you. Guardians don’t usually lose to engis 1v1 but in tpvp where time is a huge factor, you’re probably better off going else where.

Flumek.9043:

Its actualy not a buff and damage “IN THE LONG RUN” remains the same. Condies tick every full second – starting from the time of first applied condi.
Meaning on a lets say 3.35s burn:
-Before u always got 3x ticks and had a 35% chance to get 4th tick
-Now u will always get 3.35x worth of damage

It is completely equal, just making it consistent. A nice change.

Actually, it’s a buff for Guardian’s Virtue of Justice’s passive. It will almost always proc with it’s fraction duration missing. Now it’ll hit with what ever fraction damage modifier you have

I was testing a 100% burn duration build when I was theory crafting and noticed a small fluctuation of burn damages.
Guardian Build: 34004 Radiant Fire + Supreme Justice traited
Smoldering sigils and Bal runes

You can replicate it if you just auto attack with scepter. Also once you go past 2 second duration, fraction duration damage no longer applies :P