Guild Wars 2

If anything:

Tone down Lemongrass, not DM. I didn’t even agree with ~98% immunity to movement impairing conditions before this build became mainstream. WvW fixed, sPvP unchanged.

If you do anything, that’s where you start. Next you wait. People will learn how to fight this build just like they learned how to fight D/D serker thieves. Mace was scarcely seen before. Once they added that extra second, it became immensely popular. The only thing that pulled mace out of 11 months of obscurity was that 1 additional second on its stun. If they reduce it, they need to give lots of love somewhere else.

Excalibur.9748:

Sil.4560:

Hell the blind and stealth gimmick is still ridiculous. Not because it’s unbeatable, but because of how obnoxiously forgiving it is for bad players. The whole thief class needs looking at in modes like WvW, and people are here whining about warriors?

There is play to defeat thieves, there is no play that can beat a warrior. That’s the problem and why people are complaining about warriors, instead of thief.

This forum is ridiculous because when someone makes a legitimate claim, he’s just bombarded with pointless “L2P” comments.

All I heard was, “This is OP”. We were making fun of a guildy last night because he lost to the very build this thread is talking about, but we play warriors so we know how to beat warriors.

I didn’t hear anyone ask for advice or outline a build so that we know what tools you have to work with. I did see the original poster say he brings stun breakers… even up to 3, but if you were getting caught in 3 Skull Cracks before your first break was back off cooldown, I have to wonder… why are you not respecting the fact that the guy has his mace out? You know what he’s going to do to you. This is a very powerful build, but I hesitate to call it OP. If you want advice, there are warriors that will gladly oblige you. If you only want to complain, there are lots more that will flame you.

Schocker.9705:

i plan on using a shout war for a havoc squad, we have enough dmg, i think a shout war is optimal for us

That’s the key, what’s optimal for the setup. Warlord’s assessment is right on in many areas of the game. When I 1v1 against a shout warrior, I’m not worried because I know most of what he’s packing, and my build has plenty of tools to deal with what they bring to the table. When you put one in a group, they become a lot more scary, not as an individual, but because of what they contribute to the whole; which is what it sounds like you’re going to be doing. If your group decides they want to incorporate that build into their comp, it’s a strong addition.

There are also some very strong support options for other classes, but if you want to play a warrior or bring offensive support, then yes, you’re headed in a viable direction. If you are open to playing another class or want to support defensively, you would benefit from doing some exploring of other classes.

Interpret Interrupt.3824:

I used mending up until the recent patch, because I was not using cleansing ire much. But now that I can 10k heal, I think that out weighs any mending use. Because once you hit half health with mending you are in trouble but for some reason with surge you can recover.

Ya, I understand that. It really sounds to me like Mending just isn’t the heal for your build. I probably wouldn’t couple it with CI either, but that still leaves lots of builds that can put it to good use. It sounds to me like it is almost edging out Healing Surge for you. I would argue that is exactly where Anet wants it to be. If certain builds will make you scream, “Gosh darn it! Mending, if only you were a little better for my build!” and others, “Healing Surge, You’re so close! But I need my Mending.”, then a skill is balanced, and Anet has succeeded.

Look at Defektive’s comments, he obviously doesn’t like the thing, and you seem to be right on the fence of running it; same skill, two players/builds, two very different opinions. I promise you, there are warriors out there that are running it and love it, and the math shows some pretty involved thought and deliberate choices went into making Mending what it is now. Maybe Anet will agree with you? I don’t know. I love the warrior and want to see it succeed. I’m only here to do my best to provide moderate opinions supported with objective evidence.

Deniara Devious.3948:

…snip…

I appreciate your respect of my other posts. Let me try to go point-by-point.

-As far as the relevance of PvE vs PvP vs WvW, no one will ever submit, for good reason, that their game type should suffer at the balance of another. To remedy this, Anet has started to split skills. Maybe the Signet needs a split (sPvP and WvW) vs (PvE). I won’t deny that it’s powerful in PvE. I was running difficult content in full serker with old Healing Signet and 15 in Defense no problem, so I understand your argument there, but in a general PvP environment pre-buff, it was markedly worse than the other heals in most builds. Although some could make it work very well, it needed a change. So I agree that, yes, in PvE, it’s probably too much and could use a split; emphasizing (sPvP and WvW) vs (PvE).

-With regards to healing power, it is a group support stat. Buffing its effectiveness for individual heals means 2 things:
1) Base heals need to be reduced because, with that change, healers heal more and to prevent what you’re referring to with Healing Signet from reoccurring, base values would need to come down.
2) Indirectly, no-healing-power builds become even less survivable. I’m not even talking about burst berserker builds. I mean, across the board, anything without healing power takes a hit. Meanwhile, healing builds that already bring heals strong enough to be effective in all game types get even stronger.

It’s obviously even more complicated than this, but we could be here all day delving deep and exploring every variable that needs to be mapped and considered before implementing something like this.

However, I’ll sympathize with you, because I too have shed a tear at the warrior’s poor access to the use of healing power. But, no other class, save the ranger to my knowledge, can begin to approach the offensive support of a warrior. For instance, 30 points in Tactics with a Banner of Discipline can give your full group 100% uptime on +28% crit chance, 15% crit damage, and even 150 power and regen should you choose. That is a tremendous boost to damage. Coupling that with the same healing/defensive support of classes like the ele or guard would be… wow! much too much.

Maybe I’d get on board with Regen seeing a reduction to base heal and increased scaling with Healing Power. That way, you can ensure that every class has some access to being able to AoE support their group through heals without negatively affecting more offensively and defensively oriented builds to the same degree as altering personal heals. But you’d have to take a look at any #6 healing skills/traits that provide regen to see how they would be impacted.

As far as Berserker being #1, I wonder if that stems also from the content generally being “faceroll-easy” or “1-shot-hard”? I agree that damage is king but it’s because, in my opinion, PvE is either too easy or too hard and unrewarding. You either want to blow through it to avoid boredom and maximize rewards, or you have to blow through it to avoid getting 1-shotted by high level Agony. The lack of scaling rewards according to difficulty has left us with a bunch of unoccupied, difficult dungeons; min/maxed, farmed ones; and many of the hardcore dodge rolling their berserker butts off to avoid getting 1-shotted by agony in high level fractals (which wouldn’t change much even with defensive builds). There isn’t much room for support in any of those scenarios. Obviously there are far more variables in the equation than our ideas, but all those little things combined with the game being designed for every class to stand alone would require some heavy heavy, fine tooth comb thought and re-balancing over a long period of time. I’m not saying it won’t happen, but it should be a long, arduous process to avoid breaking the game.

^^^Condi caps also contribute here

-Finally, agreed on build variety 100%.

And in regards to Arah, ashamedly, I’ll admit I never watched the video, nor do I keep up with stuff like that. I’m not sure what can still be soloed and what can’t be, but kudos to you for pointing out my ignorance in an area.

Defektive.7283:

But that’s optimally.

Optimally doesn’t happen in PvP. You’re not using mending on CD, and the conditions can be negated by Cleansing Ire and Berzerkers Stance and Sig of Stamina.

You’re overlapping a use with other skills that function better, when you could be getting a much greater burst heal when you need it.

Can’t spread sheet healing per second in a PvP mentality because it’ll never work that way.

I addressed that:

I understand not everyone uses their heals on cooldown, but I think Anet balances around what can happen and allows players to make cost/benefit choices. Balancing around what you think players will do allows people to act outside of what’s expected to maximize effectiveness; sometimes to the point of being broken. Balancing for what can happen, for those of you familiar with engines, puts a type of “governor” on gameplay. The best performance is capped at X and players have to choose if they want to perform below X to gain Y or if they want to stick with X at the cost of Y.

As far as the “overlapping” issue, I’d bet you my favorite pair of underwear that’s by design. They want people to be able to access the same results through multiple methods. Unfortunately, sometimes one method is slightly better than another, but in the case of Mending vs CI + HS, Mending runs a medium heal and requires no traits. Meanwhile, CI + HS runs the risk of a reduced heal and requires 20 trait points invested. It may be a “no-brainer” to you, but this isn’t a 100% case of “this works better than that… all the time”.

I also understand the anti-spreadsheet jokey mindset. I don’t pretend that being good at math makes anyone good at games, but what it does do is give someone a baseline; a maximum level of performance within the perfect storm, and it’s up to the players to find a way to force themselves into the eye of that perfect storm in order to unleash the full potential of the build, so when we take a mechanic as simple as a healing skill (push your key of choice) and buff it up assuming less-than-optimal conditions (push your key of choice less often), and a player figures out how to force the conditions he needs, (push your key of choice on cooldown), that tool implemented to create balance in sub-optimal conditions now creates imbalance in optimal conditions… which we established can be easily achieved by pushing your key of choice on cooldown.

I’m not taking sides here. I’m just playing devil’s advocate. I think Mending is much more viable than you or K-pop make it out to be, but, for the record, I don’t use it.

Also some more support that Anet balances for what can happen:

The median base healing value per second for Healing Surge: 9820 + 5885 = 15705/2 = 7852/30 = 261.75 average health per second

The maximum base healing value per second for Mending: 5240/20 = 262 maximum health per second

So the maximum base healing capable by Mending is only .25 hp (.09%) away from the median base healing value of Healing Surge. I doubt that is coincidence. They balanced these heals assuming multiple uses in varying situations.

Defektive.7283:

Veritas.6071:

Assuming use on cooldown, that would make Mending’s health-per-second as powerful as Stage 2 Healing Surge while also removing 3 conditions. There would be little reason to take Surge unless you wanted Adrenaline control; as its health-per-second would only be ~17% higher than Mending’s (without healing power). Additionally, with the cooldown reduction being 20%, and only a 6% reduction to base healing, the health-per-second was actually buffed post-changes, not nerfed.

I understand not everyone uses their heals on cooldown, but I think Anet balances around what can happen and allows players to make cost/benefit choices. Balancing around what you think players will do allows people to act outside of what’s expected to maximize effectiveness; sometimes to the point of being broken. Balancing for what can happen, for those of you familiar with engines, puts a type of “governor” on gameplay. The best performance is capped at X and players have to choose if they want to perform below X to gain Y or if they want to stick with X at the cost of Y.

Use Surge and then do your F1 with cleansing Ire = 3 condis removed and a ton more health received.

Mending it just out classed by Surge and Signet.

You have to look at it from a health-per-second point of view, not single healing instance.

Doing what you suggest: 5885/30 = 196
Cleansing with Mending: 5240/20 = 262

Mending is 33% more effective than the method mentioned, and it can be performed free of traits.

Also, see the edit on my original post.

Assuming use on cooldown, that would make Mending’s health-per-second as powerful as Stage 2 Healing Surge while also removing 3 conditions. There would be little reason to take Surge unless you wanted Adrenaline control; as its health-per-second would only be ~17% higher than Mending’s (without healing power). Additionally, with the cooldown reduction being 20%, and only a 6% reduction to base healing, the health-per-second was actually buffed post-changes, not nerfed.

I understand not everyone uses their heals on cooldown, but I think Anet balances around what can happen and allows players to make cost/benefit choices. Balancing around what you think players will do allows people to act outside of what’s expected to maximize effectiveness; sometimes to the point of being broken. Balancing for what can happen, for those of you familiar with engines, puts a type of “governor” on gameplay. The best performance is capped at X and players have to choose if they want to perform below X to gain Y or if they want to stick with X at the cost of Y.

Edit: Maybe Mending isn’t perfect right now, but there isn’t a whole lot of room left before it starts to infringe upon Healing Surge’s healing potential. All of this while removing conditions and being free Surge’s risk for a poorer heal at low Adrenaline levels.

Deniara Devious.3948:

Healing signet used to be crappy, but now I feel it is a bit too good. In fact combined with adrenal health + mango pie / omnomberry ghost + some points in healing power I have used it in pve to face tank champions on level 80 areas with ease. No need to dodge. Just sit next to boss with healing signet + adrenal health. The combined passive healing from 3 sources can even counter permanent burning. You can just stand in fire and see your health bar stay up at full health. Welcome to the super easy mode…

Healing signet’s passive heal should be weaker if there is no points in healing power, but scale better with healing power.
The current formula seems to be (for level 80):
392+0.05*healing power / second
with 1500 healing power that would heal 467/s, just 19% better than with 0 healing power

I would suggest this instead:
320+0.1*healing power / second
320/s <- 0 healing power
470/s <- 1500 healing power

Not a dramatic change, but adjustment.

The active effect of the healing signet should be increased to promote its active use and its activation time should be reduced to 1/2 second.
Current: 3275 + 0.5*healing power
Suggested: 3400+0.75*healing power

There is more than one game type. The heals saw those buffs because of the warrior struggling in a PvP setting, and I never want to go back to that place.

Nerfing the base heal and buffing the coefficient to encourage heavier investments into healing power on a class with limited access to additional healing sources sets players up for failure. Sure you can dump points into healing power but unless you are running 15 in Defense and 30 in Tactics, you aren’t getting enough use to justify that stat outside of long fights. We aren’t Guardians that have healing coefficients attached to their mechanics, weapons, utilities… pretty much everything, so it is much harder for a warrior to make use of that stat.

Not to mention, that change would make it so much less effective than Healing Surge that there would be no reason to run the Signet. On top of that, warriors were soloing Arah long before the heal buff… should we just nerf the whole class? PvE in this game is not consistent enough to balance a class around. If you want more challenge, there is a better way to get it than calling for nerfs.

Senjun.8149:

peter.9024:

With sigil of paralyzation the stun is 4s, and if you chain bulls charge you get another 2 for around 6s of stun.

The build is a good build and it’s a huuuugee L2P issue for most players. As you can tell from OP he has no clue about warrior. He doesn’t know the animation of skull crack as he can barely identify the weapon sets. Since he got downed on the first stun means that he either doesn’t run stun breakers or doesn’t know how to use them at the right time. In the end this probably comes from the fact that a lot of warriors used to be free kills and at least with this build most can put up a fight as long as they can land skull crack.

The really heavy counters to this build is positioning, keep range, and most importantly know how to dodge. Since most classes outside of warrior (and necro) have good access to vigor and dodge boosting abilities, knowing when to dodge every 7s is the key to beating this build. So good luck and get better at the game!

This is probably the best answer here considering you are the only one here who knows that they have a 5-7 sec stun, 6 seconds i guess i was close. But having such a long stun on such a short cd is still pretty ridiculous, I may not know much about warriors but i think if you give any tanky class with moderate-high damage output a 6 second stun that they can use about every 7 seconds than that is a problem no matter what.

Bull’s Charge isn’t a stun. It’s a 2 sec KD (unaffected by Sigil of Para) and it’s a separate skill so he can’t cast it in the middle of his 100b. It’s also on a 40/32 traited second cooldown. There is no way you were stunned for 6 seconds every 7 seconds.

What you are referring to is “juggling” where a player chains his CCs together and attacks in between, but your perception of how often we can do it is way off. Again, bring stun breaks or prepare to get juggled. If you want to avoid the worst of it, don’t let a Mace warrior get into melee with you, or bring stability.

If we can beat them, so can you.

Dand.8231:

Shield has a 3 second single target stun, on a fairly decent cooldown.

Shield is a 1 second stun. 2 seconds with Sigil of Para. What you’ve listed here would make the OP’s scenario almost possible.

Excalibur.9748:

stof.9341:

It was probably MACE + shield, not sword. The stun is melee range so just don’t let him get close.

lol they can just use a gap closer then use the stun. besides most of them pack a long range weapon too.

It’s impossible for a warrior to 4 sec stun you, 100b you, and have a ranged weapon. After he closes with his GS, the mace will come out. Dodge away, CC him, use stability… whatever it is that you do and enjoy kiting him for the next 5 seconds. When he switches back to GS to close again, and the mace comes out, rinse and repeat.

Senjun.8149:

Its not exaggeration it could of been 5 second stuns it just felt like an eternity that was on far to short of a cooldown. I wish i could record.

Well the longest he’s stunning anyone with that setup is 2 seconds with the right sigil. He could bring Bull’s Charge too for another 2 second knockdown, but even with both of those and a traited shield, he isn’t reliably stunning anyone for 7 or even 5 seconds every 15-20 seconds. Not to mention he isn’t getting off a full 100b unless he is running frenzy, and even then he probably isn’t landing the whole combo.

It sounds like he is running Mace/Shield GS, and my response to that would be, if you want to PvP or WvW, bring stun breaks and have a way to create distance when he switches to Mace.

Senjun.8149:

Before warriors go all crazy on me hear me out here and if you are this type of op warrior, then go ahead and defend yourself id like to hear it.

So I heard wars got buffed and i was like oh cool they needed it not asking how, my friend said was it was absolutely insanely op 1v1 but i didn’t really investigate.

I am in ebg jp where alot of dueling takes place and this one war is camping 4 level 80s (we got no mesmers or engineers so no flavor of the month proffessions to help)

He uses sword/shield and then greatsword. He stuns someone for about 7 seconds and he does this almost every 15-20 seconds. In that stun you get bursted about 13k if you are in pvt gear but not running a tank build.

This war is running pvt gear and a tanky build as no one is hitting high on him at all yet hes dealing 13k dmg burst and stunning someone for about 7 seconds every 15-20 seconds. Alot of people claim this is a troll build well, it’s a troll build that’s killing off groups of people at a time.

His greatsword is am amazing gap closer of course and amazing at running away with low cooldown gap closing abilities.

It’s like seeing a vanilla DD bunker ele but twice the single target damage and instead of extra heals he has blocks and reflect. Tell me how is this fair?

There’s too much exaggeration to tell you what he’s running, and if we don’t know what he’s running, we can’t tell you how to counter him.

Player Character.9467:

galandor.1059:

Lighter.5631:

its an dps build, you don`t survive, you kill people fast or you run.
if you really want berserker power, id just go 30 25 0 0 15, much more damage and survibility mobility
sigil of para on mace, bloodlust on shield, since you will be mainly stunning with mace.

Your giving up 15% crit damage for 10% damage on bleed, no thanks.

10% more damage on all hits is doing more for you than 15% more crit damage. To put it in perspective, if you crit with that 15% more crit dmg you do 2x normal damage (1.5+0.5), with 10% more damage you’re doing 1.1*(1.5+.35) = 2.035 so you already get more damage on your crits PLUS the extra damage on all your regular attacks (also raising your crit chance 11.9%).

Listen to the man! And watch the invitational tournies. There was a European warrior that ran 30/30/something… in the quarter finals I think it was… the poor guy got blown up over and over and over… I’d had my fingers crossed hoping he would represent but no luck.

Velron.3729:

Somoe.3621:

I’m not trying to hate on Warriors here, but I don’t think it would be fair to give the class Fast Hands as a class defining mechanic.

Class Defining Mechanics

Elementalist:
- Attunements (primary)

Necromancer:
- Death Shroud (primary)
- Life Force

Mesmer:
- Shatters (primary)
- Illusions

Thief:
- Stealing (primary)
- Dual Wield
- Stealth Attacks

Engineer:
- Tool Belt (primary)

Ranger:
- Pets (primary)

Guardian:
- Virtues (primary)

Warrior:
- Burst Skills (primary)
- Adrenaline

*You can argue that Thieves have 2 secondary defining mechanics but neither is as powerful as Fast Hands (and no, Thief is not my main).

I think the Trait should either be…
1. Nerfed and moved to an Adept minor trait. That way you don’t have to waste so many points to get such a “warrior” feeling trait without making it OP, because it’s too strong for a 5 point trait.
-or-
2. Given an additional effect (without changing the 5s CD reduction) and moved to a Grandmaster minor trait. That way it would encourage a more utility/fast paced build.

How exactly are you calling our special class mechanic Adrenaline AND Burst skills like they are separate when Adrenaline = Burst skills. Looks like one mechanic to me.

You did the same exact thing to Necros.

Life force and Deathshroud are somehow two separate mechanics? No they aren’t, Life force = Deathshroud. There is no DS without Life force.

If anything the Necros secondary mechanic should be listed as Fear since they are the only profession able to perform multiple fears and spec into it.

Nah, I agree with Somoe’s breakdown. Adrenaline and Burst are different because Adrenaline can be traited to act as a class enhancing resource. Outside of burst use, Anet’s decision to make Adrenaline completely useless without traiting makes the comparison a little more gray, but it’s still capable of performing that role. The same remains true with Life Force and Death Shroud except they get a little more use without traiting. At the very least, Life Force acts as a separate health bar, and Death Shroud provides another 5 skills at the cost of bleeding Life Force. It’s like a sustained version of Adrenaline/Burst. Although a relationship exists between each mechanic (Adrenaline/Burst, Life Force/Death Shroud), they are two very separate mechanics.

However, I will take issue with Initiative being left out of the laundry list of thief mechanics. That is, arguably, the strongest mechanic in the game.

But yes, I’d like to see 1 of 3 things happen, Fast Hands become standard, Fast Hands be Discipline minor, or Adrenaline provide some benefit outside of being used as a resource for burst. It is far and away the least flexible and among one of the least useful mechanics in the game without putting 30 points in Strength, at least 15 points in Defense, or 30 points in Discipline. Warriors need something more than the ability to perform 1 attack, best case scenario, every ~7 seconds.

Dembian.9257:

I’d say for PvE a warrior is a safer choice if your looking for safe that is

Warrior at 80 in full berserker gear has alot more hp than a thief i think its like 19-20k health corect me if im wrong.

the thief is only around 10-12k health plus heavy vs medium armour the warrior is alot more forgiving if you make a mistake in pve.

make no mistake though enough mistakes or a bad enough one will screw you on either:P in either setting

Heavy armor doesn’t do much better against direct damage than medium. It only stops an additional 6.91% (Source). So, base thief takes 1000, base warrior takes 931. The health pool helps, but you still have to know how to play.

Warriors are so popular in PvE because of their massive cleave damage. I’m not arguing thieves are better in PvE, but a serker warrior isn’t that much more forgiving than a serker thief; maybe not more forgiving at all when you consider all the spammable evades attached to thief weapons.

Nick.6972:

Well, I mostly tend to play wvw in teams, however, it’s extremely annoying to play melee with all the wvw zerg lag.
If I play GS Guardian and we’re having 20vs20+ game becomes unplayable – run and spam AoE hoping to hit something.

Warrior has longer ranged options than the thief, but thief shortbow is an insanely versatile weapon. If another toon is an option, you may want to consider a ranger. Their single target ranged damage-over-time exceeds anything warriors or thieves are capable of. If it truly is only between a warrior and thief, go with the warrior.

So was the reduction in % bonus from Empowered intended?

No, no “Damage” modifiers affect condition damage.

More legendary skins are supposedly coming before the end of 2013. Collect what you can without committing and see what new skins come out.

Defektive.7283:

Veritas.6071:

Defektive.7283:

VidurrRedhands.1964:

Defektive, what amulet/gem are you using in that video?

Trade secret.

You really want it kept a secret?

tbh I don’t care, it’s just I’d rather not spell it out to everyone. There’s so many different ways to play it, different weapons that will work with it (CC Warrior, Mace Shield the only requirement). Prefer people figure out their own way that fits them, than give them a layout and say ‘here play this’.

if that makes sense? It’s not be an kitten .

I understand that.

Defektive.7283:

VidurrRedhands.1964:

Defektive, what amulet/gem are you using in that video?

Trade secret.

You really want it kept a secret?

Daecollo.9578:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Critical_Damage
Critical Damage has no diminishing returns.

Please don’t talk about other things besides AH, Stay on Topic <3.

@Yes of course, however your not taking account the 15% Critical Chance the tree applies, or the -5 Weapon Swap and the -30% Burst Skill Reduction. If you compare it like that why not just compare the base tree, in any case the Discipline Tree wins for sustained damage.

---

He just proved mathematically that isn’t always true. I disagree with aspects of both arguments, but I’m not going to get into the fray.

Aside from that, you can say what you want, Daecollo but just talking doesn’t make things true. You ultimately have to convince the devs you’re right, not the community, and the devs are not idiots. Statements with analytic support are strong. Sweeping, generalized statements are not.

Beyond that, you assert that everyone stay on topic when someone challenges your inconsistencies. Some of us are here to enrich the knowledge of the warrior community. Attacking posts, whatever their context, bearing incorrect information is part of achieving that goal. Kudos to phantom for taking the time to put together a nice post and clarify some wrong information.

oZii.2864:

people already complain about retal

Thieves don’t have retal

Elementalist don’t have retal.

The problem with even more retal is that if 5 people have retal on them and you lay aoe on them you can almost kill yourself. This isn’t a huge problem for warrior’s as far as aoe but if you go cleave or 100bs a guardian with no healing signet you can get a idea of just how strong retal is on 1 person imagine hitting 5

I would be in favor of moving spiked armors retal duration up to 10 secs with a 15 sec cd then it would be grandmaster worthy imo right now it just isn’t.

Even if you go 30 tactics you get 8 secs out of it. I know people that experiment with the trait but they usually drop it after playing with it a few days.

The problem with increasing duration is that you get even better returns with boon duration. It would be extremely easy for someone to have 100% uptime on retal with a base of 10 seconds on a 15 second cooldown. Maybe 7 seconds base would be better. It’s a small increase but those 2 seconds take it from 1/3 uptime to almost 1/2 uptime without boon duration. Also, only builds with over 100% boon duration would be able to achieve 100% uptime, and at that point, they’ve given up so much to achieve that duration that it seems a lot less powerful than someone only needing 50% duration to push it from 10 to 15.

Daecollo.9578:

Veritas.6071:

Daecollo.9578:

Mmm, lets stick to the topic at hand.

@Veritas:
Yes, they would make those traits and skills better.

However, look at other classes, like the thief for example. They have many skills that stealth them. Their traits benefit from going into stealth like ours benefit from gaining adrenaline.

Why should we be punished. Why can’t we spec and make our traits synergy better with other traits?

Because we can generate adrenaline while being offensive and defensive. Thieves can attack out of stealth and lose that regen or they can sacrifice their offense and stay in stealth for the heals (sounds like current Adrenal Health, huh?). A warrior that heals when he gains adrenaline would never stop healing unless his adrenaline capped… at which point he could just dump it and keep healing.

Easier said then done.

Not really. People would gain so much survivability with the longbow and Cleansing Ire that they would be compulsory in any competitive build. 20 points in Defense and a longbow would ensure that you were always healing and cleansing condis. I know you have a lot of pride in your ideas, but sometimes other people have better ones. It’s better to get the community behind an idea that is sound than to try forcing something that is obviously flawed. Just my 2 cents. Have fun discussing, guys. It was fun.

Daecollo.9578:

Mmm, lets stick to the topic at hand.

@Veritas:
Yes, they would make those traits and skills better.

However, look at other classes, like the thief for example. They have many skills that stealth them. Their traits benefit from going into stealth like ours benefit from gaining adrenaline.

Why should we be punished. Why can’t we spec and make our traits synergy better with other traits?

Because we can generate adrenaline while being offensive and defensive. Thieves can attack out of stealth and lose that regen or they can sacrifice their offense and stay in stealth for the heals (sounds like current Adrenal Health, huh?). A warrior that heals when he gains adrenaline would never stop healing unless his adrenaline capped… at which point he could just dump it and keep healing.

Olba.5376:

Chrispytoast.3698:

BP should be replaced with…

Gain Might for every bar of adrenaline spent…
either 5 stacks for 1s…3s…7s
or 1…3…5 stacks for 10s

This follows the idea that warriors should spend adrenaline, not sit on it.

HF should change to

Gain Fury for every bar of adrenaline spent…
Fury for 2s…4s…8s…

I have to say, I prefer this idea over the others. Personally, I don’t use either of the traits, so I wouldn’t be losing any damage, but the PvE dungeon meta builds would, since they’re already at 25 stacks of Might and near-permanent Fury.

Thus, those meta builds would lose out completely. In fact, you could bet your kitten that the meta would shift to something like 20/20/0/10/20 or so.

Personally, as someone who lives and dies with my constant burst spam, I’d welcome such a change.

5/10/15% damage is quite a bit stronger than those might stacks. Not to mention 10 points in Tactics can net you an equal number of power with 100% uptime (Empower Allies). Additionally, there is no shortage of warriors running might stacking or boon duration builds… if you increase the stacks too much, you could hurt those builds because many of them are already capping might.

As for Fury, we have so much of it already that people complain about Arcing Slice on the GS and Dual Strike on OH Axe granting Fury. Imagine the outcry if a 30 point trait did the same thing.

Skamlic.8041:

Olba.5376:

Skamlic.8041:

Devs could add more damage to burst skills (or make them more useful). Then they can make BP and HF only to effect burst skills:
BP: Burst skill has 5%/10%/15% more damage while 1/2/3 bars of adrenaline.
HF: Burst skill has 5%/10%/15% more critical chance while 1/2/3 bars of adrenaline

I have to say no to both of those. Burst Mastery already gives +damage% to bursts. And we know what happened to Discipline the last time we had tons of +damage% on burst.

As for the Heightened Focus, there’s already a minor trait at 15 points into Arms that gives 10% crit to bursts, at all times.

Yeah, you’re right, but I could not think of anything better.

What about just flat +%dmg (BP) and +%crit. chance (HF) without any adrenaline at all? Lower values of course. I think this could work, they are grandmaster traits after all.

The only thing I’ve thought of to help with this is to have the current bonuses linger for maybe 3 to 5 seconds, but that could be pretty strong for fast adrenaline gaining builds… I don’t think these two traits are as much of an issue though. Strength and Discipline both have a Grand Master trait that work well in an adrenaline sitting build and bursting build… although I believe Berserker’s Might could use a buff or be changed completely. Maybe 1 adrenaline per second.

Chrispytoast.3698:

Chrispytoast.3698:

Lower the HPS for each tier of AH and add on the healing per bar spent. Current builds using AH would still benefit from holding onto their adrenaline but builds that need to burst would get a healing benefit.

Veritas.6071:

Just for the record, I like Adrenal Health how it is currently, but I understand everyone’s frustration. I believe gaining health when you gain a strike of adrenaline won’t work because you effectively turn:

Signet of Rage
Berserker’s Stance
Berserker’s Might
Inspiring Shouts
Furious
Sharpened Axes
Cleansing Ire

Into traits/utilities that increase the rate of healing, and in some cases, they would be capable of functioning as an additional heal. If anything, I would hope we see something like:

Regenerate health based on adrenaline level(reduced). Gain health per bar of adrenaline spent.

That isn’t exactly what the bursters want, but we achieve a few things:
-We avoid making adrenaline gaining traits/utilities OP.
-The passive reduction allows some healing to be added (on burst) without drastically increasing the trait’s healing per second.
-We gain synergy with Cleansing Ire and frequent burst use.

I would also recommend changing the passive to heal every second instead of every 3. That way, bursters milk as much healing as possible in the time between when they hit that first full bar and use their burst.

Yay, someone else agrees with the idea I had earlier

Haha sorry. I didn’t want to hijack your idea. This thread is over 70 posts… I just couldn’t read every single one.

Just for the record, I like Adrenal Health how it is currently, but I understand everyone’s frustration. I believe gaining health when you gain a strike of adrenaline won’t work because you effectively turn:

Signet of Rage
Berserker’s Stance
Berserker’s Might
Inspiring Shouts
Furious
Sharpened Axes
Cleansing Ire

Into traits/utilities that increase the rate of healing, and in some cases, they would be capable of functioning as an additional heal. If anything, I would hope we see something like:

Regenerate health based on adrenaline level(reduced). Gain health per bar of adrenaline spent.

That isn’t exactly what the bursters want, but we achieve a few things:
-We avoid making adrenaline gaining traits/utilities OP.
-The passive reduction allows some healing to be added (on burst) without drastically increasing the trait’s healing per second.
-We gain synergy with Cleansing Ire and frequent burst use.

I would also recommend changing the passive to heal every second instead of every 3. That way, bursters milk as much healing as possible in the time between when they hit that first full bar and use their burst.

I don’t think we’ll see a change like this, but I’d be blown away if we saw something like in the OP. Berserker’s Stance with a burst in the middle would be a 3 bar heal, burst heal, 3 bar heal in an 8 second period. Healing Shouts would be tremendously effective when mixed with Inspiring Shouts. Furious and Axe Mastery would be as bad as Omnoms were. SoR would be a 3 bar heal followed by a burst heal on a short CD. Cleansing Ire would make you not even want to attack a warrior… his heals would go into overdrive, he’d burst you to clear condis and heal again in the process, then rinse and repeat. There are just too many powerful side effects resulting from the OP.

I suggest you guys all get behind an idea that is mutually beneficial and kick and scream together against Anet instead of against each other.

Their site makes me think they moved to Darkfall. You could poke around there, and maybe a few of them are still lingering in GW2.

Coldtart.4785:

Depending on how you measure them you could say every stat has diminishing returns. If you average 20 strikes to kill something at attack x then you average 10 strikes to kill that same thing at attack 2x and 5 strikes to kill at attack 4x, but when measured as damage dealt per strike it’s a linear increase.

It’s the same with armour. If your effective hp is 20k at armour y then it’s 30k at armour 1.5y and 40k at armour 2y.

212700/2127 armor= 100
212700/4254 armor= 50
212700/8508 armor= 25

So ignore that percentages have even been mentioned. The first 2127 additional armor stops 50 damage. The next 4254 armor only stops 25 damage.

With power, we see identical returns per point added:

1000 weapon damage x 1 power x .6 skill coefficient = 600 damage
1000 weapon damage x 2 power x .6 skill coefficient = 1200 damage
1000 weapon damage x 3 power x .6 skill coefficient = 1800 damage

Power scales linearly.

Toughness doesn’t.

If you think about how division works (dividend/divisor=quotient), as you increase your divisor, your quotient will become smaller and approach 0 at slower and slower rate. When dealing with positive numbers (like we do in GW2 damage calculation), the quotient will never become 0. Therefore, no amount of toughness will ever create a quotient of 0 (100% damage mitigation).

As we saw here:

212700/2127 armor= 100
212700/4254 armor= 50
212700/8508 armor= 25

Even assuming identical incoming damage, you can’t add X toughness and always stop Y damage. Therefore, toughness does not scale linearly and, in fact, gives less return as you stack it higher.

But here:

1000 weapon damage x 1 power x .6 skill coefficient = 600 damage
1000 weapon damage x 2 power x .6 skill coefficient = 1200 damage
1000 weapon damage x 3 power x .6 skill coefficient = 1800 damage

We saw that, assuming the same weapon damage and coefficient seen here, 1 power will provide 600 additional damage every time, and therefore scales linearly.

Yet another hijacked thread. If you want more clarification, PM me.

You made no mention of traits or skill rotations. I’m getting the feeling you could have set up this comparison more fairly.

Yaki.9563:

BurrTheKing.8571:

Yaki.9563:

BurrTheKing.8571:

they made toughness only useful up to a point, you see diminishing returns before long.

When will people stop with this ignorance?

When it stops being true? The math is in and no amount of toughness makes up for Protection.

And why should it? They aren’t mutually exclusive. Toughness is a weak stat but that doesn’t mean it scales as poorly as people think. You’re just spouting off some junk some random stated with ignorant confidence on the forum, and you took it for gospel.

I guess this is applicable here too:

100 total damage/ 2 armor = 50 damage received

Now, to half our damage, we must double armor.
100/4 = 25

And it stays true,
100/8 = 12.5
100/16=6.25
100/32=3.125
100/64=1.5625

So, our first added 2 armor reduced damage by 50%, in this case, 25 damage. The next 4 armor only stopped 12.5 damage, again 50% but only 12.5 damage. Double the investment, half as much damage stopped. The first 2 points of armor reduced damage by 25% each. The next four reduced damage by 12.5% each. And as we see above, it continues to decrease damage by 50% but 50% of the previous number gets progressively smaller.

But does the math stay true in another example? Let’s look.
1000000/2 = 500000
1000000/4 = 250000
50% decrease; 250000 more damage mitigated
1000000/8 = 125000
Another 50% decrease; only 125000 more damage mitigated

And a more applicable example:
212700/2127 armor= 100
212700/4254 armor= 50
212700/8508 armor= 25

Yep, as we see here, the more toughness you add, the less effective the next point becomes.

Protection on a full glass cannon warrior is equal to:
212700/X=67
multiply the X across and divide by 67
212700/67=X
3174 final armor=X
-2127 base armor
Protection=1047 toughness

Protection on someone with 1000 toughness(3127 armor):

212700/3127= 68% damage taken
68-33 = 35% damage taken
212700/X=35
212700/35=X
6077 final armor=X
-2127 base armor
Protection=3950 toughness

If you want more clarification, feel free to PM me.

Yaki.9563:

Veritas.6071:

An example of poor scaling would be toughness:
+100 gives +4.5% mitigation or .045% mitigation per point on average
+500 gives +19.04% mitigation or .038% mitigation per point on average
+900 gives +29.74% mitigation or .033% mitigation per point on average

^^^This is an example of poor scaling. Each point of toughness provides less mitigation than the last.

You are making a common mistake in failing to recognize that each percent of damage reduction or increase is not the same. As an extreme example, if you went from 99% damage reduction to 100% damage reduction that would an enormous difference (a boss could hit you for 1000000000000000000000000000000 damage but you would take 0) while going from 0% to 1% damage reduction is negligible.

Each percentage point of damage reduction is worth more than the previous one. And just the opposite, each percentage point of damage increase is worth less than the previous one.

Toughness does have some slight scaling issues, but it’s not because the percent reduction appears to diminish (it should, to retain linear damage reduction) but because it is added to armor meaning it already starts out worth less per point than it should be. Either power should be added to weapon damage or toughness should not be added to armor (and armor would reduce damage separately).

I’m not exactly sure what you are saying, but here is an easy to see example:

100 total damage/ 2 armor = 50 damage received

Now, to half our damage, we must double armor.

100/4 = 25

And it stays true,

100/8 = 12.5
100/16=6.25
100/32=3.125
100/64=1.5625

So, our first added 2 armor reduced damage by 50%, in this case, 25 damage. The next 4 armor only stopped 12.5 damage, again 50% but only 12.5 damage. Double the investment, half as much damage stopped. The first 2 points of armor reduced damage by 25% each. The next four reduced damage by 12.5% each. And as we see above, it continues to decrease damage by 50% but 50% of the previous number gets progressively smaller.

But does the math stay true in another example? Let’s look.

1000000/2 = 500000

1000000/4 = 250000
50% decrease; 250000 more damage mitigated

1000000/8 = 125000
Another 50% decrease; only 125000 more damage mitigated

And a more applicable example:
212700/2127 armor= 100
212700/4254 armor= 50
212700/8508 armor= 25

Yep, as we see here, the more toughness you add, the less effective the next point becomes.

And we’ve successfully hijacked the thread. I don’t have anything else left to say. If you want more clarification, feel free to PM me.

For entertainment purposes =)
———-
http://youtu.be/RRnwIi6qr2w?t=6m39s

Some parts aren’t so impressive, but it shows how well coordinated Guardians can anchor a zerg.

This is what coordinated warriors can do.

Yaki.9563:

Veritas.6071:

Fenrir.5493:

Healing signet scales terrible with healing power, tha only thing that scales a bit better is adrenal health, regen is another one that scales a bit better, but healing signet nope.

To find how a heal scales, you divide its coefficient by how often you receive healing from that source.
Stage 3 Healing Surge: 1.5/30 =.05
Healing Signet: .05
Adrenal Health: .15/3 =.05
They all scale the same.

Scaling refers to how much the heal improves relative to its base value. Something that heals for 9000 with a coefficient of 1 scales far worse than something that heals for 200 with a coefficient of 1. Healing surge and healing signet are big heals, so those coefficients give them poor scaling relative to adrenal health which is a small heal.

This is different than power, which scales properly across the board.

I understand that argument, but damage in this game is always:

Health – Damage + Healing = Live or Die

What is important is that your healing can outpace the incoming damage. For achieving that, the addition of healing power functions the same in both Healing Signet and Adrenal Health.

Sure, you can say, “Oh, well 1000 healing power will increase my healing per second by 1.38% with Adrenal Health and 1.27% with Healing Signet.” But, as stated before, the formula for death is just Health – Damage + Healing = Whatever… So your goal is to simply increase your Healing/Second in hopes of outpacing damage. By what percentage you are increasing your healing isn’t of great relevance unless you are using it to gain perspective on exactly what you are gaining or losing. An example would be, “Do I run this clerics or soldiers? Hmmm okay, well I gain 3% healing per second but I lose 10% damage… doesn’t sound like a good deal.” And even those values should be taken with a grain of salt.

An example of poor scaling would be toughness:
+100 gives +4.5% mitigation or .045% mitigation per point on average
+500 gives +19.04% mitigation or .038% mitigation per point on average
+900 gives +29.74% mitigation or .033% mitigation per point on average

^^^This is an example of poor scaling. Each point of toughness provides less mitigation than the last.

Assuming a .05 coefficient
+100 gives 5 health per second or .05 health per second per 1 point
+500 gives 25 health per second or .05 health per second per 1 point
+900 45 health per second or .05 health per second per 1 point

^^^Healing power, like power, scales linearly. 1 point gives the same thing, every single time.

Here, I’ll just do the math.

Healing Signet 0 healing power: 392 hp/sec
Healing Signet 1000 healing power: (392((.05)(1000)) = 442 hp/sec

442 – 392 = 50 hp per sec gained with 1000 healing power

Adrenal Health 0 healing power: 360 hp/3 sec
Adrenal Health 1000 healing power: (360((.15)(1000)) = 510 hp/3 sec

510 – 360 = 150 hp gained per 3 sec with 1000 healing power
or
150/3 = 50 hp gained per second with 1000 healing power

Fenrir.5493:

Healing signet scales terrible with healing power, tha only thing that scales a bit better is adrenal health, regen is another one that scales a bit better, but healing signet nope.

To find how a heal scales, you divide its coefficient by how often you receive healing from that source.
Stage 3 Healing Surge: 1.5/30 =.05
Healing Signet: .05
Adrenal Health: .15/3 =.05
They all scale the same.

Fenrir.5493:

Veritas.6071:

Fenrir.5493:

Healing signet scales poorly with healing power, the thing that scales good is adrenal health but guess… you need to stay full adrenaline for it to work.

To find how a heal scales, you divide its coefficient by how often you receive healing from that source.

Stage 3 Healing Surge: 1.5/30 =.05
Healing Signet: .05
Adrenal Health: .15/3 =.05

They all scale the same.

Try them with health power and with no heal power in game, you will see what i am saying.

They each utilize 5% of your healing power/second. Therefore, they all increase by the same value per second per 100 healing power. They all “scale” the same.

Jzaku.9765:

I’m quite curious as to it suddenly becoming regarded as “better than it was” because there were no changes to it(?)

This is a really good point. I’m not on one side or the other when it comes to shout builds, but there weren’t any changes to them; unless you count the increase to base healing and improved scaling on Healing Signet and Healing Surge. I guess being able to say up longer combined with better scaling on those two heals provides more incentive to run healing shouts because you get more opportunities to use them, and cleric gear has better synergy with the build through the actual heal. Seems to me like warriors got stronger, and shouts just came along for the ride, but the same can be said for any other tool we have. I think it’s a good support option, but I’m a selfish player.

I also agree that shout builds lack the individual utility of many of our other skills. FGJ is one-dimensional. SiO isn’t as bad if you aren’t using it in a stun breaking role because it allows you to free up the shout to act as a heal/condi removal, but in a stun breaking role, I don’t think you want to be spamming the thing, so it loses utility. OMM is another one-dimensional shout. The heals are nice, but when compared to our other options for healing, there are definitely more efficient choices for individual survivability. As far as group survivability, they are obviously very strong.

Drek Thalon.5490:

You don’t have 100% crit in pvp.

The OH sword exists outside sPvP, and because that was never specified, there was no reason to assume we were talking about only 1 game type.

Drek Thalon.5490:

Veritas.6071:

winshmo.7896:

No one other than condi builds would use offhand sword and when they do they’re sacrificing a lot of damage negation for that.

This is not true. Offhand sword has the best direct damage burst available to any offhand in the form of Rip. It is also very capable of performing in a defensive role.

No one uses offhand sword for anything other than condition damage. And even then it is still a toss up because you are losing amazing utility from the shield.

If you are wasting 1.25sec to do 1k damage with an Impale Rip combo then you are doing it wrong. Sorry mate. You are way better off using your offhand for utility.

Torment scales at .0375 or .075. That means, you get ~4 dps on a stationary opponent and ~8 dps on one that is moving per 100 condition damage. The only condition which scales at a lesser rate is bleeding (confusion is equal). That isn’t stellar but it isn’t terrible.

Meanwhile, in my power build, I get the base Torment tics of ~32/~63(ignoring my condi damage) and my Rip hits for:

(952 avg weapon damage) * 1915 Power * (1.92 skill coefficient) (2.5 crit modifier) (1.15 % damage) / (2600 target’s Armor) = 3870 Damage

-I used the crit modifier because I have 100% crit

And that’s at the time I decide to pull it out. I don’t Impale and immediately Rip, so I’m not dealing with a 1.25 second rotation.

It’s totally fine if you don’t like the skills that the weapon brings, but I just wanted to show readers your assessment isn’t exactly accurate.

Fenrir.5493:

Healing signet scales poorly with healing power, the thing that scales good is adrenal health but guess… you need to stay full adrenaline for it to work.

To find how a heal scales, you divide its coefficient by how often you receive healing from that source.

Stage 3 Healing Surge: 1.5/30 =.05
Healing Signet: .05
Adrenal Health: .15/3 =.05

They all scale the same.

The reason they reversed Arcing Slice changes was because they said many builds would be sacrificing damage to get damage (ie. losing Berserker’s Power/Heightened Focus to gain Fury and Might). However, that was when both traits were Adept tier. With them being moved to Grand Master, I think the conflict still exists but to a much lesser degree. Arcing Slice being changed to provide good duration on Fury and multiple Might stacks could be a valid option now. That change in addition to our increased mobility in Discipline and Arms trees would greatly reduce player reliance upon SoR and maybe open up some builds to work in the Battle Standard or Rampage. But this is a video game so the options are limitless. I never would have guessed they’d overhaul our heals the way they did, so I have no doubt there is some equally awesome idea coming down the pipe.

I don’t think when he says “scenarios” he is drawing a line between PvP and PvE. I think he means to say individual encounters. In PvE, it’s easy to walk into any fight and win, but in PvP, some sets put you at an inherent disadvantage in certain situations. I think what he’s saying is that it isn’t their goal to give everyone an equal shot at winning… it’s their goal to give everyone an equal shot at succeeding in whatever area they choose and leaving it up to the player to force those situations.

Zagerus.8675:

Maybe that’s just them becoming more in line with the Greatsword though.

I think this is spot on. One of the possible causes of GS having a presence in most PvP builds is a lack of adequate balance against other weapons. GS is still a very strong weapon, but with the Hammer aftercast reductions and addition of Final Thrust, other weapons are beginning to see more use, which is a good thing.

As far as Arcing Slice moving to the #2 slot, keep in mind that you wouldn’t be getting up to 15 seconds of Fury from that skill. It could end up looking more like Dual Strike on the Axe; which as we all know, doesn’t get much love from the community. Also, 100b IS the strength of the GS. It doesn’t have great sustained damage. It has great mobility and great burst on a controlled target. By making 100b less accessible, you are reducing GS’s overall effectiveness.

winshmo.7896:

How about the viability of sword as a off hand using other main hand weapons besides sword. Why would they take the offhand sword when other offhands have better utilities (even axe is a more famous offhand). I’ve yet to see others use it in conjunction with say, mh mace or axe.

People take it because they want a mix of burst with the ability to be somewhat defensive. Until yesterday, Shield and Warhorn did a lot to make up for most builds’ lack of sustain. Now that we will be more durable, people will be more willing to explore different offhands. OH mace is more popular because its CC helps setup things like Final Thrust and Eviscerate. I’m not sure why you think OH axe is more popular unless you are referring to PvE where it is used to fill Fury gaps and build Adrenaline.

If you look at the “big 3” offhands, Mace, Shield, Warhorn, they all addressed one or more of the issues that warriors had in the past(and may still have); CCing a target to setup a control chain or burst, spike avoidance, condi removal. It isn’t that the OH Sword is less viable than these three; it’s that it fills a role less commonly needed by the majority of warrior builds; good damage and medium defense. Most warriors will get their high damage from setting up 100b, Final Thrust, Eviscerate, or a hammer chain. That leaves them to get their defense and added control from Mace, Shield, or Warhorn. Offhand sword is an incredibly flexible offhand, but it’s medium defense and lack of CC, currently, make it less popular, but there will always be a “less popular”… and “less popular” doesn’t = nonviable.