Guild Wars 2

With all the completely new F2P accounts, achievement points can actually be a decent gauge on how your matchmaking is. You can add (and remove after you are done) just to quantify how many people are new off your team, and your opponents. I’ve actually stopped playing unranked completely because there are often completely new players mixed into the pool, both on the enemy team, and on my own.

I’d personally recommend playing unranked if you are new, and just keep in mind confirmation bias. Sure you might run into tryhards 5man pre-mading sometimes. Just focus on how you can potentially improve if people are still committed to the match. If other people start afking, it might be better to solicit the other team to ask if they want to arrange duels for the rest of the matches duration.

Wolfey.3407:

With the exception of 2-3 people who are contributing and making a good points… the majority of this thread seems to be along the lines of:

My build I got from YouTube or Twitch doesn’t work anymore against rangers!

or

My build I got from ____ WTS champion isn’t working as well against rangers!!!

or

I can’t afk smash rangers by pressing 1 (or 2 for some classes) any more! ranger be broken and op!

---

There are some legitimate issues that need to be addressed, but in no way does this make ranger OP…. the tournaments alone prove time after time (sings a song) that Rangers aren’t OP….

There does need to be a mechanism to dodge or counter it. Maybe even decrease the range of Taunt by a few points.

I think the range is short enough as is. 240 is about the radius of an engineer bomb which was brought up from 180 if I recall correctly. Really, the only thing that needs to be changed is that it shouldn’t pull you out of evades. They fixed the issue of it pulling people out of invulnerable (or at least for renewed focus). Unblockable skills exist, so pulling people out of blocks is fine, as long as on the trait it describes it as “Unblockable”. I would not mind more counterplay against stuff like Shelter. It just needs to be clarified. Going through blinds… I haven’t personally done enough tests with other skills that are similar to comment on this (aoe CC like Fear Me, etc.)

Pulling out of evades is what makes the skill completely broken though, as the main reactive defensive mechanic a player can use is dodging, and not being able to proactively react to a skill that you know is coming (eg. pet swap F2) is annoying. Sure you can save a stunbreak/instant condition cleanse, but the effects of beastly warden taunt application just do not seem to adhere to the rest of gw2’s combat design.

Zev.3407:

Theres more than just rangers getting taunt now, but i actually have never had an issue with pets taunting me lol(i didnt even though they could)

Rev gets taunt too and i love it lol, some people just have issues when things are new and they don’t know how to counter yet.

I will probably need to test around with Jallis more, but I believe the application of this taunt can be avoided through conventional means (dodge roll, block etc.), which I will probably be able to now that Mallyx is dead.

By rank points… are you referring to the rank level tied to the finishers (bunny→dragon)? In short, yes. They have been made much easier, sometime two or so years ago. I don’t have the detailed numbers, but they normalized the requirements so that anyone who pvp’s regularly is a dragon now, as opposed to …. pvping for 10 years and finally getting dragon. Ranked and Unranked matches both contribute to the champion title.

Ranked Level does not matter in pvp at all.

hopefully anet realizes that people are upset about the changes they’ve made to demon stance. The displacement was unique, and removing it completely ruins the fun of Mallyx.

Wow. they just made mallyx stance useless. Unique Mechanic now ruined.

Zatoichi.1049:

Guys, if you can dodge the f2, you can dodge the Taunt. The only F2s that are difficult to dodge are birds, cuz birds are very sticky, and bird f2s are the closest thing we have to an instant f2, thus the Taunt and attack happen AT THE SAME TIME. Predict and dodge f2, dodge the Taunt, cuz they are simultaneous.

The F2 activates at the start of the cast, that is why it is used with birds, you get taunted, and the bird can guarantee the hit. In addition the taunt will pull you out of your evade if you are in range of it; don’t believe me, do some tests with a friend who has a ranger in a custom arena. Currently the ONLY way to avoid taunt is to be out of range of the pet when it uses the f2 skill, which is hard to do, since it activates at the start of the f2 cast

Cynz.9437:

my only issue with it is that it is unavoidable….
and can’t be blinded :/

This. Often you can see it coming, but aside from getting out of the 240 radius range, you just can’t avoid it. See them pet swap in melee? Try to dodge, get taunted. Extremely frustrating.

Sigmoid.7082:

@Alemfi
" they changed the mechanics of condition removal from FIFO to random, making the notion of “covering” conditions less reliable."

From the Wiki on Conditions

For generic condition removal, the most recently applied condition or conditions will be removed first.

Its only boon and condition conversion that is random as of June 23rd patch

Boon to condition conversion and condition to boon conversion has been standardized and is functionality changed. Skills that convert boons and conditions now randomly select from all boons and conditions on the target.

Woops thanks for the correction

The Wizland.8435:

I think it’s already different enough. Burning is a bursty condition that requires less condi damage investment. Bleeding is more of an attrition condition that can be reliably and easily applied. Or at least, that’s what it’s supposed to be, but as is burning is too easy to stack.
That’s not to say I dislike the suggestions here. I just don’t think they’re necessary.

That is a fair analysis. In fact, earlier yesterday morning, I decided to do a few tests to see exactly how high burning/bleeding could be stacked, and how much damage they would tick for. Due to my being slow with the keyboard, I missed out on a few stacks, however I hit 46 stacks of bleeding (could have been 52, but I forgot the trap) ticking for 4712 on my ranger, while on my guardian, I hit 15 (which could have been 17 or 18 if I was faster with my keyboard), and ticking for 6695. The bleeds appeared to be able to linger longer, so one could argue that given this information they are “balanced” between each other.

If bleeding is designed mostly to just be a cover condition, I personally could also be consider that interesting design, however, during the whole condition revamp, they changed the mechanics of condition removal from FIFO to random, making the notion of “covering” conditions less reliable.

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

This is intended as discussion on how to make the conditions different, not how they function now. Right now no one builds condition builds for bleeding, b/c bleeding is just inferior to burning.

Also, according to the wiki:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bleeding
Bleeding has a .06 damage coefficient from Condition Damage.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Burning
Burning has a 0.155 damage coefficient from Condition damage.

So Burning is currently benefitting MORE from condition damage investment than Bleed. Bleeding just has REALLY LOW base damage, 22, as opposed to Burning’s 131.5.

That would be true if we consider stack per stack reference but conditions skills can apply conditions in multiple stacks and durations. So the only ‘valid’ reference is the ratio between base damage and scaling.

And unfortunately our current meta has shown that it’s quite easy to stack relatively high amounts of burning. Numbers are something that can always be adjusted, granted for an MMO there are a LOT of numbers. I know that there existed plenty of builds in the past that were able to stack 25+ stacks of bleeding by themselves, so yes, bleed is definitely more accessible then than burning often capping around 12-15 stacks of burning solo (from what I’ve experimented with). The point still stands that these two conditions are simply not very unique compared to torment (DOT that is enhanced when punishing movement) and confusion (DOT that is enhanced when punishing many skill casts), or even Blind vs Confusion (good against one big attack, punishes several small attacks) and Aegis vs Retaliation (Good against one big hit, Good against several small hits), and that Burning is just a condition that is Bleeding’s “Big Brother”.

Silverkey.2078:

What about burning is the only condition which can crit (the crit procs on application, not on each tick). This way it can remain as powerful as it is, but require full stat investment (condi damage, precision, power or ferocity depending on hybrid or full condi) to be strong.

That would certainly differentiate the condition; however, it sounds like unique tech that isn’t currently supported in the game. Granted, I suppose the same could be said for the “Contagious” idea, above, but that one sounded really fitting for the idea of things on fire, haha.

Silverthorn.8576:

This is too easy to stack burning, so nerf this and make it works like GW1 desease (contagious).

I have not played GW1, so I am unfamiliar with the concept of Disease. However based on your wording about Contagious, I assume it implies the the condition would propagate to nearby players. Was it possible for them to propagate the condition back? I feel like this would make the burning stacks get WAY out of control, however I am probably misunderstanding how the behavior is supposed to work. It would be interesting though. Since IRL, things on fire generally tend to set other things that are nearby on fire. That’s actually quite an interesting idea, I like it!

Tim.6450:

alemfi.5107:

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

I hope you are joking right? right????

I mean if you look at the base damage / divided the scaling you will realize that burning needs 848 condition damage to double it’s damage and for bleeding 367. This means that burning has a much lower scaling compared to it’s base then bleeding.

This is intended as discussion on how to make the conditions different, not how they function now. Right now no one builds condition builds for bleeding, b/c bleeding is just inferior to burning.

Also, according to the wiki:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bleeding
Bleeding has a .06 damage coefficient from Condition Damage.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Burning
Burning has a 0.155 damage coefficient from Condition damage.

So Burning is currently benefitting MORE from condition damage investment than Bleed. Bleeding just has REALLY LOW base damage, 22, as opposed to Burning’s 131.5.

Right now, [Bleeding] is basically just really bad [Burning], or the other way around that [Burning] is just [Bleeding] on steroids.

This is —- kinda boring. I wanted to bring up discussion on how we could make these two conditions different. This is NOT a “BURNING IS OPOPIE!”. The numbers currently definitely could use adjustment, however I want to keep this a constructive discussion on how we the devs can make these two conditions different and FUN.

Two ideas I had.
First: Make Bleeding a condition that requires minimal Condition investment. “High” Base Damage, Poor Condition Damage Scaling. Burning is a condition that has the reverse properties, Low Base Damage, High Condition Damage Scaling. This allows builds that have both (Engies, Eles) to build in two different ways, One could go for power, and try to accentuate their damage with Bleed, while the other can go all out on Condition burst with Burning, while using bleeds as a cover condition.
The only thing that I kinda feel miffed about if this was to happen is that Necromancers generally speaking have bleed as a primary condition, and can only get burning through dhuumfire, while guardians are basically all about burning. Thematically it is just a bit strange for a necromancer to build primarily for power, and a guardian to build for condition. Maybe that’s just me though.

Second: This one is just a silly idea. Basically… what are you taught at a young age when you are on fire? Stop, Drop, and (Dodge) Roll! Dodge Roll could… I dunno remove 1-3 stacks of burning or something. I know their is already a trait that removes burning through dodge roll. Such a missed opportunity. But anyways, this was just a silly idea.

Regarding the original topic. It’s not bad design to have low skill rewarding competitive elements in the game. This video sums up the general idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w

I saw a suggestion in the other forum on this topic that was about swapping the effects of Unyielding Anguish, so that it pulses torment, and only applies the displacement during the initial cast of the skill. I think this would alleviate the issues of no counterplay.

This was beautiful.

Regarding Unrelenting Assault. I may need to confirm this during the next beta, but I recall interrupting it while on my greatsword ranger using the 4 skill to block and then interrupt.

nearlight.3064:

You are very unlikely to have both of these skills on the same build, unless you ran a strange celestial glint/Mallyx build with sword, which I doubt is a highly viable build.

Secondly I beleive that unyielding anguish should be slightly reworked to only displace on the initial leap and cast of the field, but it should displace someone a bit farther away. Afterwards the field should persist and pulse torment based on how many conditions the revenant has, but shouldn’t displace anymore. Simply put the field is too good for displacement of classes without teleports, but the condi pressure is a tad weak.

Been running these two since Shiro was first introduced. This was back when ooc swapping legends didn’t have a cooldown. So you could super speed all the way to an enemy controlled point, and steal it.

After playing with it during the last beta weekend, it’s still really strong, if not stronger, as they added evade frames to the sword main. I needed to plus one your suggestion about swapping the effects on unyielding anguish:

Initial Displacement.
Pulsing Torment.

This would make the skill less broken, and give opponents control on whether they want to contest the point and stack torment on themselves, or to wait til the field is gone.

It’ll probably be broken as all hell, but we’ll see.

Still haven’t gotten a red post acknowledging this bug, probably need to post it on the bug forums/ attach a short test clip demonstrating it (not a big fan of twitch vods myself).

It’s a new and annoying feature.

Short answer: increase of afkers to get their daily.

PlatinumMember.5274:

Oh look at another person proven to be “mistaken”.

I know, right? It’s pretty hilarious to see people make hyperbolic claims, only to get shut down by the dev team with the actual statistics and numbers. People like to blame losses on anything that is not themselves, and the easiest thing to point to now is “lack of soloq” and “premades”.

On a different note, it would be nice to see more statistics, like “results of last X games played”.

/15character bump.

Anyone else encounter this?

Animation bug preventing other skill usage while an asura is using fgs auto attack.

It’s been months now, asura still can not break FGS auto attack to use their other fgs skills.

Patchi.9061:

D/D ele might be the strongest pick but lets not forget what would rise to power as they get nerfed.

Cele signet necros is one that worries me the most.
All I am saying is let’s not be one dimensional and nerf one class at a time but actually BALANCE the game by actually asking for a buff/nerf for multiple classes.

Apparently you don’t understand what makes necros strong (against celeddele). Necros in general are a reactive class, as opposed to a proactive class. They are strong against proactive classes that create a large number of boons on themselves, that the necro can react to and corrupt. Necros are strong against proactive condi classes that spam condis, as the necro can then convert it to health, transfer it back etc. Necro won’t get out of hand because their strength is currently reactive, rather than proactive (see old dumbfire). Necros also don’t have punishing tools against proactive crowd control (they can trait for ds as a stun breaker, but that is only defensive reactively, and does not punish the person ccing).

Yashuoa.9527:

Akikaze.1307:

Yashuoa.9527:

Akikaze.1307:

Yashuoa.9527:

Necrotize.2974:

While in Heart of the Mists, there should be two little icons in the top center of your screen. One that looks like the PvP icon(crossed swords) and another that looks like a helmet. Click the helmet and it should take you to your PvP build tab where you can change traits, amulets, runes and sigils.

The helmet is on the left side of the double crossed swords?
It says it will be unlocked at lvl 31.
Is that the one?

Or do you mean a helmet on the map?

The helmet is located at the top centre of the screen.
Refer the screenshot I attached.

Yeah I just found out.

Its in the center.

It shows amulets, sigils etc. but no gear like hatpiece, shoulders etc.
Where to obtain the gear?

Whilst in the Heart of the Mist (HotM), you don’t need any specific gears equipped for stats, they are obtained from amulets/runes/sigils. However you do need a chest, pants and boots piece equipped to get the armour values. Those specific pieces can be any level or grade, therefore even the starter gear would work.

Similarly for weapons, it can be any grade/level and should give the full attack values. You can purchase the NPC ones if you choose to use other weapon sets.

Okay so you gain different gear looks from doing pve dungeons and such and from unlocking stuff in pvp?

Meaning if you enter HotM as a new player at lvl 3, than you will be equal gearwise to everyone else, but your looks will just be starter gear look for a while, until you get different gear.

Yes. /15chars

GLHF!

The re-implementation of queuing outside of Heart of the Mists is definitely a needed feature. I think concerns for long map loading times are not really the biggest issues… they already can notify players when they have been removed from the queue, it’s a risk players take when they transition maps.

Not sure if intended, and spirit watch is not a ranked map rotation, but it was loads of fun running mallyx/shiro. Mallyx forces orb drop with unyielding anguish, steal orb, switch to shiro and use impossible odds for superspeed to cap the orb.

Also, Shiro Impossible Odds allows for almost permanent OOC super speed.

Had a lot of fun when I finally got to play the beta Sunday afternoon.

I found revenant to be quite powerful this beta actually.
The added weapon swap definitely improved things massively.

Weapons: Staff/Mace-Sword
- Staff has a block on 3, sword has a block on 4.

Legends: Mallyx/Shiro
Shiro: Permanent OOC superspeed.
Mallyx: Unyielding Anguish allows you to decap/cap points easily.

Specialization Lines: Corruption, Retribution, and Invocation.

Was not the biggest fan of the Shiro heal, but other than that, I had a great time with revenant.

When are you using them, what class are you using?

For the most part, unless you are playing a thief or an engineer, you have many options to deal with conditions, if that is what you are having the most trouble with.

You mentioned fighting two players at the same time, 2v1, you shouldn’t expect to win, basic math.

Are you making sure to be selective about which conditions to remove? For the most part, bleeding/poison (until you need to heal) isn’t too threatening, burn/chill can be a strong priority to remove, etc.

Random Weird Guy.3528:

They do post sometimes and no they don’t get people to post for them (as far as I’m aware). The thing is that the vast majority of people who moan on the forums aren’t actually that good at the game and would rather moan about things than figure out how to deal with them properly.

Couldn’t have said it better myself!

Every so often you’ll see a post from someone on a competitive team. The thing is, most of the people who post are actually forum warriors, rather than people who actually play the game (well), so it can be a bit difficult to find. I don’t think this is particular to Guildwars 2 either, I rarely see streamers post to Hearthstone, another casually competitive game I follow/play.

mistsim.2748:

ive come to conclude that a good power ranger is better than a rampage zerker warrior in every single way. we have more survivability, our sustained damage is higher, roaming is as good, cc is better with beastly warden, and we have much more burst compared to a zerker warrior who’s not in Rampage. Rampage is also too easy to counterplay. I think other players are also starting to realize this.

thoughts?

SSSHHHH we are trying to keep it on the down low here. Let every one keep thinking warrior is op.

Anet should really create some sort of indication in vendors for items that cannot be salvaged. I just wasted 6 gold buying a heavy settler’s gear with runes of strength on it from southsun vendor , and now it’s soulbound on my ranger… and I can’t redeem the rune of strength.

Thanks Annette.

I feel like this skill should really only trigger if you are in combat. I find it really irritating that it triggers whenever you switch kits, which is useful to get swiftness, but now you put the combat portion of it on cooldown. It’s just clunky.

Lexiceta.4156:

Wait you drop supply without having supply? This seems like it could be very easily abused.

Only while dieing in the enemy’s base.

Dahkeus.8243:

Slapinator.4196:

How is it possible that this amulet makes every build so forgiving with the same benefits almost like marauder or berserker along with condis and healing power.I don’t think that eles or engis or whatever is overpowered this cancer (celestial amulet) has absolutely no balance at all compared to the rest of stats. Build diversity is not all about traits but about stats as well…

Yea, pretty much the conclusion I think a lot of people are coming to, particularly since only 1 class is really worth calling OP while using a cele amulet right now (ele).

Engineers are balanced at best with cele (some might argue underpowered), but even TCG’s engineer ran with Soldier’s over Cele in the last EU tourney and shoutbow is pretty a shadow of its former self post-patch.

I think you might have misunderstood him because of his poor english.
The way that I read this, is that OP believes Celestial Amulet is Overpowered, claiming it is competitive with Zerker and Marauder in terms of damage, but allows the user to have defense as well.

This was arguably relatively true prior to the June 23rd patch.

In my opinion, there really ought to be more variants (particularly for condition builds) similar to Marauder, mostly specialized, but splashing in a fourth statline for the justification of more stats over the baseline 3000, (marauders is 3220, from what I remember).

Laserbolt.6731:

How does a MM necro win without minions (since the ele killed them all)?

And who says MM is the most viable Necromancer build? I still have qualms against Anet’s design decisions regarding many Necro changes (chilling darkness being the latest concern), but they’ve opened up other avenues for necros to explore, the latest being boon corruption options: signets, axe3, on top of existing corruptions such as the well, ds2, corrupt boon etc. It’s easy for necros to eat guardians and eles, particularly b/c of burn condi transfers and boon corruption.

Dissatisfied that Anet is pushing us into this niche ONLY, but it’s still a powerful and specific niche limited to necros.

Rizo.9534:

We don’t think that rangers are bad. We just know if we’ll agree that rangers can do damage, then it will be nerfed for shore.

Haha ah, right, gotcha. I don’t usually main ranger, so I don’t feel the hits as much, but now that you mention it… anytime ranger poked into the meta, anet did take out the hammer.

(Traps, Pets, Spirits, Possibly PewPew)

Apparently my post was deleted because I quoted/reprimanded someone that was giving anet a hard time. Anyways, thought I’d express my appreciation for the Behind Enemy Lines and Overtime changes.

Been using this personally:
http://intothemists.com/guides/6085-darwinism_survival_of_the_fittest

You can get quite a lot of damage on your enemy, most of the burst occuring within the first 3 seconds. Basically Pet/Weapon Swap to GS, quickness entangle. wail on them. You can try it out Blooperz and see if it seems similar. I don’t really care to fight forum warriors qqing that ranger is in a bad spot.

Just a small correction, there was a comment by a dev (Evan?) that MMR is broken into two parts when matching, one is account MMR, the other is profession. So if you play on a profession you’ve done worse with, you’ll be matched accordingly.

The answer to the question of whether you can exploit this by tanking a classes mmr, queuing with said class, and then switching to your “real” class was left unanswered. I think this was being questioned pre-June 23rd patch, so with all the bug/balance fixes it was forgotten about.

EDIT:
Not to say that it’d be bad to change this up. It’s a bit silly the way it currently is (although the relatively recent changes include 50% of the classes, why not just make it 100%). The daily is already completed in 1 pvp match (assuming you win with profession relevant).

Found quote:

We have MMR for both professions and accounts.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/pvp/Profession-MMR-2/first#post5136231

Down state is fine, in fact it enhances pvp. Rallying could be removed, potentially.

I am honestly confused at what you —- people are complaining about. We just got bug fixes for major game breaking abilities that affected gameplay (grenadier, guardian symbols), the patch has been out for two weeks? There’s no need to make a balance pass before the meta has even had time to settle due to bug issues etc. I’m still experimenting with builds, coming up with solid ones with Necromancer, Mesmer, and Ranger, moving towards Engineer and Guardian next. Seriously, calm your tatas people.

Edit: Also, after looking at the patch notes, there were actually quite a few balance changes. One of which being the npc’s being brought up to compensate for overall increase in damage.

see my signature. (2013)

Caedmon.6798:

No bad word about condi’s unlimited stacking,but this…this hurts you,just lol.

In a pvp environment, it’s very rare to even hit the 25 bleed stack cap, so I don’t see the change affecting pvp that much, maybe burning and poison stacking intensity with poison fields from thief shortbow and engi grenades.

Aomine.5012:

Actually this is a nerf to movement skill too.
Now their traveling distance is not affected by swiftness as well, meaning a Warrior or a Ranger will travel a much shorter distance with their movement skill. It used to work both ways, that chill and swiftness all affect the distance.

And what is wrong with that? Removing counter play and pro active play is removing decision making that can allow for the player to improve and differentiate themselves.

Needed to login to +1 this.

What inspired them to think that this would be a good change? It removes counter AND proactive play. If you miss because you don’t travel far enough, due to movement impairment conditions, that’s your own fault, similar to missing a strong hitting attack due to blind.

Everything else in that blog post was fine/good, perhaps exception being that burning is now basically just bleed 2.0, unless there are some other effects.