Guild Wars 2

fellyn.5083:

No, I’m saying their balancing philosophies are a joke. And you trying to use them as an argument to remove important traits from warrior is a bigger joke.

Sorry my friend, but this is not a thread made for debating their balancing philosophies. If you take issue with that, feel free to start up a thread about that topic and attempt to get the devs attention in that manner and direction. Your completely off topic with that. What is relevant though, is that you appear to be okay with the nerfs other professions received based on these philosophies. If I am incorrect in that deduction, please correct me, I would love to hear your take on how they have gone wrong with other professions, as to have made some of the statements you have made you must certainly have leveled all of the professions to 80 and spent some time with them to make some judgements, as I have done so. Please, my friend, share with us how you feel your experiences leveling and playing the other professions has promoted your perspective that having such movement capability is reasonable for the warrior.

I simply ask this, because you haven’t really expanding to a path of logic or relating facts thus far as in relative comparison to your experiences on the other professions. So, please tell us, how much time you spent on each of the other professions, and how those experiences have brought you to feel this is balanced.

You see, in my experience, I dislike there balancing philosophies on a few of the classes myself, but that is just as irrelevant to the topic as your feeling on the balance philosophies of the warrior. Like it or not, we have to discuss the topic inside the scope of their philosophies. Unless a day comes that they actually adjust them.

Bombsaway.7198:

We have kits which effectively act like weapons.
Most engineers will run at least one kit.
You have more effective skill combinations than you would if you had more weapon choices and no kits.

Now, if for some reason you don’t like kits. . . . .then this class is going to feel very restricted.

For the most part I completely agree with you. What I have a problem with, is that in order to have a weapons swap IE kits, we lose a slot in which the other professions can have a stun breaker, or to me, more personally, a condition cleanse that cleanses us. In general, I enjoy the function of kits and how they play. In the case of the elixir gun, we gain the stun breaker on the tool belt skill. that is a additional function I can appreciate with that kit. This still leaves the lingering problem of condition cleansing. Transmute is only one condition and on a bit of a cool down. Super Elixir requires you swap kits, then ground target a skill. Cleansing formula requires a 20 point trait investment, and an investment in non-kit utility choices. Healing turret, as the others, requires multiple actions, for a limited condition removal. This leaves elixir C as the only true cleanse. That is a very limiting amount of choices. Personally, I would like to see a cleanse of some significance on another kit. Preferably other then the elixir gun. Just something beyond elixir C, that does not require multiple actions to be performed.

In my eyes, this would help to relieve some of the desire for more weapons choices. As has been discussed many times before, the extreme limitations of our actual weapons, causes part of the issue. Even if we do acquire some new weapons choices, we end up with the same problem. The only swap we will have are kits, and they will still take up a slot that others can use for cleansing or a stun breaker choice.

The problem goes further, because in the vast majority of builds, it is all but a requirement to have a kit, due to the weapons limitations. This disallows us to build for full gadgets, or turrets(which are a whole other conversation in themselves).

Personally, with the ability to evade and, block, riposte, and blur, combined with the damage I can do, I feel my mesmer is in a good place. This is coming from someone who has leveled all 8 professions to 80 with about the last 50-60 levels of each profession being in WvW. Personally, in my opinion, what mesmers need most is fixes to traits and skills that are not functioning properly, and small tweaks to some specific weapons skills.

tetrodoxin.2134:

I think it’s fair that a class, which is somehow designed to have a weakness for conditions, has to spend 20 points into a defensive traitline to get cleansing. And it’s a pretty good cleansing trait after all.

This in itself is part of the issue, because many of the other professions do not have
a trait they can put 20 points or in some cases any points into for that high a level of cleanses.

Warrior

We want the Warrior to be capable of good melee damage in a sturdy body. They can still do some decent damage at range, but they aren’t as good at it as the Ranger (with their pet). They have a hard time taking enemy boons down, and instead, have to just go through them with raw force. They may have a hard time with enemy conditions, and may need to ask for ally help in order to keep themselves free of hampering conditions.

Kind of speaks for itself doesn’t it???
Source
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-December-14-2012/first#post999247

fellyn.5083:

Difference is I’m not arguing to take something away because I don’t like it.

Whether you or I like it or not is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that they adhere to the balancing philosophies consistently.

See on like the two of you who are so vehemently arguing to keep the warriors unreasonably out of balance, I have leveled all 8 professions to 80. 50-60 levels of each of those was done in WvW. You appear to speak out of a fear about your capability to be successful with your professions if it is anything less the over powered. I on the other hand am simply speaking out of my personal experience and relating those to the balancing philosophies.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

did you even play warriors in sPvP during launch?

warriors have best landspeed.
this is fact. will not change.
accept and move on.

Why yes, yes I did. It was my first profession to 80. followed by Guardian then Engineer How about you, did you play any other profession at launch?
Let me ask you this. Do you have a better argument then
“We have always had this mobility and it will not change, so deal with it”
Honestly, you need a better reason then this.

Now you posted some very inaccurate comments earlier

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

“mesmer best illusions no balance”
“thieves best stealth no balance”
“necromancer best death shroud no balance”
“guardians best boons no balance”
“rangers best spirits no balance”
“engineers best condition damage no balance”
“elementalist best something no balance”

After reading this, I am unclear if you are simply worried about your lack of survivability if you lose your ability to flee or if it is simply a complete and total lack of knowledge and experience with other professions.

fellyn.5083:

I don’t know if you’re caught up on reading this thread, but some one actually proposed to remove traits from warrior help with condition cleanse. They want warrior to be a sitting duck.

So are you suggesting that they did not specifically say there balancing philosophy is ??

“We want the Warrior to be capable of good melee damage in a sturdy body. They can still do some decent damage at range, but they aren’t as good at it as the Ranger (with their pet). They have a hard time taking enemy boons down, and instead, have to just go through them with raw force. They may have a hard time with enemy conditions, and may need to ask for ally help in order to keep themselves free of hampering conditions.”

Now can you present a reasonable argument support where the philosophy suggestion land speed or mobility in any way? Can you present a reasonable argument as to why they should have such high condition removal, the ability to use weapon skills to break immobility, and the ability to limit immobility duration? As these functions and feature directly counter the devs specific balancing philosophy.

It would seem to me that “chill”, “immobilize”, and “cripple”, fit the exact definition of “Hampering” conditions. The devs very specifically used the adjective “Hampering” and that seems fairly specific to me. As far as your concern about being rooted in place, well, it also specifically states they want warriors balanced to “require help from other professions” to deal with them.

I mean you can make all of the complaints you want at me, but I am simply stating what the devs very specifically stated as their balancing philosophies on the profession. The same professional balancing philosophies that they adhered to when nerfing other professions.

Interesting. I quoted a dev post and stated how a professions current ability contradict the balance philosophy, and am dubbed a troll?

Care to actually explain how I am “stretching” anything?

fellyn.5083:

coglin.1867:

Another thing in relation to the warrior in this case, is that they can trait these to break immobilize. This does cause a problem, because it would make fixing this specific complaint difficult. Personally they could abolish this trait as far as I am concerned. As such ease of breaking the condition immobilize is counter to what Jonathan Sharp specified as the professions balance philosophy.

“We want the Warrior to be capable of good melee damage in a sturdy body. They can still do some decent damage at range, but they aren’t as good at it as the Ranger (with their pet). They have a hard time taking enemy boons down, and instead, have to just go through them with raw force. They may have a hard time with enemy conditions, and may need to ask for ally help in order to keep themselves free of hampering conditions.”

Yet they have much better then average general cleansing options, and a better then average access immobilize breakers.

While we’re at it we should just ask anet to remove the warrior class from the game. Seems like nothing short of that will make any one happy.

No need for your dramatic sarcasm. Like it or not, immobilize is a condition, and Anet specifically states in their balance expectations that warriors by design and balance in their own words, should require help from other professions to deal with “hampering conditions”. This is clear evidence to validate my comments in this case.

They have nerfed other professions based on these exact “balancing philosophies”. Eles were specifically targeted for nerfs based on their movement. Several other professions have had there vigor nerfed based on these philosophies. Eles have had mobility nerfed based on these philosophies. Engineers have had their damage nerfed multiple times based on these philosophies. Every profession has had direct and hard nerfs based in large part by the warrior communities complaints (although we are aware there were other parts of the community as well). Honestly, we can do with out the over dramatic sarcasm, and you could attempt to see the disparities between what the balancing philosophy states and what warriors are actually able to do.

Another thing in relation to the warrior in this case, is that they can trait these to break immobilize. This does cause a problem, because it would make fixing this specific complaint difficult. Personally they could abolish this trait as far as I am concerned. As such ease of breaking the condition immobilize is counter to what Jonathan Sharp specified as the professions balance philosophy.

“We want the Warrior to be capable of good melee damage in a sturdy body. They can still do some decent damage at range, but they aren’t as good at it as the Ranger (with their pet). They have a hard time taking enemy boons down, and instead, have to just go through them with raw force. They may have a hard time with enemy conditions, and may need to ask for ally help in order to keep themselves free of hampering conditions.”

Yet they have much better then average general cleansing options, and a better then average access immobilize breakers.

tattoohead.3217:

Were talking about balance here, the content looks cool.

There seem to be a whole bunch of things that were discussed in the developer livestream that simply didn’t happen. Like for instance having 2 sigils on 2handed weapons, and the rune/sigil rework that was going to happen.

Did i miss something, because i was expecting that in the 1/21 patch.

Well since the very specifically stated in the live stream that the discussed changed were going in after the living story is done in march…………..well it appears you must have missed them stating that.

Right, but we are not discussing traits or abilities. We are discussing the weapons skills functionality, and how they are exploited. Anet has set precedence in respect to this when they changed skills such as ride the lightening. With traits or utilities, there is an investment made into a pool of limited resources. With weapons skills there is none.

When you specify Hambow in this manner then refer to 10 trait point investment, you scew the entire discussion. Several professions have traits they can invest in for movement.

Depends on what you mean by “hybrid”. I often run a hybrid build with all celestial gear. Personally, I feel the investment in Napalm is of more value. Another Couple of ticks of 600ish burning seems much more noticeable damage then the say 10ish% direct damage increase of a hybrid build. Though I admit, I have never done the math on it.

junho.7825:

LOL, I really hoped someone didn’t come up with the highest HP with armor thing about warriors. Those are CHARACTERISTICS OF PROFESSIONS.

Precisely the point. With those characteristics, the ability to exploit gap closers for excessive movement speed is well over the top. Nice to see you are in agreement.

Mobility is counter to the balancing philosophy Jonathan Sharp posted. For that matter so is “cleansing Ire”.

“We want the Warrior to be capable of good melee damage in a sturdy body. They can still do some decent damage at range, but they aren’t as good at it as the Ranger (with their pet). They have a hard time taking enemy boons down, and instead, have to just go through them with raw force. They may have a hard time with enemy conditions, and may need to ask for ally help in order to keep themselves free of hampering conditions.”

No where in there is high mobility mentioned. Yet they have it. As a matter of fact, it very specifically states lacking condition removal, yet they turn around and give them “cleansing ire”.

Then to top that off, they have a very cheap investment to acquire high HP+High GP regeneration.

How on Earth does excessive HP regeneration combined with cleansing ire equate to weak to conditions?

We have to draw the line somewhere.

What makes this ridiculous is that the exact second they feel something even remotely get strong on a profession outside of warrior, they are quick to discuss a nerf. Yet they in now way show any of this initiative with the lengthy list of bugs or needed fixes.

As I see it, all they need to do is increase the direct damage of each attack of flame jet, or simply take the burning on the first hit of flame jet from 1s to 2s. This would give it more value as a kit for condition builds, as well as ease the problem of horrible damage for the cast time of flame jet.

Artaz.3819:

The problem is removing Warrior mobility is how do you also solve for Warriors keeping other players in melee combat range too? Would you prefer Warriors having hard CC and/or spammable movement impairing conditions on every weapon?

I know my answer. Two sides to the coin.

Basically the entire thread has covered this in detail already. No one has an issue with gap closers being used as gap closers. What your scenario represents, is exactly what the weapons skills we are discussing, were designed to do. What your mentioning above is how they should work and we want them to work. As long as you have a player to target to close a gap on in with the intention to get them in range of your attacks, then it is functioning perfectly.
What everyone is taking issue with, is the fact that these gap closer skills are being exploited for general travel and/or land movement as well as being exploited for escape purposes, to run from a fight.

Your right. I am trying to take the OPs unfair specification of warriors, and turn this into a more rational discussion about weapon skills . The fact that they have been specified by Anet as gap closers, combined with what they posted as their idea of what every profession should be, certainly justifies them as requiring an adjustment. My suggestion is to add the requirement of needing a target that is in range. This would exclude skills that are utility skills or that currently require a form of ground targeting.

Artaz.3819:

Fair enough, give Warriors pull abilities on each melee weapon then.

Requiring a target in order to activate Rush or Leaps would be even a greater buff to stealth (where you immediately lose target) and clone classes (read: Thief and Mesmer). You know because those two classes need even more buffs because they aren’t popular at all…

TL;DR bad idea because you didn’t think about the easy counter classes

Why use such an unnecessarily complicated solution, when adding a target requirement as in other skills solves the entire issue.

killahmayne.9518:

If people want to cite sword/GS as an example of broken mobility, How about I cite the elementalist with fiery greatsword, teleport and rtl? Can anybody catch that? Seriously. Or thieves with shortbow and shadow step and stealth, or rangers with sword + greatsword.

Warriors wielding only a greatsword, with no trait cooldown only has average out of combat mobility. Which many people tend to have in WvW.

Perhaps you should read the thread. It is in reference to any and all professions weapon skills. So yes, this includes swoop, rush, savage leap, fiery rush, and the like. Thieves short bow is excluded, it requires ground targeting. Similarly whirlwind attack is excluded from the list. Blink and rocket boots or bulls charge on the other hand are utility skills, thus require the sacrifice of a utility slot for the mobility.

So to recap, because some posters appear to have an issue staying on the topic here. We are discussing weapons skills only, not utility skills. Further more, of the weapons skills, we are only discussing the ones with no targeting of any kind required. Again, because time and effort (ever so small as it may be) are required to use them.

MiniMe.1960:

I remember when Warrior just sucked.

I call shenanigans (to put it politely)…..You do not remember that, because it was not the case. If you have something well thought out or intelligent to add, we truly welcome your input. But when you start off with a line such as this, it is clear you are just trolling, or displaying an unreasonable bias.

So yes, Arlette, to answer your question, we are indeed very lacking in condition cleanses. Lucey laid out all the options. Healing turret, which requires multiple button presses to remove 2 conditions every 20s.

Elixir C, our only actual full cleanse has a hefty cool down of 40s.

Elixir R has a good cleanse as a secondary mechanic, but it has a ridiculous col down to use it for conditions at 120s, and you are forced to ground target it.

transmute isn’t bad as a 15 point minor trait investment.

cleansing formula 409 only works with a 20 point investment AND a utility skill investment in a very specific utility set, and to be totally honest, it offers you limited option for damage.

fellyn.5083:

Why do people care if a class can run away from you fast?

Are you just being intentionally obtuse? I sure hope so, I would hate to think that with our 2 1/2 pages of post explaining this in detail, that you would actually be dense enough to ask in earnest.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

your argument is invalid as warriors are meant to have the best “land speed” in the game. guild wars 2 has been out for more than a year. it is about time you digested the fact that warriors have the best mobility in the game.

Translated to plain English, this says, I am OP, and love it, and would probably lose many fights if I weren’t, so please do not nerf us as you would do any other profession, because I lack the skil to compensate for such a change.

zapv.8051:

Thematically, the idea of a warrior running away is ridiculous, and shouldn’t be allowed.

You make a good point in the area of theme. This also reminds me, that it appears to me to be contrary to what they listed when they defined the warrior and it’s role.

silentnight warrior.2714:

So we have good landspeed mobility and that makes us good to run away. Other classes have better combat movement. So there is balance in that point. Warrior as to travel the distance. Other classes port.

Do you have to tell this lie to yourself so you can sleep at night?

Harper.4173:

Warriors are mobile – yes – but with that mobility comes the trade-off of no CC.
And with no CC you can’t exactly hold your opponent in order for you to kill him.
So yes – you can run away with said spec but it’s pretty much all you can do.

Wait, wha.., what? The off hand Hammer he had with that great sword offers no CC?

Thighum.7295:

People comparing steal to the movement skills on greatsword just is wrong. STEAL REQUIRES a TARGET. If you use steal without a target it goes on a 20+ second cd with no added movement. In addition, it is a profession mechanic, and if you don’t trait for steal its like a 30 second cd.

Warrior gs skills have a shorter cd, and work without a target. What are you trying to compare here?

Exactly. I have mentioned several times through out this thread, and others. The solution to all of these gap closers being used for general mobility and escaping after you get your butt kicked would be solved if they functioned exactly this way.

ArmageddonAsh.6430:

I am fine with lighter classes being faster,

I agree. Not only does it work thematically, but it is more in line with what Anet specifically stated in their post about what they feel professional roles are.

Aza.2105:

Rush, Bull’s charge and Savage leap should all require targets to use.

Rush and savage leap, absolutely. Bull’s Charge, I disagree with. In my eyes, there is a huge difference between the investment in a weapon skill and a utility still. If you invest 1/3 of you utility options for a mobile skill, then you deserve the mobility. Simply picking up a great sword or short sword on the other hand should not in it self offer you land speed, mobility, gap closers and escapes, where others have to trait ir invest utility slots for it.

Part of the issue here, is that too many posters are making this about warriors, when this issue is not that singular. It encompasses many professions. Swoop of the ranger great sword is just as bad. As far as I am concerned, ride the lightening also should not work without a target.

JETWING.2759:

Did you see that when you use swiftness the thing become easy
The warrior of first video use SL > WA > Rush to maximize mobility, to you to say that all warrior has that mobility, you need assume that all warrior run GS + Sword, what isn’t true

The warrior is not the problem, any weapon skill on any profession that is a gap closer, being used for mobility and escapes, IS the problem.

Which profession has less mobility is completely irrelevant. What is relevant, is professions using skills that devs have stated as gap closers, being used for general movement and mobility, when they should not be able to be used in such a manner. The example of certain warrior skills are not the only ones, nor are they the only profession that has skills that should not be able to be used in this manner. Warrior are simply the most prevalent case given all of the other aspects of the profession.

icewyrm.5038:

coglin.1867:

It has bothered me for a long time that I spend traits or utilities for mobility just to see some other profession create a gap while running away by using skills designed for gap closing.

To be fair engineers are probably the second least mobile class in the game – prior to the change to rocket boots the only real movement skill available was acid bomb (and jump shot, lol) and it’s rarely useful as a mobility skill.

Necros have it a bit worse – flesh wurm has a longer range than rocket boots but an even longer cooldown…

Right, and I agree. But that wasn’t really my point regardless of the profession, weapon skill gap closers should not be used for world travel and escaping movement, regardless of the profession or what profession your escaping. In my eyes, requiring a simple target in range is the perfect solution.

It has bothered me for a long time that I spend traits or utilities for mobility just to see some other profession create a gap while running away by using skills designed for gap closing.

I am okay with the skills that require ground targeting of some kind. But skills like rush should require a target that is in range to function.

Here I am on say, an engineer. I have to spend either 20 points for power shoes or 10 for speedy kits, and incorporate a kit for my build, and use rocket boots as a utility slot that does a 900 launch every 20s, Just to see a warrior get 1200 movement skill on the same cool down. I am not trying to single out warriors either, this skill just jumped in my head first. Several professions have weapon skills that are designed as gap closers that give them incredible mobility where they should not.

Yet bombs maintain 18 vulnerability stacks, the damage that bombs do at 18 is more then grenades do at 25.

You have this odd ideology that even though grenades do less damage, you unreasonably claim they do more simply because the number of vulnerability stacks is slightly greater, even though the damage logs prove you wrong.

Cynz.9437:

1. make condis tick slower (see pt. 2 why) and reduce duration

Everything in the game is set on a “clock” so to speak, and I think messing with a 1s count is a bad idea for a long list of reasons

Cynz.9437:

2. I think condi stat needs to be split in 2:
- condi dmg: stat needs to have value lowered (by half for example, arguable) but do the same what it does now – make condi tick for higher dmg
- condi haste: makes conditions tick faster.. i understand that controll condis like confusion and fear won’t profit from it but that way the players would be more interested in stacking condi duration

I feel your jumping to conclusion in your statements. For example, if you make a power based build with knights gear (which has toughness) and a condition damage build with rabid gear (also contains toughness), you have similar damage capabilities and similar defense.

I do not know what classes you have, but I personally have leveled all 8 professions primarily in WvW. If you take any profession in a power soldiers gear build and compare it to the same profession in a condition dire gear build, you have similar damage and equal defense. I have tested this a good bit in all professions. Now, obviously certain trait choices will make variances in this, as well as weapon and utility choices based on play style preferences. The fact it, that you can dodge or block condition appliers as well as you can direct damage.

Cynz.9437:

3. Add condi/condi haste/condi duration armor(kind of like zerker)… you still can run dire/rabid but since condi dmg stats itself would get lowered, stacking that set alone shouldn’t provide as good; condi/prec gear needs to be removed imo, but it is arguable

I may be missing your meaning here, but this sounds over complicated and as if it would create a large pool of other issues.

Cynz.9437:

4. amount of condi stacks you can get on player should be lowered

They already are limited. They are limited so, that in many cases if you enter a 1v2 fight, that the 2 man group in this situation suffers a damage lose.

Cynz.9437:

5. PVE only (wvw should stay as pvp): players should have own condi stack on NPC. Meaning: i play necro, my teammate is thief, i have 15 stacks of bleeds on NPC, thief has own 10 stacks of bleed on NPC. In any other MMO i have played so far it was common practice and DoTs were pretty good in pve, idk why it is not the case in gw2.

Regardless of other games do (I feel what other games do, that do not have similar functionality as GW2 are irrelevant) I agree with the reasoning here.

Cynz.9437:

6. spells that apply high amount of condi stacks, should have low direct dmg coefficient (arguable)

Generally they do. I agree that in some cases it doesn’t and those particular skills (spells is a bad choice of words) need to be addressed.

Cynz.9437:

7. condi food needs values lowered, by a lot

Personally I think you must not be very familiar with the food values, because they do not add much. They can be a solid boost when, and only when they are combined with very specific amount of traits in certain lines and a very specific choice of runes and very specific armor stats.

Cynz.9437:

8. spells/traits that apply burning need to have higher costs…some of them right now (hello IP) are too easy to apply

IP is a 20 trait point investment for a measly 1,312 damage every 10 seconds, assuming you crit precisely 10s apart. It is single target. Now am beginning to have difficulty taking you seriously.

Cynz.9437:

Side note: this suggestions are not something new tbh, in wow for example i played warlock (which is pure condi necro basically) and they were pretty good in pve simply because of own stacks of condis and condi haste.

I always laugh when players defer to things WoW stole from previous MMOs, then state it as if WoW revolutionized something. Honestly friend, this is not WoW, and I prefer you stop trying to make it WoW.

The only game mode that condition damage is really a problem, is sPvP. It is not over powered by any means in WvW and is distinctly under powered in PvE.

Personally, I feel you are over reacting in your hypothesis’ and should spend more time playing every profession in both condition and direct damage builds. If you did so, you would come to realize that in more cases then not, direct damage does more actual damage then condition damage.

The real problem is that most players have more options for direct damage mitigation in the forms of stacked toughness, dodges, traits, weapons skills, and utilities, that they use, then complain about condition damage when they only use builds that have limited condition cleanses.

testpig.5018:

I WvW, i don’t PvE, i don’t Craft, don’t ever have the time or the materials for it. However, in doing all the WvW i do, i’m sitting on a TON of these t6 crafting materials. That are just taking up slots in my bags and my bank. I can’t use them as i’m not a crafter, and i can’t trade them, as they are account bound.

All I am seeing here is that you play WvW and refuse to craft. I play almost exclusively WvW and I have a full set of ascended trinkets, back piece, and armor. Soon to have ascended weapons as well. Because I pulled up a simple guide on crafting and learned. It took me all of about an hour and a half to use resources I earned purely in WvW and level my leather working to 500, and huntsman as well as weaponsmithing both to 400, soon to be 500. It took about another day to take time to purchase anything I didn’t have, and craft my ascended armor, using gold I earned in WvW. I know have a full set of ascended dire trinkets+armor, a full set of celestial armor+trinkets (this one is more time gated), a full set of ascended trinkets+armor of zerkers gear, and have a full set of rabid trinkets and 3 of the armor pieces, just earning enough dragonite to finish my last 3 pieces of armor for rabid.

If you refuse to craft and earn your gear, that is your fault, and the option is there. I have never played an MMO in which I did not have to do something that was not my preferred choice to earn the gear I wanted. You need to just buckle down and do it, and stop complaining.

tattoohead.3217:

I have been playing for quite some time… And never even herd of this kind of “hacking”

Also I’m a server admin (RL jobs… Ugh) and I can tell you that while it’s not impossible to hack into antes servers, it would be quite a feat to find your data and change just that. Also there would be no “reporting” needed as Anet would be instantly aware of any changes made to server side data by a 3rd party.

Exploits are one thing, hacking is so improbable that it borders on impossible. It’s not hacking there’s absolutely no argument there, sorry.

It may be an exploit, that is true. Calling something a “Hack” just happens to be a general MMO term. Either way, if you haven’t hear of this, you must not read the “game bugs” or “general forums” sections at all, because there have been threads all over those sections for weeks. I read about it for quit some time before it evened happened to me. There are video links of it occuring posted in various locations as well.

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

We’re talking about getting optimal DPS/utility here. You -can- run bombs if you want, sure. You could also run a pistol poison stacking build but that’s besides the point.

All the people in this thread going “I don’t engineer but my grenades not big damage” or alternately “PvE is so easy why bother minmaxing lolol play how you want” are totally missing the point. Not everyone enjoys being the 5th useless member of a pug group with 4 other useless members.

So, what does any of this rant have to do with the fact that bombs out damage grenades?

You are simply arguing several points in this thread with wrong information. Not to mention your constant contradiction to your own statements. For example, I found a reasonably recent thread in which someone made a comment of this nature to you, and you rudely ripped into them about the value of an engies might stacking+vulnerability stacking combined with its damage, making it one of the most valuable professions in a dungeon or on a boss. Not to mention the damage output you once exclaimed was well above the 5th. Yet here you are, arguing against its value when it suits you. You should really show your credibility a favor, and start showing at least a shred of consistency.

No it isn’t. You are ridiculously overestimating the percentage that play grenades consistently. A great many play bomb build. Particularly due to the fact that the knowledge of bombs superior damage has started to spread.

Manuhell.2759:

You, and no one else, it would seem. The area is so small people have no problem to move out, assuming they even care to do it – that bleeding is terribly poor, the only issue is the cripple.

I know a great many, including myself who currently use this skill. It is spectacular to slow down those coming at you as you cast box of nails then swap to EG and instantly cast acid bomb. Another common use is to slow down pursuers on your tail just before you use rocket boots, to make sure you put good space between you and the group if you need good space.

No one I know uses it for the bleed, that is just a small bonus. Everyone I know uses it for the AoE cripple.

Rezzet.3614:

i still find it stupid engineers shouldnt be pusnished for people not using stun breakers

Very many stun breakers do not cleanse immobilize. Some of ours do not.

ellesee.8297:

the nerf is to supply crate. not net turret.

No, they very specifically stated it is to net turret. They net turret just happens to drop from supply crate also. I doubt they have a system that allows the game to recognize if the turret came from supply crate or was places by a player as a utility skill.

I will stay with the P/S. The sigil value never played into my decision in the first place. I am not one of those “100% optimal” types of players. I take what works foe me, and I find fun and useful. In this case, I have found the reflect, AoE knockback, the block, and the AoE stun all to be of the value, look, and play style I enjoy.

Rhalas.4167:

FurryFOX.6541:

I’ve been reading and there is a one shot kill hack, that now that I think about it has happened to me many times. Usually by warriors. So, that’s what I’m thinking now. This punk hacked.

Im not so naive to think there arent hacks like that but these types of accusations without proof are the reason I left FPS games.
In BF 3, BF 2, BF 1942, etc, not only was I accused of hacking but people that I personally knew that didnt hack were accused as well.
Its seems to me, that players arent willing to accept that people may be better than them and use this as a crutch to massage their ego.

To be fair, there has been an extremely vast amount of players using this exploit. Not only does it take you out. It bypasses the need for stomping. Quit literally you are running along at full health one second, and the next second, you are dead. Not downed, but dead. The worst part is, they do not even have a manner to report players directly for this type of action, or such actions as seeking out glitched map areas that register you as invulnerable, but you can report someone for harsh language.

Guanglai Kangyi.4318:

Just face it, grenades are dumb. Imagine all the cool kitten engies could have if they didn’t exist.

You mean like the very supportive elixir gun kit, or the all around useful tool kit, or would you be referring to the very utilitarian bomb kit that just so happens to out damages grenade kit ?

Because HgH is linked to actual elixir utility skills and not skills associated with the EG. Basically they need to change some EG skill tool tips. I suggest you turn in a bug report on this. I know I have. Eventually they will change it when they get annoyed with enough bug reports.

First off, i think it is a bad idea to make a kit an “weapon swap” period. Secondly, if I was being forced to take a melee kit as a “weapon swap” I would take the bomb kit every time. Then of coarse, I would use the tool kit as a utility skill

Hvaran.6327:

make smoke vent with bigger radius +80

jet flam less dmg and constant burning reaply 1s per hit mohaha

then it would be good.

No need to lower the FT base damage just to add more burning. It is weak enough.

it is a very reasonable request to ask that it functions similar to smoke bomb. Any way to bring more value to the flame thrower is welcome. The utter weaknesses of flame jet really call for anything that can help boost the kits over all value.

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

nerf: Healing signet passive: only ticks when in 600 range of an enemy.

Now this is an interesting nerf, leaving the numbers untouched but completely opening a way to counterplay the heal, since we will create some distance to disable the warrior’s healing when he needs, range kiting him, and the warrior needs to get up-close melee range to start healing.

I want to like this idea. It seems to me though, that this would punish melee builds and reward ranged builds for staying at range.

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

Greatsword: Rush
- nerf: needs an enemy target to be selected (removes: running away)

Now this is not so interesting anymore, you are removing game’s depth and dumbing the combat for what exactly?

How is this dumbing anything down or removing depth? There is no excuse for skills dubbed gap closers by the devs themselves, being used as general movement skills and escapes. I am perfectly fine with that being the case for utilities, but weapons skills intended by design as gap closers, have no business adding to the professions general mobility period. Nore should it be usable as an escape. Personally, I feel all professions with gap closer abilities attached to the weapons as weapons skills, should only be capable of being activated when in range and with a target.

“Stupid enough”? Kind of harsh words there. I hardly feel it makes sense to call players “stupid” for attempting to kill there enemy. How are they to know you have AED equipped, much less active? Over time some will learn to identify it, but it is a fairly new skill. Not to mention the fact that you may still be killed by already applied conditions. Neither of which make a player “stupid”.

In WvW for example, you have various setting that change how other characters display on your screen. If you have 5 friend and 5 enemies on the screen at the same time and are on the 3rd from lowest setting, you will only see a default graphic for each profession. They may not be physically capable of seeing a graphic variation.

So until they change it so it is physically visible on all game settings, it is a bit illogical and rude to declare others who physically cannot see such a change as you are suggesting, as “stupid”.

So you support the OP and his perspective, and are suggesting we should do so as well, simply because he made some post to the community suggesting the full value of engineers in dungeons??

That is an odd mentality for me to swallow, but to each his own. I for one completely disagree with the OP on this, and feel nothing he has presented justifies it. As well, I stand by my analogy, and say yes, it is exactly like the analogy I made. To suggest we excuse the reasoning he used here for such a poor argument, simply because he made a few positive engineer post in the past, is completely irrational in my opinion.

You are very literally stating that even though absolutely no one agrees with the OPs opinion, nor understands it, that we should be silent and except it simply because you yourself feel he did good with previous post of engineers dungeon capability.

As you seem with him enough to make multiple post on his behalf, I would be more interested to read your arguments on it, rather then to see you simply tell the rest of us how we are wrong for our own opinions. Please explain to us why you support him so vehemently. It would do a lot more for the discussion then simply going around quoting others post and aimlessly claiming they are wrong, while offering absolutely no reasoning or logic to your statements.

Thunderbrew.7034:

I know it wasn’t working in the past, and most certainly doesn’t seem
to double speed now.

Anyone else notice a difference?

I am not sure what your referring to. I have used it regularly off and on, and I have never known it to be bugged.

ellesee.8297:

if we’re talking about pve, then why do we need incendiary powder or permanent burning? ft has a lot of burning already and there’s 4 other people in your party that can possibly apply burning

The thing is, that this is almost every players mentality. So when I show up in PvE with rabid gear and 100% condition damage, I am the only one applying conditions because everyone else in the entire game avoids conditions because they have the same out look as you do. Personally I enjoy the 900 dps that I maintain with simply burning alone from fire bomb. Add in my AoE bleed stacks and AoE torment, mix in permanent poison, a dab of confusion, then add in my direct damage with high crit chance, and your doing great damage with an easy level of survivability.

I do not care what argument you care to use, thematically it would make sense that the flamethrower should be the single most burn damage applying utility in the game.

Sins.4782:

Sorry mate. Since you made the initial claim (10.5k dps ’nades), the burden of proof is yours. What are you calculating with, anyway? Both war banners, frost spirit, spotter? Empower allies?

Since that is the amount of damage he is attributing to the engineer in the spreadsheet he posted, then um, no, it is not on me. Further more, he is now claiming that it can be done by spaming simply 2 grenade skills.

So now your suggesting spamming nothing but grenade and shrapnel grenade does 10,500 damage per second? You were being out far enough in left field with your original comments. Now, well, your not doing your credibility any favors. Care to offer a fact or evidence of your claim that spamming just two skills does even half that damage your claiming?

gesho.9468:

can s’one explain what 10.5k dps referrs to? are we talking of spvp? how can dps be 10.5k?

Pretty sure he is referring to Damage per second. The problem I have encountered, is that he does this as a spread sheet calculation, and I have never found his number practical in actual game play for the most part.

Infamous Darkness.3284:

I completely disagree with you here, even if we don’t understand and believe the OP’s claims. Guanglai Kangyi.4318 has done a great deal to further the engi community especially in the way of dungeons, for all he’s done to get the dungeon forums to recognize the engineer as a viable option in dungeons, he at least deserves the right to be heard, maybe he will surprise us?

I can agree that he did push hard to promote what engineers can do in damage, buffs, and debuffs, but that doesn’t meant we have to accept an unreasonable argument. That is along the lines of logic of staying with an abusive spouse simply because they buy you gifts and act sweet the day after they abuse you. One does not make the other right.

Your making a great deal of claims, yet offering absolutely no facts to support your arguments. Sure, your presenting a great many of your odd opinions to support your argument, but no actual facts. As well, if you actually did offer some real facts and numbers that were accurate, I doubt it would be anything close to what would be needed to cause reasonable players to agree with you. As much as I can appreciate what your trying to say, your reasoning and solution are just completely unreasonable as I see it.

Rezzet.3614:

Saturn.6591:

coglin.1867:

Rezzet.3614:

if anything that guy isnt even using grenades LOL

The simple fact that this is the first line of your post is a problem in itself, but if you, by default, assume a build is bad simply for not having grenades, your closed mind will limit you greatly. If they want to build a SD build and were smart enough to realize that they have alternatives that they find more fun and of greater damage value to their play, why do you feel you need to mock and belittle that.

He already defended himself, but I can’t help but still write what I thought when I’ve read this post:

Read the OP again, then look at the video which is meant to prove OP’s point, and then read Rezzet’s post.

What Rezzet was lol-ing about wasn’t a build without grenades. It was about the fact that a video of an SD-build was posted to prove that Engineers are overpowered because of grenades.

Someone gets it Thank You ! lol

My apologies. I completely misunderstood your meaning. Sorry about that.