(edited by fellyn.5083)
@Awe.1096, Yamiga.7863
You can play the game any way you want. MMOs, especially in the case of GW2, are about enjoying the game the way you want to enjoy it. What bothers me about the specific change(s) that you guys are clamoring for is that they don’t affect gameplay at all. Nothing hinders you from playing the way you want to play now, without those changes implemented.
That means that there are two reasons why you might want to have these changes implemented. You might, rationally but maliciously, want to limit competition on the leaderboard, thus making it easier to maintain your place. Personally, I think the way the leaderboard is setup right now is already broken enough as it is, and really needs a major overhaul (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/The-AP-Leaderboard-Sucks-Let-s-Fix-It), but the change you suggest makes it worse, not better. Or, you might irrationally be trying to deal with your own neurosis by changing the game. If that’s the case, if this really is a mental illness for you, it really might be a good idea to step back. But that’s still not a reason to change the game.
You’re missing the point. Completely. I could care less about the leaderboard, competition or anything like that. I’m playing for the personal satisfaction of completing achievements, like I do on most games I play (I even went for Civilization V ones lol). In GW2 achievement points act as a global meta-achievement, therefore I’m trying to earn them as much as I can, including dailies.
This is a all or nothing playstyle, and the current state of dailies actually does “hinders me from playing the way I want to play” because it takes a lot of time (not skill) to do them all every day, and missing one or two of them just because I don’t have time is really frustrating, to a point its almost not fun aymore.
The proposition I made would fix that without any impact on anyone but AP farmers, people that share my completionist playstyle.
I’d like to point out that your argument makes absolutely no sense. If dailys hinder you from doing what you want don’t do them then? Why does the game need to change because you have some sort of OCD complex?
I think your personal satisfaction level would sore through the roof when you realize that you are in fact not obligated to finish them every day.
The “all or nothing” play style you created is your problem alone and there is a solution for your problem already.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
I am not talking about statistical sampling whatsoever or offered any insight on it, if you even read my post. I just made a general statement.
You definitely did. To be specific:
For all we know, the opinions of 90% of the people who don’t look or post on the forums could be totally different from the 10% that do.
For all we know, especially all we know about statistics and probability, there is an incredibly high probability that the opinions of those not posting on the forums are the same as those of forum warriors.
Not entirely true. The kind of player who posts on the forum are usually a completely different kind of player that just plays the game being completely oblivious to the forums.
We know that’s true therefor it’s safe to assume the vast majority of the players do not have a strong opinion on warriors one way or the other.
Using the opinions of forum posters to represent the entire player base doesn’t work.
When we see threads blow up like with the flame kissed cultural armor shenanigans then you know regular players have come to the forum to share their mind. That’s simply not the case with warriors. It’s usually the same people thinking they represent a large majority when they don’t.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
That you think it is “mass-hysteria” and not “well deserved mass outrage” speaks volumes for your own delusions.
It’s not mass anything considering only a small amount of players actually post on the forums.
Once you cap luck you just sell all your loot. That’s kind of how they intended it to work. But they put a super high ceiling on luck so most regular players will probably never get anywhere near the cap.
Fellyn:
How do you propose having “facts”?
If I see a sunset 100 times, can’t I claim it is beautiful without a model on how to define the beauty of a sunset?The data that would be required for moving to a numeric model is almost impossible to obtain for GW2 and gets so situational.
But, just like I can say a sunset is beautiful based on my common experience and perception, I can say a warrior is over powered based on my common experience.
In a game, the only thing that matters is the player’s perception of fairness. In fact, the numeric models hardly even matter if the vast majority of players THINK warriors are over powered, they simply are. This is a game not reality. Perception is defining not spreadsheets.
Subjective. To you the sunset is beautiful to the next person in line it’s blinding. Neither are fact.
Just because you think it’s true does not really make it true.
You can’t just say I see a lot of warriors in game so that means that they are over powered. Just because something is popular doesn’t mean anything.
Case in point, Justin Bieber. Millions upon millions of people around the world think he’s the most amazing musician ever, better than legends like Michael Jackson. Doesn’t make it true, does it?
(edited by fellyn.5083)
Warriors got a lot of buffs because they were literally 1 trick ponies in pve only. In wvw or any form of pvp they were all but considered free kills. The warrior representation was next to nil.
So, yes, I’m aware of the history. Still the whole “warrior has heavy armor so it shouldn’t be fast” argument is very tired. Since when has GW2 ever followed the typical mmo tropes?
Warriors were the backbone of WvWvW zerg meta from Autumn 2012. Telling anything else is either just a blatant lie or shows ignorance of this game mode. Warriors were never weak in pve or WvWvW and buffing them for this game mode has been overdone.
I haven’t used the heavy armor argument at all. I know that protection > armor in most cases. The base health pool size and mobility however matters.
I am not asking to have warrior’s nerfed to the ground since I am playing one, but there are few issues which need addressing:
1. mobility (GS #5 needs its CD increased and range brought down to 900, warhorn CDs and effects should be looked upon with quick breathing trait)
2. longbow #5 needs to be toned down (compare it with any other immobilize weapon skill e..g guardian hammer #3 and engi rifle #2 and you see it is overpowered and at the same time longbow #1 could do roughly 10% more damage)
3. Healing signet needs to have its passive effect reduced and its active effect buffed up (in general signets should more active use for all professions)“I haven’t used the heavy armor argument at all”
That’s probably why I wasn’t quoting you to begin with don’t you think?
As for the rest..
1) Okay. Fine. But make it so it doesn’t outright miss your target 98% of the time for no particular reason.
So Warriors have the right to complain while Eles with offhand dagger (RTL) don’t?
Where did I say that?
So because some random nobody says the best way to get karma is with a warrior that means it’s absolutely 100% true?
And the rest, that’s hardly fact or even proof.
And just because some random nobody is doubting that makes it untrue ?
Seriously please stop talking about proof, that´s just stupid as kitten. Nobody here on the forum´s can proof anything because nobody here has any access to statistics or other official number material or game metrics. The only people that really can proof anything are arenanet employees and they will not talk at all about stuff like that because that would show the massive fail their balance / design team landed.
I’m not the one making these claims…so yeah…there is that. I’m also not the one who is claiming my opinion is fact.
Warriors got a lot of buffs because they were literally 1 trick ponies in pve only. In wvw or any form of pvp they were all but considered free kills. The warrior representation was next to nil.
So, yes, I’m aware of the history. Still the whole “warrior has heavy armor so it shouldn’t be fast” argument is very tired. Since when has GW2 ever followed the typical mmo tropes?
Warriors were the backbone of WvWvW zerg meta from Autumn 2012. Telling anything else is either just a blatant lie or shows ignorance of this game mode. Warriors were never weak in pve or WvWvW and buffing them for this game mode has been overdone.
I haven’t used the heavy armor argument at all. I know that protection > armor in most cases. The base health pool size and mobility however matters.
I am not asking to have warrior’s nerfed to the ground since I am playing one, but there are few issues which need addressing:
1. mobility (GS #5 needs its CD increased and range brought down to 900, warhorn CDs and effects should be looked upon with quick breathing trait)
2. longbow #5 needs to be toned down (compare it with any other immobilize weapon skill e..g guardian hammer #3 and engi rifle #2 and you see it is overpowered and at the same time longbow #1 could do roughly 10% more damage)
3. Healing signet needs to have its passive effect reduced and its active effect buffed up (in general signets should more active use for all professions)
“I haven’t used the heavy armor argument at all”
That’s probably why I wasn’t quoting you to begin with don’t you think?
As for the rest..
1) Okay. Fine. But make it so it doesn’t outright miss your target 98% of the time for no particular reason.
2) I disagree that #5 needs more nerfs.
3) If they make the passive even worse than the proposed 8% nerf to encourage the use of it’s active unless the active is amazing no one is going to use it. People will just switch to healing surge.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
I see your problem: no stunbreaker.
The issue is the damage here. Not the stun.
The damage was instant. Leaving no reaction time to even use a stun breaker.
The damage is not instant. You took a shield bash, an eviscerate, and almost a full axe auto attack combo. That’s the better part of 5 seconds. Plenty of time to pop a stun breaker and disappear.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
Maybe you didn’t notice, but Arenanet has been buffing warriors since Autumn 2012 all the way till summer 2013. Almost every single balance update was like Xmas to warrior. Healing signet’s passive effect was almost doubled. Condition removal and mitigation was significantly ramped up: cleansing ire, dogged march, berserker stance.
Heavy armor doesn’t do as much as you seem to think it does. Especially in a condition heavy meta like we have now.
Still seems like people aren’t going to be happy until warriors are a free kills again in wvw and pvp and all their damage reduced to nothing in pve. And as slow as a turtle as well.
Because that’s fair.
You might want to read the post before yours fellyn. It’s not just the heavy armor, but a combination of overbuffs.
Warriors got a lot of buffs because they were literally 1 trick ponies in pve only. In wvw or any form of pvp they were all but considered free kills. The warrior representation was next to nil.
So, yes, I’m aware of the history. Still the whole “warrior has heavy armor so it shouldn’t be fast” argument is very tired. Since when has GW2 ever followed the typical mmo tropes?
I think you should reread the thread, because you obviously did not understand the suggestions. As it is now we have the immense advantage as long as we keep playing. Adding a hardcap on temporary AP points would allow people who started later to catch up as time goes on.
Next time read more closely before posting.I am annoyed by having to reexplain everything every few posts because people either dont bother reading the whole thread or want to get this thread closed with strawman arguments.
No I’m pretty sure that would just cement the top spots for people who have been playing longer.
Maybe the reason you need to keep explaining your suggestion is because it doesn’t make any sense.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
Deimos, you have done nothing to prove warriors are not overpowered. Your statements are 100% opinion, not based upon any evidence whatsoever. In fact, the only counter-argument you can try to come up with is simply denial.
Provide proof warriors are balanced properly. What you state is pure conjecture, not supported by any facts.
If they are so balanced, why have they been nerfed twice in a row?
This is my last response, because, quite frankly it is clear you are incomprehensibly biased. Evangelistic zealots cannot be convinced they are wrong, no matter how much truth you place in front of them.
Go prosthelytize somewhere else.
Not unlike you? What proof have you offered to back your claims because I haven’t seen any.
Could it be that you haven’t shown any proof to back up your claim because the proof doesn’t exist?
Irony is fun.
No longer in signature. Well, that’s interesting.
If there wouldn’t be less choice, then there would be the same amount (if not more) Achievement points and their related tasks offered each day. Great! We are on the same page. =)
Choice is always a good thing!
I didn’t want it sending the wrong message, and obviously it was.
So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?
If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?
If a hard cap were introduced I would absolutely be able to slow down, as any points I miss or would miss could be “made up” in a sense. Surely even new players would appreciate that, right? I probably would just do 5 on some days, and after I hit the cap, I would do 5 for the item rewards.
There’s nothing stopping you from doing that even without a hard cap, except, you know, people might start catching up to you on the leaderboard, which is what you’re trying to avoid.
Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?
If anything, the leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals, should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements (kill 30 ambients), as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).
And of course, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t here from the start.
Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play. I dont see any improvement. Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.
So you’re saying it rewards dedication to the task. I’m not seeing a problem. I’m really not sure why you think you deserve more just because you play a lot or longer than others.
You contradict yourself. First you say it rewards dedication to the task and in next sentence you say people dont deserve more for playing longer.
But its like that already 5 dailies in 15minutes or 20 AP in 4-6 hours. So playing more per day gives more AP.
No contradiction. Being dedicated to a task and asking to be set apart from others because you’ve played longer are completely different things and it’s telling that you think it’s only black or white.
You’re basically saying that you deserve an advantage over a person who started 1 week ago because you were playing a year ago and you want to take away the chance for the person who started a week ago from ever catching up to you.
That’s pretty much the definition of what it means to be selfish and entitled.
At the end of the day if you feel like it’s to much work to do all the daily achievements just don’t do them. You’re inventing a problem that doesn’t exist so you can keep your spot on the leader boards without putting in that much effort all the while cutting off the chances from other ap seekers from ever getting to the top.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
No longer in signature. Well, that’s interesting.
If there wouldn’t be less choice, then there would be the same amount (if not more) Achievement points and their related tasks offered each day. Great! We are on the same page. =)
Choice is always a good thing!
I didn’t want it sending the wrong message, and obviously it was.
So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?
If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?
If a hard cap were introduced I would absolutely be able to slow down, as any points I miss or would miss could be “made up” in a sense. Surely even new players would appreciate that, right? I probably would just do 5 on some days, and after I hit the cap, I would do 5 for the item rewards.
There’s nothing stopping you from doing that even without a hard cap, except, you know, people might start catching up to you on the leaderboard, which is what you’re trying to avoid.
Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?
If anything, the leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals, should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements (kill 30 ambients), as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).
And of course, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t here from the start.
Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play. I dont see any improvement. Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.
So you’re saying it rewards dedication to the task. I’m not seeing a problem. I’m really not sure why you think you deserve more just because you play a lot or longer than others.
boons are NOT the issue, This change would be very pointless and break SO many builds across multiple classes for no reason what so ever.
Not technically true. The defiant and unshakable are technically boons and they are a large part of the problem.
Convert those to resistance instead of straight up immunity and that would help a lot. Alternatively just remove them from the game entirely.
Something so obvious it should have been done a year or more ago…which is why it will probably never happen.
So because some random nobody says the best way to get karma is with a warrior that means it’s absolutely 100% true?
And the rest, that’s hardly fact or even proof.
“The only logical solution is to nerf warrior mobility.”
I don’t see the logic here exactly.
Not the warrior, but another class would be the fastest, overpowered class. Do you consider it a solution?
Seems like you don’t want any balance, you just want to nerf warriors because you hate them, or one of them.The point is – warrior have too much of everything. It is a joke that a HEAVY armor class is able to escape SO easily and so freely without punishment. If Ride The Lightening deserved to be so heavily nerfed, the same should happen to Rush.
Heavy armor doesn’t do as much as you seem to think it does. Especially in a condition heavy meta like we have now.
Still seems like people aren’t going to be happy until warriors are a free kills again in wvw and pvp and all their damage reduced to nothing in pve. And as slow as a turtle as well.
Because that’s fair.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
All yours for 1600 gems in the gem store, limited time only.
Taking a quick look at this game, I couldn’t help but notice a pattern:
GW2 Activity / Dominant Profession
Dungeons: Warrior
Fractals: Warrior
Open World Events: Warrior
Open World Bosses: Warrior
WvW Zergs: Warrior
Hot Join PvP: Warrior
Solo PvP: Warrior
Team PvP: Warrior
GvG: Warrior
WvW roaming: Thief/MesmerAt the 1,000 foot-level, this doesn’t look like something that’s balanced: quite the opposite.
Does the balance team ever look up and examine profession balance across the board?
During the “Ready Up” stream, the developers were very concerned about over-nerfing Healing Signet for warriors such that it may not make them viable in the meta (i.e. team PvP).
Why is this such a massive concern? It’s not as though warriors are in so bad a place that no one will ever play warrior in Guild War(ior)s 2 again if you do nerf them out of the meta. They’d still be the most powerful profession for the vast majority of the game.
Now, take a look at, say, engineers. I can’t remember the last time I saw an engineer in anything but PvP and roaming WvW. Nerfing engineers very well could result in the profession not being played – anywhere.
Here’s where I am scratching my head: you’ve buffed a class to the point where it is, literally, the most dominant class in nearly every aspect of the entire game, and you guys are deeply worried about over-nerfing it in just one area of the game.
You guys are the balance team, and I’m sure that role has to necessarily include all aspects of gameplay in Guild Wars 2. So I’m asking: is this balanced?
Numbers to back up your post or are you just joining the warrior hate band wagon?
I’m gonna guess that you don’t have the numbers to back your claim up though because they don’t exist.
P.S. Something must be wrong with my eyes because for the most part I see most professions represented somewhat equally when I run dungeons or do other things in pve. Even rangers.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
And why should everyone else trying to get a lot of ap not have the same opportunity that you have/had?
Because it is too hard. They have to spend hours not having fun to get their AP. It just isn’t fair to them. :P
If you don’t agree that’s fine and you’ve said your piece, not sure why you’re still posting here.
I have to say I’m confused. If wanting less daily achievements has nothing to do with the Leaderboard, why would someone who didn’t care about the Leaderboard place their Leaderboard ranking in their signature?
Still, let’s say it does have nothing to do with keeping one’s rank on the Leaderboard. Why should their be less choices for everyone because some do not want to do all the achievements? Why can’t some people just not choose to do everything on offer? If some people do not care for PvP, they can choose not to play that part of the game, even though it is offered. If some people find it tiresome to do Jumping Puzzles, they can choose not to complete them…even though the game offers that content. Why should Daily or Monthly Achievements be any different?
It seems to me that more choice is always a good thing. But, that’s just me.
Nah, it’s not just you. All of us “trolls” that make up 99% of the player base feel the same way.
If you don’t agree that’s fine and you’ve said your piece, not sure why you’re still posting here.
He probably keeps posting in this thread because you’re so much fun.
Its amusing Anet gives infractions for pointing out obvious trolls, but the trolls are allowed to post whatever, just because they might sound reasonable on first look. But as soon as you look at their AP and PvP rankings they are quickly uncovered.
One more reason to loose faith in this company.
What’s really amusing is that you have some arbitrary number in mind that determines who is a troll and who isn’t based solely on their AP and pvp ranking.
Just like the topic of Ewon from the old suggestions forum, non-completionnist people like some who posted here already dont understand the problem and think we, ap hunters, want to stay at the top without efforts. That is not the problem here, the suggestions that have been brought to make it better for everyone, dont even affect non-completionnists and reduce the very grindy aspect of hunting for AP. How is that affect you folks ?
It’s a simple fact that it requires way too much time to complete all. When you go for those extra achievement points, you dont have much time left to actually play contents that you would like to do. The problem of the daily gradually increased as they added more dailies, then dailies for each new living stories to complete the related meta achievements, but still, it was doable in decent amount of time. The really big troubles came with the december update and the new pvp dailies which triple/quadrupled the amount of time required to complete all the dailies related to the pvp. How is that normal to have to spend more time to do 1 full pvp daily than a monthly pvp ?
So please, dont just turn down the completionnists with simple WRONG ideas like we want to stay forever on the leaderboard or we should play even more to keep our position, that is not the problem here.
So then don’t complete them all?
I’m sure you don’t need to be told…but you realize it’s purely optional right? You choose to do it or not. If it takes to much time then just don’t do it?
If you want a top spot on the leader board then invest the effort but don’t try to have that system changed because all of a sudden “it’s to much work”.
And why should everyone else trying to get a lot of ap not have the same opportunity that you have/had?
I feel like this is an elaborate troll. Asking for the game to be changed because you don’t know how to manage your time is just..I don’t even know.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
To use a Deimos Argument:
Necros class theme:
Death Shroud, minions, healthMesmers:
illusions, conditions, stealthElementalist:
The elements, attunements, aoe damageThief:
stealth, mobility, damageRangers:
pets, kiting, damageengineers:
tool kits/ tool belt, conditions, damagegaurdians:
boons, blocking, damage, armorwarriors:
land speed/health/armor/damage/passive effects/mobilitythat’s fair
Except for health is shared with necro, armor is shared with guardian, and thief can do quite a bit more damage. And shouldn’t land speed be rolled into mobility? Because that’s what it is?
So where a mesmer gets it’s clones to make up for not having a lot of hp or armor it gets something better as far as defenses go. Where an engineer might lack a bit of mobility they are gain quite a bit of defense from conditions like blind.
The point is that for every “bonus” a warrior has other classes have a compensation for it. Some better, some worse. But that’s beside the point.
So yeah, I fixed the list for you! That’s fair. Wouldn’t want you to appear biased in your comparison or anything.
shouldn’t adrenaline be on your list for warriors? Or do class specific mechanics cancel each other out? So deathshroud,illusions,ele attunement,kits,etc need to be removed.
I added it…and I’m questioning what “passive effects” are on that list. I think every class has “passive effects”. Some good, some bad. So that’s not even warrior thing, whatever it’s supposed to mean.
To use a Deimos Argument:
Necros class theme:
Death Shroud, minions, health, conditions, aoe damage, passive effectsMesmers:
illusions, conditions, stealth, passive effectsElementalist:
The elements, attunements, aoe damage, passive effectsThief:
stealth, mobility, damage, passive effectsRangers:
pets, kiting, damage, passive effectsengineers:
tool kits/ tool belt, conditions, damage, passive effectsgaurdians:
boons, blocking, damage, armor, passive effectswarriors:
land speed,health,armor,damage,passive effects,mobility, adrenalinethat’s fair
Except for health is shared with necro, armor is shared with guardian, and thief can do quite a bit more damage. And shouldn’t land speed be rolled into mobility? Because that’s what it is?
So where a mesmer gets it’s clones to make up for not having a lot of hp or armor it gets something better as far as defenses go. Where an engineer might lack a bit of mobility they gain quite a bit of defense from conditions like blind.
The point is that for every “bonus” a warrior has other classes have a compensation for it. Some better, some worse. But that’s beside the point.
So yeah, I fixed the list for you! That’s fair. Wouldn’t want you to appear biased in your comparison or anything.
And finally, at the end of the day making class vs class comparisons is flawed because that’s not how a-net balances this game. And this the argument most people seem to be making. “Well warrior has a better <insert ability here> than <class> so warrior needs a nerf”. Nope, sorry. Wrong.
Warrior does a lot of things okay. It by no means does everything the best. Jack of all trades, master of none, etc.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
they can flee, because their profession mechanics allow them to do so. did you forget that they are melee profession and require movement skills to get close to attack?
And this makes my point. You appear to have difficulty understanding very key components of making an experienced and intelligent argument. You do not even know what your own mains professional mechanic is. It is your adrenaline and F1 key. Fleeing is in no way part of their professional mechanic.
As well, you make a lot of false claims. They are not a melee profession. Warriors are a heavy armor profession with both melee and ranged weapons. You can have purely ranged or purely melee weapons, but it would really help your argument if you developed a little more understanding of the profession you are making blind arguments in favor of.
Do I need to quote the balancing philosophies for you again?Since we’re talking about things the devs said, lets go back to the original description they gave warriors on their official page shall we..?
“Warriors are masters of weaponry who rely on speed, strength, toughness, and heavy armor to survive in battle. Adrenaline fuels their offensive power—the longer warriors stay in a fight, the more dangerous they become.”
Interesting how they can contradict themselves is it not? Then again, they’ve nerfed all our burst skills so the second part is kind of a lie, which is another contradiction. So the precedent has been set, what they say one day is completely irrelevant to the next. Hence their design philosophies that you are using to justify your need for more nerfs are a joke.
And you keep assuming things and being wrong. You should really work on that.
/Sigh…….shakes head.
that quote might have some weight to it if you had even the slightest concept of who wrote it. I know who wrote that. It was not a dev. Might I make a friendly suggestion? It may be wise to actually know something about points you are attempting to make . At least I am actually quoting devs, offering you a source link, and making sure their names are visible. What your doing is copy/pasting what the promotional and advertising department put on a promotion website. But to claim a dev said something when they did not, works strongly against your point.
Fair point that a dev might not have said it directly. But it’s still officially an endorsed description by arena-net so in the end it doesn’t matter who said it. At one point in time some one sat down and decided “this is how a warrior is supposed to be” and slapped a-nets label on it.
So your point on who said what and when is moot.
Please do not assume the design philosophies have anything to do with the actual classes.
Elementalist:
Elementalists are multi-faceted spellcasters that channel elemental forces, making fire, air, earth, and water do their bidding. What they lack in physical toughness, they make up in versatility and the ability to inflict massive damage in a single attack.
They did not trade durability for massive damage or even a massive damage attack. Their DPS is on par with other classes. Also Elementalists get their DPS from many attacks, not 1 attack.
Air:
_By harnessing wind and lightning, elementalists can target specific foes with focused, high-damage attacks. _
Staff air has only 1 damaging attack and it is a chain (and is the second worst auto attack in the game). The scepter has no high-damage attacks, but a series of smaller attacks. The Dagger actually has 3 attacks, none of which are high damage (although the lightning whip is the best auto attack).
I am sure other classes can comment on how their class has slipped from the original design, but as of right now the class descriptions are outdated (I believe they were created in the alpha when the elementalist attunements actually did something before traiting).
Thanks for demonstrating further that the devs know how to easily contradict themselves.
Super idea. Nerf warriors stability in the condition heavy meta and warrior being a melee centric profession…
People on this forum really won’t be happy until warriors are either always a free kill or removed from the game.
This profession balance forum was a bad idea. Encourages all these completely clueless people to make stupid threads like this.
I’m guessing within a few days the next complaint from people will be that it is unfair warrior can use so many different weapons so they shouldn’t be able to equip a second weapon.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
Is this for real? A nerf to vigor is a buff to warriors? Seriously? And warriors don’t have to use dodge either?
What other stupid reasons can we come up with to nerf warriors (more)?
(edited by fellyn.5083)
If we’re not debating their balance philosophies then why do you keep bringing it up? You seem to forget that you’re the one who was doing that and not me. You asked what I thought about it.
Honestly, I cannot believe I even need to explain this to you. It is very simple. We are not debating their balance philosophies, because they have already laid out the philosophies. Simply put, this thread is not about their balancing philosophies, but how the capabilities of the warrior appear in no way congruent to said philosophies. It seems extremely elementary that this even needs to be explained. Players did not come up with the philosophies. The devs did. If you have a problem with that, I guess you can pointlessly debate what their philosophies, but I hate to break it to you, we players cannot change it. What we can do, is point out the vast disparities between what their philosophies are, and what the professions capabilities are.
And I do not remember ever mentioning my opinion on nerfs to other professions. But go on, keep assuming things and being wrong. You’re doing a good job at it so far.
My point exactly. You clearly have no idea what the other professions can do, or how they play. Thank you for pointing that out.
unfortunately, there are also a lot casual warrior hater players who think warriors are overpowered, hence the upcoming healing signet shave and long bow pin down, both of which are totally uncalled for.
thank goodness healing signet is not completely neutered.
I am actually a warrior fan. You simply chose to personally attack anyone who presents an intelligent argument that contradicts you. It may help if you presented some form of intelligent counter argument.
Nice of you to point out how out of balance you feel the warrior profession is by pointing out the unnecessarily high amount of health regen they have access to, in comparison to other professions. You my friend, are certainly a fun person to discuss and debate with, because you so openly make my points for me, or expand on them way. Your efforts in that are much appreciated, thank you.
Since we’re talking about things the devs said, lets go back to the original description they gave warriors on their official page shall we..?
“Warriors are masters of weaponry who rely on speed, strength, toughness, and heavy armor to survive in battle. Adrenaline fuels their offensive power—the longer warriors stay in a fight, the more dangerous they become.”
Interesting how they can contradict themselves is it not? Then again, they’ve nerfed all our burst skills so the second part is kind of a lie, which is another contradiction. So the precedent has been set, what they say one day is completely irrelevant to the next. Hence their design philosophies that you are using to justify your need for more nerfs are a joke.
And you keep assuming things and being wrong. You should really work on that.
(edited by 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.
If we’re not debating their balance philosophies then why do you keep bringing it up? You seem to forget that you’re the one who was doing that and not me. You asked what I thought about it.
And I do not remember ever mentioning my opinion on nerfs to other professions. But go on, keep assuming things and being wrong. You’re doing a good job at it so far.
Wow, didn’t even think of this when they mentioned the new independent cds on sigils.
Bet you anything Anet will say that this is working as intended since the poor Warriors have to trait 15 in order to get this completely OP buff.
Hey guys go easy on those OP warriors, their healing signet is losing 30hp/s.. Now they can heal for only a measly 380 hps with the highest health pool in the game….
Well if something is working as it’s designed to should they lie about it? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here.
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.
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
“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.
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.
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.
You put way to much meaning on the word hampering. But sure, lets remove a core trait from warriors because it’s doing exactly what it was designed to do. All because a bunch of whiners on the forums are complaining they are being denied their free warrior kills.
At the end of the day not a single person in this thread has provided a good reason why it needs to change other than “I think..”.
I see your point, but I think your entire case falls apart upon close inspection… Your retort always involves “free warrior kills”, but since when have warriors been considered free kills? Are they not considered, by any non-biased source, to be one of the strongest classes in the current meta? So how is getting a warrior down to low HP a “free warrior kill”? And if you say “well maybe you outnumber the warrior so it’s a free kill!”, that would apply to ANY class. Then, by your own logic, EVERY class should have huge mobility comparable to a Warrior’s.
Thus it seems your core response fails. No one is suggesting that warriors should be free kills, and warriors even with 0 battle movement are hardly free kills.
I also find it funny that you call this a “core trait” of warriors. In what sense is this a core trait? A very powerful trait, yes, but hardly core to Warrior. It’s extraneous, not part of the core Warrior experience.
Difference is I’m not arguing to take something away because I don’t like it.
I don’t think anyone’s argument amounts to “I don’t like it”. I think the case is more accurately summed up thusly:
Warriors are in a good enough place balance-wise that the additional mobility is not only uneeded, but indeed, overpowered. The Warrior’s natural tankiness, defensive utilities, high access to offensive boons, and extremely powerful condi cleansing/resistance combine to make the Warrior’s high mobility too much.
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.
And you’re right, most arguments in this thread are not “I don’t like it”, instead it’s mostly “it’s not fair”. Which is the best reason to balance something I’ve ever heard of. Ironically at any given point in time some one has probably claimed every single thing in the game isn’t fair for one reason or another. So yeah…
You put way to much meaning on the word hampering. But sure, lets remove a core trait from warriors because it’s doing exactly what it was designed to do. All because a bunch of whiners on the forums are complaining they are being denied their free warrior kills.
At the end of the day not a single person in this thread has provided a good reason why it needs to change other than “I think..”.
I see your point, but I think your entire case falls apart upon close inspection… Your retort always involves “free warrior kills”, but since when have warriors been considered free kills? Are they not considered, by any non-biased source, to be one of the strongest classes in the current meta? So how is getting a warrior down to low HP a “free warrior kill”? And if you say “well maybe you outnumber the warrior so it’s a free kill!”, that would apply to ANY class. Then, by your own logic, EVERY class should have huge mobility comparable to a Warrior’s.
Thus it seems your core response fails. No one is suggesting that warriors should be free kills, and warriors even with 0 battle movement are hardly free kills.
I also find it funny that you call this a “core trait” of warriors. In what sense is this a core trait? A very powerful trait, yes, but hardly core to Warrior. It’s extraneous, not part of the core Warrior experience.
Difference is I’m not arguing to take something away because I don’t like it.
You put way to much meaning on the word hampering. But sure, lets remove a core trait from warriors because it’s doing exactly what it was designed to do. All because a bunch of whiners on the forums are complaining they are being denied their free warrior kills.
At the end of the day not a single person in this thread has provided a good reason why it needs to change other than “I think..”.
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?
It’s interesting how you take that to mean only movement impairing conditions instead of the other 8 million conditions in the game and think this is a valid reason to remove one of the more useful wvw/pvp traits warrior has.
But no no, I understand, you want warriors rooted in place from 100% hp to 0% hp. You deserve those kills after all.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
What mobility issues in WvW?
Um, the fact that some classes have way too much escape mobility.
Yes, nothing worse than a thief spamming HS to run away from you at a rate of like 123984612037846 meters per second. Or worse, Monarch’s Leap.
Right.
BTW these are not in fact “mobility issues”, at least have the common sense to call them something like “disengage issues” or something.
I call it an entitlement issue. People thinking they deserve to have a kill when in reality they don’t.
I call it an entitlement issue. People thinking they deserve to escape when in reality they don’t. See what I did there, that isn’t an argument, and has no logical thinking behind it.
Now onto the thread. I think leap skills should all be like ride the lightning. That way if they run away they can’t comeback and use those skills. People can run away all they want the problem comes when they disengage and then reengage when it is convenient for them. If the cooldowns on some of those skills were like rtl they couldn’t be used to reset fights casually because of longer cooldowns. Although I would consider not making this change to heartseeker because it needs to be spammable for d/p thieves.
Be careful there sir, that you don’t cut yourself with that sharp wit.
What mobility issues in WvW?
Um, the fact that some classes have way too much escape mobility.
Yes, nothing worse than a thief spamming HS to run away from you at a rate of like 123984612037846 meters per second. Or worse, Monarch’s Leap.
Right.
BTW these are not in fact “mobility issues”, at least have the common sense to call them something like “disengage issues” or something.
I call it an entitlement issue. People thinking they deserve to have a kill when in reality they don’t.
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.
You’re stretching incredibly far for that one. And I wasn’t being sarcastic. The way this particular forum is going people will only be happy once warrior has been removed from the game completely, so why stop at removing just 1 trait?
you can’t expect them to list every little change in the patch notes :p they listed the major ones anyway. For instance another unlisted minor bug fix was with omnom ghost, its no longer glitchy as kitten. I agree they sort of blindsided us with that cof p1 change, that was a bit uncalled for. At worst you’ll see more player casualties as they race for that room and then realize its closed.. then again i never use that room so its all meh for me. Just lots more ppl joining me to camp my spot… hehe :P
Yes you can.
My last log in was somewhere in November 2013, reason warriors, exactly, I got eviscerate for 16+k damage, that’s more than thief HP bar. You may start trash talk about l2p, but my gw 2 game experience is since November 2012- November 2013, mostly as a thief, champion illusionist champion shadow. IMO wariors have all in one, best of all classes, high survivability, high DPS, high mobility. So the point is, this game only about favorite class by devs, and player base can do nothing with it.
And what kind of gear were you and the warrior wearing? I’m guessing berserker right? What kind of buffs? Debuffs? Food?
You leave out quite a bit of information. And don’t act like thieves can’t do similar amounts of damage from stealth, if not more.
But I guess if you admitted to those little tidbits of fact then you wouldn’t be able to say warriors are op.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
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.
I didn’t know warrior was the only class that could weapon swap or use weapon swap sigils.
You learn something new every day.
Only class that can use them every 5 seconds, vs 9-10 seconds for other classes. Was kind of the point of the whole thread. Unlearn and try again.
I’m still not seeing a problem.
I didn’t know warrior was the only class that could weapon swap or use weapon swap sigils.
You learn something new every day.
yes make them require target then they will be completly useless!
9/10 times rush/bullsrush other gap closers will bug if target moves a little. So doing this will make mobility skills insta death button.
The only thing that would change is that you wouldn’t be able to escape fights you should not be escaping to begin with.
Guild Wars 2 is a game of crutches and man do people start to get upset when anyone even suggests a crutch be removed.
Why? Because you think you are owed a kill that you didn’t earn?
This may come as a shocker but if some one is running from you that means you won the fight.
Even at 60% capped crit damage, which is what it always should have been, Zerker will still be better than condition damage.
Please, there’s a reason everybody runs zerker, and it’s not for the “slight” difference between it and the alternatives.
Next on the chopping block should be warrior PvE and guardian sustain, especially guardian reflection uptimes. Blind should have diminishing returns, or guardians should have less access to it.
Warrior banners/FGJ duration also need a nerf comparing their utility to other classes’ utility.
Buff necromancer dagger and axe, and make necro dagger hit 3 targets, or make weapons restricted to single targets do more damage than weapons that cleave (warrior axe vs. thief and necro dagger).
Buff the terrible elementalist scepter and dagger autoattacks, especially water attunement autoattacks. Your only source of competitive damage shouldn’t be lightning hammer or fire attunement staff.
Buff ranger greatsword, buff ranger pet trait with 30% crit dmg bonus to 60% so rangers can gain same crit dmg bonus to all their damage contributions as all the other classes instead of having 30-50% of their damage only have 30% crit dmg bonus.
Give pets/minions 70-80% aoe damage reduction so they’re actually useful in dungeons and WvW in particular. Make ranger melee pets cleave with their autoattacks, and remove the huge 45 sec cd death cooldown and replace it with a 15-20 sec cd death cd.
Give weapons like guardian mace/warrior mace and shield more use.
Outright buff ranger mainhand/offhand axes. Make whirling defense usable while moving.
P.S. I’m just happy cheesy D/P thieves with 110% crit dmg bonus are history. No more 8-9k backstabs with permastealth might stacking cheesiness.
Nerfing is not what either warrior or guardian needs. They should instead change mechanics to encourage using something other than berserker gear.
As many times as it’s been said people still don’t get this.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
The problem is that Anet hasn’t stated anywhere that they understand what the real problem is and they’ve demonstrated the same thing in the past multiple times.
They have, they’ve stated that changing to Ferocity was a necessary first step.
I don’t see how it is but whatever. Where have they said they understand that core combat mechanics whats going to change instead of tweaks to gear sets as a band aid fix?
First step? The game is over a year old and quite frankly this first step is nothing more then to slow down the players abilities to kill content.
When you don’t have a trinity (which I feel is far superior to what we have currently in gw2) you need to design encounters which require more then simply dps to beat.
Anet has failed miserably on this as pretty much all content in gw2 is mindless dps spam or mindless dps zergs.
It is my opinion this change will do a great deal of harm to this games health and player base. When you release gear grinds such as ascended which some people spend real money on to acquire and create via the gem store and tp – if you change said items it angers many people.
It also removes any and all faith and trust in Anet and a lot of people will not buy any gems in the future due to this nerf.
I am guessing that this patch will have a direct impact on Gem purchases and conversion to gold. I forsee a LARGE drop since they pretty much tossed trusting them out the window.
I think you misunderstood my post. I’m saying core combat mechanics need to change not gear stats.
I was asking that person where it has been said by anet dev that they understand the core issue, that berserker stats are not it and how nerfing berserker gear is the first step to fixing a problem that doesn’t exist, or at the very least is misunderstood.
(edited by fellyn.5083)
The problem is that Anet hasn’t stated anywhere that they understand what the real problem is and they’ve demonstrated the same thing in the past multiple times.
They have, they’ve stated that changing to Ferocity was a necessary first step.
I don’t see how it is but whatever. Where have they said they understand that core combat mechanics are going to change instead of tweaks to gear sets as a band aid fix?
(edited by fellyn.5083)
I’ve played a lot of MMOs and never before have I seen one with as much blatant class bias as Guild Wars 2. Why on earth does the most heavily armored class in the game also offer superior mobility? It’s time to get serious about class roles and stop bullkittenting your community with balance patches that do nothing but unbalance the game further.
Guardians have superior mobility? I thought we were talking about warriors. Color me confused.