Upcoming Balance Notes - Page 14 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Professions

Upcoming Balance Notes

11011121416

Comments

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2020

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2020

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    Wow, have you been sleeping under a rock or something???
    Can you remember the Feb. update? They've never done such an overhaul before! Sure it was only PvP/WvW, but it was huge! Secondly, I'd literally draw the exact opposite conclusion, from what you're writing. In those 8 years, they've never talked so specifically about team composition changes as they did with the balance teams lately! Or have you conveniently missed all the memo's? I mean, to me, they we're pretty much screaming from the top of their longs: sorry about our state of balance (at least in the competitive areas), let us try to make it up to you! The frequency of releasing balance patches is imo still far too low, but that's a whole different discussion. But really, you can't close your eyes to all the obvious signs they were giving, and I wouldn't be surprise if they're mum (NCSoft) is involved in this as well!

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2020

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    Wow, have you been sleeping under a rock or something???
    Can you remember the Feb. update? They've never done such an overhaul before! Sure it was only PvP/WvW, but it was huge! Secondly, I'd literally draw the exact opposite conclusion, from what you're writing. In those 8 years, they've never talked so specifically about team composition changes as they did with the balance teams lately! Or have you conveniently missed all the memo's? I mean, to me, they we're pretty much screaming from the top of their longs: sorry about our state of balance (at least in the competitive areas), let us try to make it up for you! The frequency of releasing balance patches is imo still far too low, but that's a whole different discussion. But really, you can't close your eyes to all the obvious signs they were giving, and I wouldn't be surprise if they're mum (NCSoft) is involved in this as well!

    I'm not saying direction can't change and third parties can't influence that. The point if NCSoft is involved in class balance is moot because the discussion was related to the fact that ...

    Anet knows what that direction is (regardless how third parties influence it) and how to change the game to get it. The idea that players know better than Anet what direction of the game should be and how the game should change to do it is absolutely absurd ... EVEN if NCSoft is or is not involved in that activity.

    The only reason we are talking about NCSoft here is someone claiming that Anet is doing 'bad' balance resulting in NCSoft intervening. Frankly, I think that's a stretch ... but it's also a metric kitten ton of speculation as well. The idea that NCSoft comes in and Anet to lay off people somehow related to class balance is just nonsense.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Naxos.2503Naxos.2503 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm fairly certain the lay offs are completely unrelated to Guild wars 2 proper. The company has already explained that it was because of side projects whose investments had been wasted and did not pan out, leading to an overall lack of efficiency, both on new projects and current projects (gw2), thus needing to be reframed onto what was already working (again, gw2). I'm not saying it was the only reason, but it's likely the biggest one.

    Balance for a game of that complexity is never gonna be easy, especially if new things get added ontop. And we like having new things added ontop. It keeps things fresh. What we dont like is when those new things invalidate old things. And that's the part they havent quite figured out yet.

  • Josiah.2967Josiah.2967 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @lare.5129 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:
    Warrior is trash, fix it.

    why it should not be trash? this is BS. All call this class BS. Banner Slave. Not Banner King.

    messmer

    mesmer was pro versus dominant pvp class very long time. Let them chill some time.

    Give Banners to Necromancers without impacting their DPS. Make it a buff to what they all ready do. They will be brought to raids with sub par DPS... WIn-Win? Am I doing this right?

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    In a business perspective

    business is a business. It not any tie whit balance, classes, and nerf or boost.

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    Can you remember the Feb. update? They've never done such an overhaul before! Sure it was only PvP/WvW, but it was huge!

    WHAT?? lol. no. have see no "huge changes"on wvw, play and whit fb feel NO ANY changes, with thief feel some nerf personal dps, but incoming damage from skilled players feel the same.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    I think its reasonable, think about it. You lay off their staff and replace them with your own ..

    Again ... I'm not saying direction can't change and third parties can't influence that. The point of NCSoft being involved in class balance or not is moot because the what is important here is that WHOEVER is in the driver seat determines the game direction and how to change the game to get it despite your claim they don't and players know better. That's just doesn't make sense. Whether you think that whoever is Anet or not, is really not relevant to the discussion. Whoever that is, they DEFINITELY know better than players what direction they want the game to go in and how to make changes to the game to do that because it's their call to make that direction whatever they want it to be.

    And what it is they are doing is stripping aspects of classes, to roll into E-specs and sell back to us. Just like with tomes and guardian~ I can see a world where the next batch of E-specs bring back all that was removed and then some to help sell them. And thus power-creed returns, and we are back at square one.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 25, 2020

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    I think its reasonable, think about it. You lay off their staff and replace them with your own ..

    Again ... I'm not saying direction can't change and third parties can't influence that. The point of NCSoft being involved in class balance or not is moot because the what is important here is that WHOEVER is in the driver seat determines the game direction and how to change the game to get it despite your claim they don't and players know better. That's just doesn't make sense. Whether you think that whoever is Anet or not, is really not relevant to the discussion. Whoever that is, they DEFINITELY know better than players what direction they want the game to go in and how to make changes to the game to do that because it's their call to make that direction whatever they want it to be.

    And what it is they are doing is stripping aspects of classes, to roll into E-specs and sell back to us. Just like with tomes and guardian~ I can see a world where the next batch of E-specs bring back all that was removed and then some to help sell them. And thus power-creed returns, and we are back at square one.

    OK ... that doesn't change what I said ... I'm not going to argue your interpretation of what's happening or why ... it's irrelevant. I'm also not going to get wrapped up in a discussion about some speculative conspiracy you have about Anet devs being replaced by NCSoft aliens so that they can changes classes in order to repackage and sell us especs leading to world domination either ... it's also irrelevant.

    Whatever far out theories you have that you want to believe, the fact remains that despite your claims, Anet (whoever you believe they are or are not) directs the game and changes it how they see fit for whatever reason they have to do it and certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine it. It's not about what is better or correct ... it's simply about what Anet wants to happen.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • ArielRebel.3426ArielRebel.3426 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Anet [...] certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine it.

    The history of video games have many times showed that often devs/producers can and will actually kill their own game or suffer substantial financial loses because of how bad were the decisions they made. It can be monetization (turning off players because they feel scammed, example: battlefield, fifa), priorizing a certain aspect over an other (turning off a good chunk of their game's population, example: bungie refusing to do anything about cheaters in PVP hence why that game mode is a ghost town on PC and most hardcore PVP players will seek their fun somewhere else), but it can also be poor balancing (many games fail at developping a competitive scene, ex: HotS which blizzard essentially pulled the plug a while back, For Honor by ubisoft is essentially on life support and balancing was one of the main reasons). There are many more examples.

    To take the For Honor example, they often used "metrics" to base their balancing. A certain character would be broken if played a certain way (abusing a certain move) and would therefore be seen as performing much better than the truth was (ie: anybody not abusing said move would almost ways suck and be at a huge disadvantage) so instead of balancing the character (by removing the broken move and giving him other better tools to compensate), they often sat on their thumbs and waited YEARS before addressing the issues. Hell, you can search on youtube, ubisoft was made fun off because in their "competitive tournament" the winner was a returning player that simply spammed the same move over and over again and there was no way to counter it so he won over veterans that never stopped playing the game. The game/studio lost all credibility toward proper balance of their game and thus a good chunk of players moved on.

    All that to say, devs/producers THINK they may know what is best for their game, but it is far from being always the case. If Anet was so good at decision making for their game, don't you think GW2 wouldn't be MUCH more popular?

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ryou.2398 said:
    What a lame excuse ...

    Excuse for what? There isn't an excuse here. That's simply how it works. Implying it should be 'done better' means you haven't grasped how this process works. I don't get what 'valid point' is being made here ... Anet will never be able to make good class changes because it's not the way the poster (or other changes that some players don't like) want the direction of the game to go? Sure ... GREAT point.

    I'm the angry one? No, I'm good thanks. I'm actually pretty happy with most things that happen in this game.

    When your players know more about the game, its mechanics and its performance offer feed-back its beneficial to listen because they aren't being biased.

    OK ... but that doesn't change the fact that Anet knows what direction they want it to take and make changes to do that. If they consider player feedback in that process ... great ... no one here is saying they don't. I will say they don't ALWAYS do that because frankly, players DON"T always have good ideas and DON'T know what direction the game is going.

    I know you're going to try to say players know more than Anet about what they should do than Anet knows about what they want to do ... but that doesn't make sense.

    Well, NCsoft seems displeased with what they've been doing prior to the lay offs. Thus that would in theory mean that they didn't do that good?

    In a business perspective, perhaps. But no one should be claiming that 'displeasure' is related to how Anet balances classes though; there was never any statement from NCSoft that was even remotely linking the layoffs to how Anet balanced classes. If NCSoft is concerned about class balance ... obviously they don't have a problem with how Anet does it as it's been the same approach for the last 8 years ... or even NOW. Besides ... do you honestly think that if NCSoft was unhappy with how classes were balanced, their answer to that is to make Anet lay people off? That's rather absurd.

    I think its reasonable, think about it. You lay off their staff and replace them with your own ..

    Again ... I'm not saying direction can't change and third parties can't influence that. The point of NCSoft being involved in class balance or not is moot because the what is important here is that WHOEVER is in the driver seat determines the game direction and how to change the game to get it despite your claim they don't and players know better. That's just doesn't make sense. Whether you think that whoever is Anet or not, is really not relevant to the discussion. Whoever that is, they DEFINITELY know better than players what direction they want the game to go in and how to make changes to the game to do that because it's their call to make that direction whatever they want it to be.

    And what it is they are doing is stripping aspects of classes, to roll into E-specs and sell back to us. Just like with tomes and guardian~ I can see a world where the next batch of E-specs bring back all that was removed and then some to help sell them. And thus power-creed returns, and we are back at square one.

    Wait, can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?


    And I don't even think they need that espec power creep to sell the expansions. I understand that for some it will make it a "must buy if I want to keep playing the game", but I doubt it's any significant number of sold copies. It might just be that they don't extensively test out their builds, so the first x time after the release is basically community providing data for them. It could also be that making new especs slightly (or sometimes less "slightly") stronger simply eases the players into the new builds and then they can be nerfed back in line as more players use them. Might be all 3 of these (including powercreep for sales), might be none, might be something else. But I don't think especs being initially power creeped make a significant change in the expansion sales. (don't confuse that with me saying I think especs should bring power creep, I definitely think they shouldn't. It's just that if we know they'll be nerfed back in line "shortly" after, then... I don't really care that much -as long as it doesn't take a year or two to do it)

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @ArielRebel.3426 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Anet [...] certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine it.

    The history of video games have many times showed that often devs/producers can and will actually kill their own game or suffer substantial financial loses because of how bad were the decisions they made.

    That doesn't change what I said ... IF Anet's goal is to sink their own game ... then what I said is even MORE true. Anet certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine that direction ... even if it's as destructive as sinking their own game.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sobx.1758 said:
    can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?

    Guardians used to have Tomes as Elite skills.
    While the removal of said tomes wasn't related to elite specializations,
    Tomes still are something that returned with Firebrand.

    Allegedly, Arenanet also stripped some things off Acrobatics trait line and put them into Daredevil.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:
    can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?

    Guardians used to have Tomes as Elite skills.
    While the removal of said tomes wasn't related to elite specializations,
    Tomes still are something that returned with Firebrand.

    Allegedly, Arenanet also stripped some things off Acrobatics trait line and put them into Daredevil.

    So two examples in the whole history of the game is proof of what the poster is implying that Anet is being infiltrated by NCSoft agents to take over and resell elements of the game to us that we already have? Sounds like the stuff of a bad conspiracy theory movie script. I mean ... one of those examples isn't even recent ... I can't ever remember Guardians had Tomes as elite skills it was so long ago. Pretty sure that wasn't that a move to 'resell' content to us 5-7 years down the road.

    The fact is that the poster is being sensational and speculative to try to 'prove' something that didn't ever happen yet.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    So two examples in the whole history of the game is proof of what the poster is implying that Anet is being infiltrated by NCSoft agents to take over and resell elements of the game to us that we already have? Sounds like the stuff of a bad conspiracy theory movie script. I mean ... one of those examples isn't even recent

    Whether it happens to Arenanet, I cannot say.
    However, stopping the free and superior Arc Templates just to bring in their fundamentally worse and unnecessarily high monetized loadout system
    is rather similar to taking out elements that existed and selling them.
    Once Arenanet is selling us fall damage reduction, we can definitely mark that hypothesis as proven.

    ... I can't ever remember Guardians had Tomes as elite skills it was so long ago.
    Pretty sure that wasn't that a move to 'resell' content to us 5-7 years down the road.

    As I said, the removal wasn't tied to Elite Specializations.
    Both Tomes got replaced by the Elite Shout and Signet, when Arenanet consolidated all utility skills into specific categories
    I believe that also was when they introduced the category-based, wheel-shaped unlocking of utilities. skills.

    The fact is that the poster is being sensational and speculative to try to 'prove' something that didn't ever happen yet.

    A similar situation is happening with Blizzard Entertainment and its "parent" company ActivisionBlizzard.
    B.E. is losing more and more control over the company. While they don't actually take out elements out of World of Warcraft, having to grind borrowed power (which always feels the same) over and over again and having to regain the "right" to fly your mounts in each expansion comes rather close.

    But all of that doom-saying has nothing to do with non-existing, (not) upcoming balance notes.

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:
    can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?

    Guardians used to have Tomes as Elite skills.
    While the removal of said tomes wasn't related to elite specializations,
    Tomes still are something that returned with Firebrand.

    Allegedly, Arenanet also stripped some things off Acrobatics trait line and put them into Daredevil.

    So two examples in the whole history of the game is proof of what the poster is implying that Anet is being infiltrated by NCSoft agents to take over and resell elements of the game to us that we already have? Sounds like the stuff of a bad conspiracy theory movie script. I mean ... one of those examples isn't even recent ... I can't ever remember Guardians had Tomes as elite skills it was so long ago. Pretty sure that wasn't that a move to 'resell' content to us 5-7 years down the road.

    The fact is that the poster is being sensational and speculative to try to 'prove' something that didn't ever happen yet.

    I never said they were infiltrated; I said they blatantly will strip aspects (not even major ones) To sell back to you in the E-spec. What your class used to be able to do and what It cant do in some form will be sold to you. As for infiltrated ? A-net is under NC-soft west so its not even an infiltration thing; They are straight up owned and RAN by NCsoft and since Mo and Z left and the person in charge is directly tied to NCsoft? I mean with the information we have its factual. Until they come out and say otherwise and the Wiki who keeps track of this and is partnered and taken care of BY A-net even has him on the roster, and he is the only one I Can currently find in any position of meaning or power.. so its safe to assume NCsoft is running the show in the office.

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ArielRebel.3426 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Anet [...] certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine it.

    The history of video games have many times showed that often devs/producers can and will actually kill their own game or suffer substantial financial loses because of how bad were the decisions they made.

    That doesn't change what I said ... IF Anet's goal is to sink their own game ... then what I said is even MORE true. Anet certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine that direction ... even if it's as destructive as sinking their own game.

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:
    can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?

    Guardians used to have Tomes as Elite skills.
    While the removal of said tomes wasn't related to elite specializations,
    Tomes still are something that returned with Firebrand.

    Allegedly, Arenanet also stripped some things off Acrobatics trait line and put them into Daredevil.

    1. the tomes as listed above
    2. They did indeed strip some stuff from core Acrobatics to make room for daredevil (Likely because it would of been borked and broken beyond belief. Not that it wasn't/Isn't now.)
    3. Necromancers shroud used to provide a lot more coverage, and many of its utilities were changed from providing specific effects. I believe They had access to retaliation/resistance at one point? As they were at core our defacto condi class because back then many condi-classes or specs just outright sucked as condi as a whole also sucked.
    4. All of the changes done to revenant will be undone with the next E-spec; Such as the no stun-break on legend swap, the removal of block on sword offhand(The new weapon will likely have a block.) And Im sure battle-scars/shiro will synergize really well with whatever they are cooking. Time will tell. We do know glint took a sizeable rework and subsequent nerf when renegade was in the oven. I think its safe to assume this was done to make room for kalla~
    5. Berserker was neutered in competitive play, like its funny that spellbreaker came out and is just superior to it in almost every level. Berserker used to be WAY stronger, capable and able to hold its ground. Now? Its free bags in any competitive mode, but then so is warrior in general (Making room for the next E-spec.)
    6. Messmer, specifically mirage has been gutted and left for dead. Granted I dont believe this was indicative of the E-spec coming; But I do think that its subsequent "death" is going to be completely reinforced when messmer gets their new toy. Likely to be the best of what messmer could hope to be, for the time being.
    7. Damage on CC's in general, Im sure many specs coming in cantha will return us to a day where when spec'd you're CC's if you take the trait will do damage again or have extra effects. Where as now CC's are only good as CC's which hit some classes far harder than others.
    8. Rangers shouts were changed to commands, perhaps the new E-spec will have "shouts" and thus what once was will come back to haunt us again.
    9. Most E-specs just hand off tools from other classes to the classes who lack them, guardian and mantra's is another good example.

    Honestly you like most people will believe what you wana believe, no matter what I say or how much evidence I have its always "Well F you I dont believe anything but my own head cannon or narrative and yours doesn't align with mine you're an enemy." But the times in which they've nerfed a build or gutted something from a class or spec and then brought it back in some fashion on a new E-spec has been proven several times. Im not saying its 100% definitive that this is what happens, what I am saying is its happened enough to where its pretty safe to assume that they do indeed do it on a case by case basis.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    They will continue to slowly nerf classes as they progress to new expac (i agree with nerfing) but the ultimate goal is to bring out the new specs that will be just enough better than whats currently in existence to the point where you "need" the expac to be viable in competitive content. Once they have sold enough expacs they will "nerf" some parts of the overperforming new e specs to bring them inline. But they already have your cash so......

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    ... I can't ever remember Guardians had Tomes as elite skills it was so long ago.
    Pretty sure that wasn't that a move to 'resell' content to us 5-7 years down the road.

    As I said, the removal wasn't tied to Elite Specializations.
    Both Tomes got replaced by the Elite Shout and Signet, when Arenanet consolidated all utility skills into specific categories

    Yup, I think that wasn't really related, which is why when I see some statements like "what it is they are doing is stripping aspects of classes, to roll into E-specs and sell back to us" I'd like to hear more about that claim :D (I know you weren't the one to say that)

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2020

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @ArielRebel.3426 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Anet [...] certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine it.

    The history of video games have many times showed that often devs/producers can and will actually kill their own game or suffer substantial financial loses because of how bad were the decisions they made.

    That doesn't change what I said ... IF Anet's goal is to sink their own game ... then what I said is even MORE true. Anet certainly know better than players how to do that because they determine that direction ... even if it's as destructive as sinking their own game.

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:
    can you list exactly what they stripped off the classes to then sell us back as especs?

    Guardians used to have Tomes as Elite skills.
    While the removal of said tomes wasn't related to elite specializations,
    Tomes still are something that returned with Firebrand.

    Allegedly, Arenanet also stripped some things off Acrobatics trait line and put them into Daredevil.

    1. the tomes as listed above
    2. They did indeed strip some stuff from core Acrobatics to make room for daredevil (Likely because it would of been borked and broken beyond belief. Not that it wasn't/Isn't now.)
    3. Necromancers shroud used to provide a lot more coverage, and many of its utilities were changed from providing specific effects. I believe They had access to retaliation/resistance at one point? As they were at core our defacto condi class because back then many condi-classes or specs just outright sucked as condi as a whole also sucked.
    4. All of the changes done to revenant will be undone with the next E-spec; Such as the no stun-break on legend swap, the removal of block on sword offhand(The new weapon will likely have a block.) And Im sure battle-scars/shiro will synergize really well with whatever they are cooking. Time will tell. We do know glint took a sizeable rework and subsequent nerf when renegade was in the oven. I think its safe to assume this was done to make room for kalla~
    5. Berserker was neutered in competitive play, like its funny that spellbreaker came out and is just superior to it in almost every level. Berserker used to be WAY stronger, capable and able to hold its ground. Now? Its free bags in any competitive mode, but then so is warrior in general (Making room for the next E-spec.)
    6. Messmer, specifically mirage has been gutted and left for dead. Granted I dont believe this was indicative of the E-spec coming; But I do think that its subsequent "death" is going to be completely reinforced when messmer gets their new toy. Likely to be the best of what messmer could hope to be, for the time being.
    7. Damage on CC's in general, Im sure many specs coming in cantha will return us to a day where when spec'd you're CC's if you take the trait will do damage again or have extra effects. Where as now CC's are only good as CC's which hit some classes far harder than others.
    8. Rangers shouts were changed to commands, perhaps the new E-spec will have "shouts" and thus what once was will come back to haunt us again.
    9. Most E-specs just hand off tools from other classes to the classes who lack them, guardian and mantra's is another good example.

    So basically you're trying to list any major nerf and attribute it to existing or upcomming espec. I think that's far from truth, but I guess we'll see. :D

    1. I don't think change of guardian elite tomes had anything to do with upcomming espec, but only anet can know.
    2. That seems like a stretch, seeing how trait rewoks just happen and don't magically pop up in new especs all the time. But in this case... maybe?
    3. Core necro shroud did much more, so nerfing it somehow proves your point? I just don't see this one at all. Not even a little tbh, so not sure what else could I say about it. Maybe I could ask if you think it was undeserved and core necro is somehow terrible because of those nerfs without its own place in the game? (spoiler: I don't think so ;p )
    4. At this point it's not even an argument, it's something you think will potentially happen. But again you're trying to attribute any rework or nerf to next espec without real specifics, right?
    5. Those especs just... offer different things, how is this even an answer to the question about removing things from classes to repack then into next espec? "Room for next espec" again doesn't seem valid here. You think anet intentionally wants to kill a whole class to release an espec that'll be so broken that it'll be a must play for it? Why didn't they do the same things with other classes? That's just another weird, unsubstantiated claim to make imo.
    6. If you don't believe this was indicative of the espec coming (because it's most probably not and I don't think anyone thought it is), then why are you even trying to list it here? For the sake of having more points listed and someone forgetting what was the question on the way? It seems you're just -mostly- complaining about nerfs and reworks and pack them all to pretend to be an argument for your previous claim, isn't this exactly what's happening here?
    7. I don't think there's a chance for that unless they simply change their opinion about that whole nerf and return at least some of the damage to all cc skills. That said, again that's something you think might happen in the future (doubtful, but we'll see) and not something you can base your previous claim on.
    8. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But at this point it's not.
    9. And that's supporting your claim how exactly? I think it's pretty clear it has nothing to do with it. "Especs get new things" -well, duh.

    Honestly you like most people will believe what you wana believe, no matter what I say or how much evidence I have its always "Well F you I dont believe anything but my own head cannon or narrative and yours doesn't align with mine you're an enemy." But the times in which they've nerfed a build or gutted something from a class or spec and then brought it back in some fashion on a new E-spec has been proven several times. Im not saying its 100% definitive that this is what happens, what I am saying is its happened enough to where its pretty safe to assume that they do indeed do it on a case by case basis.

    Sure, people will mostly believe what they want to believe and it's also true for you -if you understand that, then it's all good. If you don't? Then just reread all your "evidence" from above and notice how many of things you've tried to pack in there you either don't even believe yourself OR you base on "I think that will happen in the future". That's not a whole lot "evidence" as opposed to what you try to claim in this paragraph.
    Also to make it clear, someone disagreeing with you doesn't mean they're suddenly your enemy or that they're attacking you.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2020

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:
    ... so its safe to assume NCsoft is running the show in the office.

    That makes no sense. You have no idea how NCSoft is involved with running the Anet office or decisions related to class changes in the game and nothing you are saying here is evidence of those things one way or the other.

    1. the tomes as listed above
    2. etc ....

    Except none of these changes are evidence of your claim that an NCSoft coup at Anet has resulted in some grand strategy to resell removed class content as especs resulting in devs that are bad a balancing. Even in the case of Tomes ... They only thing that was re-used was the word ... the current tomes aren't even CLOSE to how the original skills worked. So to conclude that they were removed as some malicious scheme to resell them to players as 'used' content to begin with ... is nonsense.

    I mean, your line of thought doesn't even make sense ... Anet doesn't NEED or benefit from stripping anything from the classes to sell us new especs because it's the same amount of work to backfill removed stuff as it is to create new content. So the idea that this is what is driving the 'bad' balancing decisions and class changes is completely absurd. This is simply a case that you don't like the changes and you have cobbled together this series of events and actions that lead to a highly speculative theory NCSoft takeover with the goal of reselling players content.

    Um, no ... these are intentional changes by people that have always done these changes with this philosophy since the beginning of the game. And I'm going to keep saying this; MOST of these changes have zero consideration of how classes perform relative to each other in any game mode. That's not a mistake. It's how Anet decided to manage the classes in this game and design the game as a whole. If that's something you aren't capable of accepting in a reasonable, age-appropriate manner ... you should probably give yourself a rethink of how you interpret and interact with this game because it's not accidental and it's not wrong and it's not likely to change given the 8 years it has worked exactly this way.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Teb.6980Teb.6980 Member ✭✭

    Hello anet if you're looking to nerf explosives grenade abuser holo the right way pls read this suggestion

    -Change grenade count from 3 to 1 for all grenade kit buttons
    -Change grenade barrage count from 6 to 3
    -Adjust grenade damage accordingly in such a way that one grenade hits for 3x more but with the 33% power dmg nerf that "all" skills got in the February balance

    The issue with this kind of "holo" is that they heat up the tank and hit their strongest hit while outside of holo forge, using shrapnel grenades and grenade barrage, while the power stacker is still ticking.
    This is a huge design mistake. By design, holo was supposed to be strong as holo, while using holo forge. But now players are simply perusing zephyr and stacking corona explosions until they heat up the tank, then THEY DON'T USE HOLO, and do a tonne of damage with sigil of intelligence, grenade barrage / minor grenade barrage on top of grenade autos
    Smart fix? Make the power stacker (augmented heat forge capacity) tick only while in holo forge.

    Please just address these design mistakes so that the non-OP "off-meta" builds like mine can still exist q.q

  • Burnfall.9573Burnfall.9573 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2020

    i would like this to be taken into serious consideration and to be prioritized and resolved when considering balance. Kroof is the only Guild Wars 2 Avid Passionate streamer at the moment who want this serious matter be resolved for the best interest for the game well being including its players who want to enjoy playing Guild Wars 2

    'Situations that are present are there because you allow and tolerate them to continue'

  • manu.7539manu.7539 Member ✭✭✭

    ELEMENTALIST: Weaver stances need to provide stability as they use to. I understand why they nerfed it. I was able to troll zergs with all the evades and dodges too easily. That was fun but lets admit it was wrong. Still, from 4 sec to 0 of stab was way too much for a nerf on a low hp class, especially for sword/dagger weavers who needs to stay close to their opponents. As condis an CC's rules WvW, having a poor acces to stab killed alot of the fun and we still see very few weavers (and eles) on the field.
    If stances could provide at least a 2 sec of stab then I guess sword/dagger weavers could get some fun back.

  • manu.7539manu.7539 Member ✭✭✭

    I just tried to see some comments on elementalists, checked on 5-6 pages and didnt see any!? Its about time ANET buff this class enough to encourage players to play it. Cant talk about something you doesnt know and that is what is happening here, we are so few eles in wvw I'm not surprise to see so few ( if there is some) comments/suggestions about eles.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 4, 2020

    @manu.7539 said:
    I just tried to see some comments on elementalists, checked on 5-6 pages and didnt see any!? Its about time ANET buff this class enough to encourage players to play it. Cant talk about something you doesnt know and that is what is happening here, we are so few eles in wvw I'm not surprise to see so few ( if there is some) comments/suggestions about eles.

    Encouraging people to play a class isn't a reason to buff it.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Burnfall.9573Burnfall.9573 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @manu.7539 said:
    I just tried to see some comments on elementalists, checked on 5-6 pages and didnt see any!? Its about time ANET buff this class enough to encourage players to play it. Cant talk about something you doesnt know and that is what is happening here, we are so few eles in wvw I'm not surprise to see so few ( if there is some) comments/suggestions about eles.

    i want to share this

    'Situations that are present are there because you allow and tolerate them to continue'

  • manu.7539manu.7539 Member ✭✭✭

    @Burnfall.9573 said:
    i want to share this

    Its a 2013 video! It still interesting in some ways but need a serious update!
    And I so agree that pulls are annoying stuff! Mostly since anet removed stability from my stances.. grrr!! :angry:

  • manu.7539manu.7539 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @manu.7539 said:
    I just tried to see some comments on elementalists, checked on 5-6 pages and didnt see any!? Its about time ANET buff this class enough to encourage players to play it. Cant talk about something you doesnt know and that is what is happening here, we are so few eles in wvw I'm not surprise to see so few ( if there is some) comments/suggestions about eles.

    Encouraging people to play a class isn't a reason to buff it.

    Haha yeah but eles still need some buffs! I played ele 9,2 k hours, very most of it roaming in wvw., guess I know a bit what I'm talking about for eles in wvw. Its not a coincidence if there is so few of us in wvw... There is some fun stuff about eles, sword dagger weaver is alot of fun but the weaknesses are awful. Range and cc's make it very annoying vs anyone good at staying at range. A better acces to stability and unblockable leaps are some of the buffs I particulary need to be competitive.

  • fuzzyp.6295fuzzyp.6295 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2020

    If we're talking Ele, Weaver and Tempest are doing just fine across most game modes to be honest, in fact some would argue they have been over preforming (Tempest mostly). Now Core Ele is utter garbage and needs a some sort of rework in order to remain a viable alternative.. But considering how Ele is one of the most popular classes for players to pick (IE: new, F2P players) it makes sense they'd leave it crippled and useless for a reason to 'gentle encourage' players to upgrade to the elite specs via expansions. :expressionless:

  • manu.7539manu.7539 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2020

    @fuzzyp.6295 said:
    If we're talking Ele, Weaver and Tempest are doing just fine across most game modes to be honest, in fact some would argue they have been over preforming (Tempest mostly). Now Core Ele is utter garbage and needs a some sort of rework in order to remain a viable alternative.. But considering how Ele is one of the most popular classes for players to pick (IE: new, F2P players) it makes sense they'd leave it crippled and useless for a reason to 'gentle encourage' players to upgrade to the elite specs via expansions. :expressionless:

    Ok lets talk about weaver and tempest but in wvw mode (I cant talk about pve its not my thing at all). Tempest overloads can grant stability and weavers stances doesnt anymore, its a huge advantage for tempest specialisation. Weaver was great for about a year but few nerfs laters its probably better to go back to tempest d/d if u want to play melee style with an ele. I cant talk about core ele but they are like rare ambiant creatures in wvw! Core eles definitely need some buffs, its a pity how easy kills they are! :(

    Sword and stances were the new toys to play with when weaver spec came out. It was then designed to be a melee figther. I'm still addict to my sword and few evade skills like Twist of Fate (a weaver stances). So I stayed weaver but tempest is probably a better choice if your not a stubborn sw/d weaver! Make my build great again, Yes U can!

  • fuzzyp.6295fuzzyp.6295 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2020

    @manu.7539 said:

    @fuzzyp.6295 said:
    If we're talking Ele, Weaver and Tempest are doing just fine across most game modes to be honest, in fact some would argue they have been over preforming (Tempest mostly). Now Core Ele is utter garbage and needs a some sort of rework in order to remain a viable alternative.. But considering how Ele is one of the most popular classes for players to pick (IE: new, F2P players) it makes sense they'd leave it crippled and useless for a reason to 'gentle encourage' players to upgrade to the elite specs via expansions. :expressionless:

    Ok lets talk about weaver and tempest but in wvw mode (I cant talk about pve its not my thing at all). Tempest overloads can grant stability and weavers stances doesnt anymore, its a huge advantage for tempest specialisation. Weaver was great for about a year but few nerfs laters its probably better to go back to tempest d/d if u want to play melee style with an ele. I cant talk about core ele but they are like rare ambiant creatures in wvw! Core les definitely need some buffs, its a pity how easy kills they are! :(

    Sword and stances were the new toys to play with when weaver spec came out. It was then designed to be a melee figther. I'm still addict to my sword and few evade skills like Twist of Fate (a weaver stances). So I stayed weaver but tempest is probably a better choice if your not a stubborn sw/d weaver! Make my build great again, Yes U can!

    I agree that the removal of stab hurts Weaver. I think the nerf to the recharge of Twist of Fate was enough of a nerf to the class and think its utterly ridiculous that ANet thinks an 'in your face' class should be bounced around like a pinball. But as I've played it more, I've gotten used to playing without the stab on stances and have adapted my playstyle to reflect that.

    The lack of stability is frustrating on Weaver, and I really wish it could come back, but its hardly game breaking considering Lava Skin is a pretty decent source of stab when you need it. And Stone Resonance is useful as well. Maybe ANet could buff Armor of Earth to make it viable as well perhaps to give Weavers another access to stab.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @manu.7539 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @manu.7539 said:
    I just tried to see some comments on elementalists, checked on 5-6 pages and didnt see any!? Its about time ANET buff this class enough to encourage players to play it. Cant talk about something you doesnt know and that is what is happening here, we are so few eles in wvw I'm not surprise to see so few ( if there is some) comments/suggestions about eles.

    Encouraging people to play a class isn't a reason to buff it.

    Haha yeah but eles still need some buffs! I played ele 9,2 k hours, very most of it roaming in wvw., guess I know a bit what I'm talking about for eles in wvw. Its not a coincidence if there is so few of us in wvw... There is some fun stuff about eles, sword dagger weaver is alot of fun but the weaknesses are awful. Range and cc's make it very annoying vs anyone good at staying at range. A better acces to stability and unblockable leaps are some of the buffs I particulary need to be competitive.

    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • @Obtena.7952 said:
    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Yeah, I agree but Elementalist still need some buff.
    It's the most complicated class and is not the strongest, that's a fact, you can see it on any Elementalist thread.
    It is old and outdated class, what has changed in it since the launch of the game were some traits and reduced the damage.

  • @JohnWater.5760 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Yeah, I agree but Elementalist still need some buff.
    It's the most complicated class and is not the strongest, that's a fact, you can see it on any Elementalist thread.

    What I find interesting (and I see more people using this argumentation) about your post is that you present this as fact, while I actually think that concepts like difficulty or even complexity are quite subjective factors. I mean, ask a piano-player about rotations and they say even the most difficult ones (like Weaver and Engineer) are mere muscle-memory in no-time. They have for instance far more difficulty in "reading the room" (the encounter) or "knowing" what a certain range/radius is (300, 600, 900, etc.), or the one I find quite challenging, what to do if things go wrong (from encounter failures up to bad boon uptimes, etc.), how to get as close as possible to a "near" perfect rotation then (with factors like forgiveness in a rotation if you miss something, which not accidentally is quite good in most Ele builds), etc.

    I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just saying it's interesting how quite a few people think that way. I mean, even Snowcrows puts up difficulty scales on their site.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @JohnWater.5760 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Yeah, I agree but Elementalist still need some buff.
    It's the most complicated class and is not the strongest, that's a fact, you can see it on any Elementalist thread.

    What I find interesting (and I see more people using this argumentation) about your post is that you present this as fact, while I actually think that concepts like difficulty or even complexity are quite subjective factors.

    What you find interesting ... I find problematic. It's no wonder that Anet continues to do their own thing for balancing ... what's the point in trying to appeal to a group of players when you earn the disdain of others? It's a zero-sum game ... so Anet might as well do what they want.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Gwaihir.1745Gwaihir.1745 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @JohnWater.5760 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Yeah, I agree but Elementalist still need some buff.
    It's the most complicated class and is not the strongest, that's a fact, you can see it on any Elementalist thread.

    What I find interesting (and I see more people using this argumentation) about your post is that you present this as fact, while I actually think that concepts like difficulty or even complexity are quite subjective factors.

    What you find interesting ... I find problematic. It's no wonder that Anet continues to do their own thing for balancing ... what's the point in trying to appeal to a group of players when you earn the disdain of others? It's a zero-sum game ... so Anet might as well do what they want.

    Thats not what zero-sum means.

    Shield of Wrath: Reduced the cooldown of this skill from 36 seconds to 35 seconds.

    Quality balance changes^TM

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 25, 2020

    @Gwaihir.1745 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @JohnWater.5760 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    I have no doubt that anyone who has experience with any class can identify places where the class suffers ... frankly, I think that's the point ... I don't believe these are gaps to be fixed and based on how Anet has balanced for the history of the game, it's not an error these gaps exist.

    Yeah, I agree but Elementalist still need some buff.
    It's the most complicated class and is not the strongest, that's a fact, you can see it on any Elementalist thread.

    What I find interesting (and I see more people using this argumentation) about your post is that you present this as fact, while I actually think that concepts like difficulty or even complexity are quite subjective factors.

    What you find interesting ... I find problematic. It's no wonder that Anet continues to do their own thing for balancing ... what's the point in trying to appeal to a group of players when you earn the disdain of others? It's a zero-sum game ... so Anet might as well do what they want.

    Thats not what zero-sum means.

    Maybe ... but it doesn't really matter and the idea is similar enough if you don't purposefully lose yourself in exactness of terms of speak. The point is that Anet can't please everyone ... so why should they make any effort to please some specific group knowing they might anger another? They shouldn't ... so they might as well do what they want.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Junkpile.7439Junkpile.7439 Member ✭✭✭✭

    All this talk about "weak" elite specs is kind of annoying. Many core specs are totally unplayable. Maybe fix those first.

    Low quality trolling since launch
    Seafarer's Rest EotM Hero

  • Jski.6180Jski.6180 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    See ELE forms and you will get my views.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 5, 2020

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Jski.6180Jski.6180 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    I get what your saying but often the direction is comply opposite of the way they wanted the game to go before. So take the tempest shout nerf in wvw even the overload nerf (this is a bit older) these where added in to start with to let the tempest class have big aoe support and make it unique from the other classes. This was not how tempest started but this is what anet decided the direction of what to do. This is what anet dose over and over they add in effects and then remove them nothing is being realty added to classes and over all the balance tends not to changes with nothing to fix a very boring meta.

    See ELE forms and you will get my views.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    I get what your saying but often the direction is comply opposite of the way they wanted the game to go before. So take the tempest shout nerf in wvw even the overload nerf (this is a bit older) these where added in to start with to let the tempest class have big aoe support and make it unique from the other classes. This was not how tempest started but this is what anet decided the direction of what to do. This is what anet dose over and over they add in effects and then remove them nothing is being realty added to classes and over all the balance tends not to changes with nothing to fix a very boring meta.

    Yup, sometimes the original isn't good so they need to change direction ... I still don't see a problem there. You would rather they keep wasting time making something work they can't do? Weird.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Jski.6180Jski.6180 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    I get what your saying but often the direction is comply opposite of the way they wanted the game to go before. So take the tempest shout nerf in wvw even the overload nerf (this is a bit older) these where added in to start with to let the tempest class have big aoe support and make it unique from the other classes. This was not how tempest started but this is what anet decided the direction of what to do. This is what anet dose over and over they add in effects and then remove them nothing is being realty added to classes and over all the balance tends not to changes with nothing to fix a very boring meta.

    Yup, sometimes the original isn't good so they need to change direction ... I still don't see a problem there. You would rather they keep wasting time making something work they can't do? Weird.

    But that was not the original nothing we are playing is even close to the original yet its being balanced as if it is the original dont you understand? The game is still being balanced as if our traits give us hp healing power etc... and not the gear it self giving these effects. That why the gen classes have fallen way behind and the specialized classes have become more gen classes and are the meta.

    See ELE forms and you will get my views.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    I get what your saying but often the direction is comply opposite of the way they wanted the game to go before. So take the tempest shout nerf in wvw even the overload nerf (this is a bit older) these where added in to start with to let the tempest class have big aoe support and make it unique from the other classes. This was not how tempest started but this is what anet decided the direction of what to do. This is what anet dose over and over they add in effects and then remove them nothing is being realty added to classes and over all the balance tends not to changes with nothing to fix a very boring meta.

    Yup, sometimes the original isn't good so they need to change direction ... I still don't see a problem there. You would rather they keep wasting time making something work they can't do? Weird.

    But that was not the original nothing we are playing is even close to the original yet its being balanced as if it is the original dont you understand? The game is still being balanced as if our traits give us hp healing power etc... and not the gear it self giving these effects. That why the gen classes have fallen way behind and the specialized classes have become more gen classes and are the meta.

    OH I understand ... I just don't see why that's a problem ... oh you still don't get balance is what Anet decides ... OK I see now the problem.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Jski.6180Jski.6180 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 6, 2020

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Jski.6180 said:
    Another swing and miss on anet end how many times till they are called out?

    Every time ... because Anet decides the direction of the game.

    I get what your saying but often the direction is comply opposite of the way they wanted the game to go before. So take the tempest shout nerf in wvw even the overload nerf (this is a bit older) these where added in to start with to let the tempest class have big aoe support and make it unique from the other classes. This was not how tempest started but this is what anet decided the direction of what to do. This is what anet dose over and over they add in effects and then remove them nothing is being realty added to classes and over all the balance tends not to changes with nothing to fix a very boring meta.

    Yup, sometimes the original isn't good so they need to change direction ... I still don't see a problem there. You would rather they keep wasting time making something work they can't do? Weird.

    But that was not the original nothing we are playing is even close to the original yet its being balanced as if it is the original dont you understand? The game is still being balanced as if our traits give us hp healing power etc... and not the gear it self giving these effects. That why the gen classes have fallen way behind and the specialized classes have become more gen classes and are the meta.

    OH I understand ... I just don't see why that's a problem ... oh you still don't get balance is what Anet decides ... OK I see now the problem.

    Well person i like things to be more aggrieved aimed and less supported aimed i do not like the all in boon meta we have now and yes i play as an scraper because that seems to be the only allowed class out side of FB.

    The problem there no aim often anet nerfs things that where just buffed. It feels like no one is in charges at all. When they do seem like they have an aim it gets thrown out the next update. Its just random ppl doing random things for no good reason after they post about it once (on the day of the update).

    I also find that new things are forgotten the moment they are added in. Ele aura transmutation where a massive step for the class it gave a lot of life to old core weapons but there just one trait that is effected by it the fire one for condi clears on transmutation that it. Such a massive effect to a class realty needs to have more going on with it. They seemed to of forgot they added it in at all. I think this is true for other classes and there odd ball effects that you have to know the classes far better then i could.

    To get to your point of why the old effect and armor is a problem is that classes still very for hp and def yet they do not vary for power so you always have some classes simply have free hp / armor just because they started the game as such back when you got most of your power healing power vit from your trait line not your armor. Why that is a problem is it makes classes who need high stacking healing power to make there heals good become locked into building with high healing only yet classes who where more able to heal as a side note (there base heals where strong to start with or always going on) dont need to push healing as much so they have even more free space to push dmg or tanklyness. This is ture for dmg as well.

    Added note: This all become worst with the last major update as well as this update when they make skill and effect the same with out thinking about the full kit of the classes. Making hard cc that use to be dmg for a kit into nothing or making passive triggers into 300 sec even if the effect is week vs each other. The same could be said for removing 10 target effects from over all week and long cast time effects vs classes who have 5 very strong and low cd effects.
    There just no real thinking being done its just rules that are made up on the spot that only apply in that moment of time. This is how every update has been at this point.

    See ELE forms and you will get my views.

  • Axl.8924Axl.8924 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    Yeah, from what anet say each spec brings a different style of play and Reaper is/should be the DPS class, Scourge is more on the support side or should be

    Scourge is barely a support. Most of their traits are geared towards damage and control. Their skills are a bit more supportive but not much more than what their core skills offer.

    Control is support btw.

    But I disagree with the premise that scourge can't also be DPS. This argument is only ever brought up for scourge and never Firebrand which is basically everything scourge wants to be but better.

    It's not that it really "can't", it's that it doesn't need to be one for pve. "Scourge" isn't a separate class, it's still necro.

    I guess that means a reaper is support. Since its got just as many control elements. Who would have thought?

    Ah yes, so nobody plays scourge anywhere since apparently reaper does everything better than scourge, ok. :)
    ...and control abilities are still a type of support whether you respond with sarcasm or not.

    Whether or not you think control is support is irrelevant as it doesn't practically function that way. Especially in raids. Why I said it was to point out the flaw in your thinking. Which, again, instead of admitting you're wrong you double down on it.

    Practically speaking, control is not the same as support. It might accomplish a similar goal in some situations but so does high DPS.

    Ah so you're limiting your opinion to one type of content in one of the modes (pve) and call it a day, cool. In any competitive mode control acts as support though. Apparently the "flaw in my thinking" was looking at the game as a whole.

    Yes, it's not "the same as support", as I wrote before, it's a type/part of support.

    And still this:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    What lily i think is trying to say is other classes have desired support that is wanted most of the time while necro is severely hampered. Having multiple stuff that is sub par for raiding is not good.

    I don't think its good for a class to not have some options such as condi power support etc.

    Personally, i think core nec should be the condi spec and scourge the support, because scourge has a lot of AOES and it causes a lot of balance issues, and core is way more limited in condi aoes.

    Here is my list of characters i got so far:

    Elementalist 80 with tempest:Talman nul
    Necromancer 80 with reaper:Zex vokar
    Mesmer level 80 no chrono yet:Klanga voosh.
    Level 80 Ranger with druid spec Jedkhan.

  • Axl.8924Axl.8924 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Aeolus.3615 said:
    @RoyalPredator.9163 IMO issue with rangers is that beastmaster was suposed to be a new gimmick to "FIX rangers" core and please to those who wanted to remove pet, nor balance nor nerfs wont work well in a class just to be a gimmick upgrade, beastmaster is quite decent atm for what is being used to, but its just a stronger core ranger nothing more.

    Most issue in this game are due class design, that conflicts with its core or some other spec where ending overshodowing other class or still be useless.

    IMO there are 3 classes that were awfully bad designed since they were made to carry at release, wich were DH, Scourge and Beastmaster, IMO this 3 spec losted all its theme since they were INITIALLY awfully designed to be OP and when that receives the balance hammer..... what was made to the class exist is no longer there.

    DH (coulkd wipe 5 players due its daze on traps and very high damage on traps, i once managed to win 1 vs 10+ due how broken traps were on a mace focus veruy blocky build, the daze was really broken...)
    Scourge was killing entirelly the melee combat, note the range is not 900 cause the circle top is at 1200 range while 900 is the center of the shade, it was not short in range as most think rhey could outrange them...
    Beastmaster, DPS easy gimmick similiar to DH, offers nothing to the teamplay and nowaydays cant do nothing alone, ended being just a upgrade from core.

    I got a question for you guys who are more experienced as ranger, doesn't axe axe help any as roamer on ranger? because it allows pretty good control. along with some other tools they got.

    Here is my list of characters i got so far:

    Elementalist 80 with tempest:Talman nul
    Necromancer 80 with reaper:Zex vokar
    Mesmer level 80 no chrono yet:Klanga voosh.
    Level 80 Ranger with druid spec Jedkhan.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020

    @Axl.8924 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    Yeah, from what anet say each spec brings a different style of play and Reaper is/should be the DPS class, Scourge is more on the support side or should be

    Scourge is barely a support. Most of their traits are geared towards damage and control. Their skills are a bit more supportive but not much more than what their core skills offer.

    Control is support btw.

    But I disagree with the premise that scourge can't also be DPS. This argument is only ever brought up for scourge and never Firebrand which is basically everything scourge wants to be but better.

    It's not that it really "can't", it's that it doesn't need to be one for pve. "Scourge" isn't a separate class, it's still necro.

    I guess that means a reaper is support. Since its got just as many control elements. Who would have thought?

    Ah yes, so nobody plays scourge anywhere since apparently reaper does everything better than scourge, ok. :)
    ...and control abilities are still a type of support whether you respond with sarcasm or not.

    Whether or not you think control is support is irrelevant as it doesn't practically function that way. Especially in raids. Why I said it was to point out the flaw in your thinking. Which, again, instead of admitting you're wrong you double down on it.

    Practically speaking, control is not the same as support. It might accomplish a similar goal in some situations but so does high DPS.

    Ah so you're limiting your opinion to one type of content in one of the modes (pve) and call it a day, cool. In any competitive mode control acts as support though. Apparently the "flaw in my thinking" was looking at the game as a whole.

    Yes, it's not "the same as support", as I wrote before, it's a type/part of support.

    And still this:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    What lily i think is trying to say is other classes have desired support that is wanted most of the time while necro is severely hampered. Having multiple stuff that is sub par for raiding is not good.

    Not sure why you suddenly felt the need to dig out posts from 6 months ago, but ok.
    I think what lily is trying to say is that she has problems with accepting when she's wrong and takes it unnecessarily personally, even admitting that -quote- "I don't like you which is why I'm dismissive" (which is even funnier when you notice she claims I'm the one "arguing in bad faith" here btw) :D

    I don't think its good for a class to not have some options such as condi power support etc.

    Luckily necro has all of them available. Just because it doesn't do the same thing "whatever another class" does doesn't change much.

  • Axl.8924Axl.8924 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Axl.8924 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    Yeah, from what anet say each spec brings a different style of play and Reaper is/should be the DPS class, Scourge is more on the support side or should be

    Scourge is barely a support. Most of their traits are geared towards damage and control. Their skills are a bit more supportive but not much more than what their core skills offer.

    Control is support btw.

    But I disagree with the premise that scourge can't also be DPS. This argument is only ever brought up for scourge and never Firebrand which is basically everything scourge wants to be but better.

    It's not that it really "can't", it's that it doesn't need to be one for pve. "Scourge" isn't a separate class, it's still necro.

    I guess that means a reaper is support. Since its got just as many control elements. Who would have thought?

    Ah yes, so nobody plays scourge anywhere since apparently reaper does everything better than scourge, ok. :)
    ...and control abilities are still a type of support whether you respond with sarcasm or not.

    Whether or not you think control is support is irrelevant as it doesn't practically function that way. Especially in raids. Why I said it was to point out the flaw in your thinking. Which, again, instead of admitting you're wrong you double down on it.

    Practically speaking, control is not the same as support. It might accomplish a similar goal in some situations but so does high DPS.

    Ah so you're limiting your opinion to one type of content in one of the modes (pve) and call it a day, cool. In any competitive mode control acts as support though. Apparently the "flaw in my thinking" was looking at the game as a whole.

    Yes, it's not "the same as support", as I wrote before, it's a type/part of support.

    And still this:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    What lily i think is trying to say is other classes have desired support that is wanted most of the time while necro is severely hampered. Having multiple stuff that is sub par for raiding is not good.

    Not sure why you suddenly felt the need to dig out posts from 6 months ago, but ok.
    I think what lily is trying to say is that she has problems with accepting when she's wrong and takes it unnecessarily personally, even admitting that -quote- "I don't like you which is why I'm dismissive" (which is even funnier when you notice she claims I'm the one "arguing in bad faith" here btw) :D

    I don't think its good for a class to not have some options such as condi power support etc.

    Luckily necro has all of them available. Just because it doesn't do the same thing "whatever another class" does doesn't change much.

    As others have said and noted necro has had a issue mainly with being desired in raids.

    Its got a identity for non speed run trials in fractals and does well, but in raids itself necros always had a issue of Falling behind everyone in multiple categories such as support power DPS and condi and generally tanking in GW2 means something else than in lets say everquest or wow where your aggro actually gets mobs attention, so having lots of hp, plus dadnir or someone mentioned life force being tied and limiting due to recovery time in PVE.

    Hopefully some day they fix this necro issue, since its a specific issue to do with mechanics which nerf necromancers suffer efficiency wise compared to other classes.

    In fractals dps is not as much a thing unless higher tier i dunno never had peeps complain about dps on tier 3 and tier 2 fractals.

    Some things are also simply not as useful as they are in PVP scenarios.

    Here is my list of characters i got so far:

    Elementalist 80 with tempest:Talman nul
    Necromancer 80 with reaper:Zex vokar
    Mesmer level 80 no chrono yet:Klanga voosh.
    Level 80 Ranger with druid spec Jedkhan.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020

    @Axl.8924 said:
    Hopefully some day they fix this necro issue, since its a specific issue to do with mechanics which nerf necromancers suffer efficiency wise compared to other classes.

    Except this isn't an issue in PVE because the game isn't designed around needing the highest efficiency builds to be successful. Hopefully, Anet continue to ignore these constant requests to 'fix' issues that would result in the content dictating what builds are needed, resulting in fewer people being able to play the builds they want.

    Abuse from people that tell you how to play is not a reason to change a class in a game that is designed and works to allow you to play how you want.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020

    @Axl.8924 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Axl.8924 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    Yeah, from what anet say each spec brings a different style of play and Reaper is/should be the DPS class, Scourge is more on the support side or should be

    Scourge is barely a support. Most of their traits are geared towards damage and control. Their skills are a bit more supportive but not much more than what their core skills offer.

    Control is support btw.

    But I disagree with the premise that scourge can't also be DPS. This argument is only ever brought up for scourge and never Firebrand which is basically everything scourge wants to be but better.

    It's not that it really "can't", it's that it doesn't need to be one for pve. "Scourge" isn't a separate class, it's still necro.

    I guess that means a reaper is support. Since its got just as many control elements. Who would have thought?

    Ah yes, so nobody plays scourge anywhere since apparently reaper does everything better than scourge, ok. :)
    ...and control abilities are still a type of support whether you respond with sarcasm or not.

    Whether or not you think control is support is irrelevant as it doesn't practically function that way. Especially in raids. Why I said it was to point out the flaw in your thinking. Which, again, instead of admitting you're wrong you double down on it.

    Practically speaking, control is not the same as support. It might accomplish a similar goal in some situations but so does high DPS.

    Ah so you're limiting your opinion to one type of content in one of the modes (pve) and call it a day, cool. In any competitive mode control acts as support though. Apparently the "flaw in my thinking" was looking at the game as a whole.

    Yes, it's not "the same as support", as I wrote before, it's a type/part of support.

    And still this:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Anchoku.8142 said:
    Now that Scourge is nerfed in WvW, can it please have its dps improved in PvE? Barrier scaling from healing power can be adjusted but PvE-Scourge needs a competitive dps option. Barrier support is not always desired so Scourge could use a solid dps build if barrier-sharing is minimal or turned off.

    Why exactly do people treat especs as if it's another class than second espec and core?
    I don't understand.

    What lily i think is trying to say is other classes have desired support that is wanted most of the time while necro is severely hampered. Having multiple stuff that is sub par for raiding is not good.

    Not sure why you suddenly felt the need to dig out posts from 6 months ago, but ok.
    I think what lily is trying to say is that she has problems with accepting when she's wrong and takes it unnecessarily personally, even admitting that -quote- "I don't like you which is why I'm dismissive" (which is even funnier when you notice she claims I'm the one "arguing in bad faith" here btw) :D

    I don't think its good for a class to not have some options such as condi power support etc.

    Luckily necro has all of them available. Just because it doesn't do the same thing "whatever another class" does doesn't change much.

    As others have said and noted necro has had a issue mainly with being desired in raids.

    Not desired by whom? Some of the people blindly following an online ""guide"" for the top meta theoretical deeps squad comp? Never saw the problem when I had necros in my squad as long as they weren't slacking.

    Its got a identity for non speed run trials in fractals and does well, but in raids itself necros always had a issue of Falling behind everyone in multiple categories such as support power DPS and condi and generally tanking in GW2 means something else than in lets say everquest or wow where your aggro actually gets mobs attention, so having lots of hp, plus dadnir or someone mentioned life force being tied and limiting due to recovery time in PVE.

    First it was about support option (which the class has), but now it's about dps (which the class also has) and... somehow "tanking working differently than in other games" as well? Where did that even come from?
    Honestly, I don't know what you're answering to anymore. Is it about game mechanics in general? Raiding mechanics? Dps tables? "not having power/condi/support options" (but again: they are all there)? You seem to be all over the place and it's getting hard to follow even in this short paragraph single sentence itself.

    Hopefully some day they fix this necro issue, since its a specific issue to do with mechanics which nerf necromancers suffer efficiency wise compared to other classes.

    Not sure there's much to fix seeing how your main complaint seems to stem from the fact you don't see/understand the difference between "viable" and "top" builds.
    But then again, maybe I just can't follow what you wrote in this post.