Why in the world would they take 50 toughness from strength in numbers

There was zero reason to do that. Guardians are an average class all around and while its not a big deal its total disrespect imo.

They nerfed all passive auras like that one (EA, Spotter, etc), so why should they leave it untouched?

I think they are reducing profession buffs down in percent so that there is more flexibility in the meta.

@Opopanax.1803 said:I think they are reducing profession buffs down in percent so that there is more flexibility in the meta.

And to make powercreep more eficient has an alternative to scourging/fb stacks.Rather than fix the bad gameplay...

I believe one of the fairly recent dev posts stipulated that they were aiming to reduce the effectiveness of passive effects and promote active play. I presume this was partially down to the comments from the community about there being too many passives traits.As mentioned, all 5 class traits (Assassin's Presence, Empower Allies, Spotter, Pinpoint Distribution, Strength in Numbers) were reduced from 150 to 100.

@"MarshallLaw.9260" said:I believe one of the fairly recent dev posts stipulated that they were aiming to reduce the effectiveness of passive effects and promote active play. I presume this was partially down to the comments from the community about there being too many passives traits.As mentioned, all 5 class traits (Assassin's Presence, Empower Allies, Spotter, Pinpoint Distribution, Strength in Numbers) were reduced from 150 to 100.

Only 4 of those 5 even serve a real purpose. 50 toughness means nothing. I laughed when I read this nerf. "Nothing of value was lost."

@Etterwyn.5263 said:

@"MarshallLaw.9260" said:I believe one of the fairly recent dev posts stipulated that they were aiming to reduce the effectiveness of passive effects and promote active play. I presume this was partially down to the comments from the community about there being too many passives traits.As mentioned, all 5 class traits (

Assassin's Presence, Empower Allies, Spotter, Pinpoint Distribution, Strength in Numbers

) were reduced from 150 to 100.

That's a fair point, toughness is probably the least useful out of the 5 and the trait was arguably inferior to the other Valor alternatives even before the reduction.

Still, it was a 33% nerf to those traits! That should give a bit more thought to choosing them.

You are missing the point. Why touch the trait at all. It is meaningless but why touch it then. Thats not how game balance should work looking at traits that are borderline weak to begin with and say we need to nerf something for guardians lets peel off 50 toughness from a weakish trait. There is nothing funny about it all unless you find incompetence and cluelessness the could effect you in the future funny. I personally don't find that funny at all I find it annoying and irritating.

Would be a better trait with vitality. It was not even worth picking before the nerf.

@"InsaneQR.7412" said:Would be a better trait with vitality. It was not even worth picking before the nerf.

We already have a vitality trait though. The real issue is that all the other AOE passives are offensive traits so the nerf to them is more understandable. This was a "just because we nerfed the others" nerf to one of the most useless stats in the game. 50 toughness lost = 0 DPS lost. A total rework of the trait would have been the less lazy option.

@Etterwyn.5263 said:

@"InsaneQR.7412" said:Would be a better trait with vitality. It was not even worth picking before the nerf.

Is there a aura trait that gives vitality?I havent found one on the wiki.Yeah it was nerfed for the sake of others but atleast with vitality it would give 1k health. Not dps dependend but would increase the health threshold for scholar bonusses and would just increase survivability in a better way than toughness.

There is no such aura with vitality. The closest thing is warr's banner of defense.

@kipthelip.5802 said:You are missing the point. Why touch the trait at all. It is meaningless but why touch it then. Thats not how game balance should work looking at traits that are borderline weak to begin with and say we need to nerf something for guardians lets peel off 50 toughness from a weakish trait. There is nothing funny about it all unless you find incompetence and cluelessness the could effect you in the future funny. I personally don't find that funny at all I find it annoying and irritating.

Its to be uniform... the real targets were Assassin's Presence, Empower Allies, and Pinpoint Distribution, which all affect DPS, is a unique source, and is stackable. Like how Grace of the land was changed to Might stacks, because Druids were being taken almost exclusively for that buff despite the personal DPS loss for the Ranger.

Guardian is the core of every single organized WvW group. This trait wasn't massively OP in that realm or anything, but it was frequently taken, and most likely will continue to be.

Unpopular opinion: I think they should just remove these passive traits and make new, more exciting ones. It's not worth it to waste a trait on 100 stats.

@Mea.5491 said:Unpopular opinion: I think they should just remove these passive traits and make new, more exciting ones. It's not worth it to waste a trait on 100 stats.

true story bro; this trait can be something like:For every ally in your 600 range ( max 10 ) you take +1% healing power output

@InsaneQR.7412 said:

@Etterwyn.5263 said:

@InsaneQR.7412 said:Would be a better trait with vitality. It was not even worth picking before the nerf.

Not an aura but there's a trait that increases vitality by 300. My point was that making Strength in Numbers a vitality trait would likely not happen due to that.

@Etterwyn.5263 said:

@InsaneQR.7412 said:

@Etterwyn.5263 said:

@InsaneQR.7412 said:Would be a better trait with vitality. It was not even worth picking before the nerf.

They could swap it maybe. A vitality aura would atleast be useful.

@"Etterwyn.5263" said:

Only 4 of those 5 even serve a real purpose. 50 toughness means nothing. I laughed when I read this nerf. "Nothing of value was lost."

Agreed, when I saw it in the patch notes I thought "how petty"Ok, it's a blanket nerf to all class buffs.. but still petty

Strength in Numbers would be 1000x better if it stacked a ‘-1% damage + -1% Condition Duration’ buff on everyone depending on the amount of people, up to a max stack of 10.

Instead it’s raw toughness, that nobody in their right mind would choose.As previous posts have said, lost nothing from the reduction in potency bc it was never used to begin with.

@TotallyNotJazzie.1493 said:Strength in Numbers would be 1000x better if it stacked a ‘-1% damage + -1% Condition Duration’ buff on everyone depending on the amount of people, up to a max stack of 10.

Instead it’s raw toughness, that nobody in their right mind would choose.As previous posts have said, lost nothing from the reduction in potency bc it was never used to begin with.

But what would you do with the other passive buffs? Part of the reason all those skills got reigned in was of the easy damage bonus most of them offered. Would this end up being a unique change? Come to think of it.... would this be OP in WvW or PvP. 10% damage reduction in WvW is a big thing when you can stack them.

You are talking about a balance team who thought out of all the issues with guard that reducing focus 5 from 36s to 35s was a worthwhile thing to change. Or that GS3 for some reason needed a 15% buff. The same team that tries to force spirit weapons into guard builds that nobody wants while ignoring the fact that LB is in a trash state despite the community's pleas for changes.

There is no logic or reasoning to these changes. Anyone playing this game long enough should know by now that the balance patches are 90% random changes nobody asked for and 10% changes to address a prior random change that had large enough backlash.

@starlinvf.1358 said:

@TotallyNotJazzie.1493 said:Strength in Numbers would be 1000x better if it stacked a ‘-1% damage + -1% Condition Duration’ buff on everyone depending on the amount of people, up to a max stack of 10.

Instead it’s raw toughness, that nobody in their right mind would choose.As previous posts have said, lost nothing from the reduction in potency bc it was never used to begin with.

I honestly think they should indeed give this treatment to defensive traits.

The game is wholly focused on DPS in PvE and giving more incentives to do stuff slower but slightly safer SHOULD be a viable tactic. Especially if you are playing with newer players. Top end players would still choose the full DPS team compositions for maximum efficiency, but less experienced teams would still be able to clear content with enough knowledge of the mechanics.

Not to mention raid enrage timers would actually become a threat rather than a forgotten thing.

In regards to WvW, you might have me there, as I’m hardly the most experienced WvW-er. However, with so much damage flying around the scene these days I certainly believe it wouldn’t be a bad thing nerfing the time to kill in that game mode.

Sorry for the essay. I normally keep my posts to 3 sentences or less. I just feel very strongly about how little that defensive counterplay is represented in GW2.

@TotallyNotJazzie.1493 said:Strength in Numbers would be 1000x better if it stacked a ‘-1% damage + -1% Condition Duration’ buff on everyone depending on the amount of people, up to a max stack of 10.

Instead it’s raw toughness, that nobody in their right mind would choose.As previous posts have said, lost nothing from the reduction in potency bc it was never used to begin with.

Actually it would make more sense if it would stack toughness depending on how many allies are affected, the more the stronger it gets.Maybe 100 per ally would be to strobg but for PvE it would be fine IMO. It would atleast ve worth to take even uf it isnt a dmg pick it would give some group support.