Do you think a trait like Juggernaut for Hammer would make it viable?

I always found hammer by design cool but it always felt off, since it is slow and normally you take too much damage and cc while swinging even in PVE. And there is that mace/mace fully takes the role hammer has and it does it better.Do you think something like https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Juggernaut would help?Something that gives some stability, damage reduction even making the back breaker AOE, something to make it different and turn into some separate build on it self.

This would help.

The issue with the current trait is that it grants a damage increase (competes with berserker's power which accomplishes a higher % damage increase), but only offers it within extremely limited window of your target being controlled, which typically lasts less than 3 seconds at a time and is dependent on CC effects being available and your target not breaking your stuns and you must be wielding the hammer. This is why the current trait is so terrible, even after the rework that removed the confusion on interrupt (because hammer is not a condition damage weapon).

The best approach for the trait is to make it something that gives it a distinct advantage over the other strength grandmaster traits without directly competing against it, such as pulsing stability.

Hammer is an insanely strong CC weapon, and hits as hard as burst attacks unto itself. The reason it sucks in PvE, is because PvE doesn't really value CCs, or anything thats not DPS related for that matter. You can't "fix that" within the hammer without directly breaking it in PvP. That said, it still suffers from a design setup around the old Stability/Defiance stacks system from launch. The trait tie ins also used to have a lot more value, but its reliance on the target having control conditions has been a sticking point for years.

There was a huge resurgence in its use with Spell Breaker using disables and interrupts to fuel its boon strip traits, but that was really the only reason to had taken it.

Ultimately the direction it needs to go is to have traits related to the Hammer play off the CCs as triggers, rather then being a conditional to the bonus. It would also be a good opportunity to explore "skill change" traits like those seen on Necro, converting 5 into a multi-target, and 3 into a split second immob.

The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

That does not preclude them though from updating the weapon somehow for the current state of the game. Body Blow, Unsuspecting Foe, and Cull the Weak are all traits that could be tweaked to be better if used against a CC's or weakend foe.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

You talk about updating the weapon and then propose some random-ish trait buffs? I don't see why they would do that tbh.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

It "should be" why exactly? Nothing in this game says that all weapon skills should strictly hold the same theme or effect. And it shouldn't. It's already hard cc, there's no need for it to be aoe cc all of the sudden.

How to fix hammer :

• Buff all base damage to compete with damage that Greatsword offers through speed. GS and Hammer should be polar opposites of each other since they are the only two two-handed War melee choices.
• Move current Hammer 3 to replace Auto Chain 3, and make new Hammer 3 a thrust attack that gives 300 range non-cleave knockback. (Use Sword 3 animation)
• Increase the effing range (apply this to GS too) so that the obviously longer two handed weapon has a higher reach than a stupid dagger. (In fact make this true across the entire game. I'm not sure why range mechanics are completely avoided for melee weapons.). If the animation actually looks like it should hit, then it should hit.
• Bring back confusion. If it was really "useless" then there was no reason to remove it. As far as I'm concerned its a bit of free extra damage. If this was useless, then so is Sigil of Air/Fire, and also Body Blow bleeding. The "Useless" argument is even more dumb the better your Might generation is.

@"XenoSpyro.1780" said:How to fix hammer :

• Buff all base damage to compete with damage that Greatsword offers through speed. GS and Hammer should be polar opposites of each other since they are the only two two-handed War melee choices.
• Move current Hammer 3 to replace Auto Chain 3, and make new Hammer 3 a thrust attack that gives 300 range non-cleave knockback. (Use Sword 3 animation)
• Increase the effing range (apply this to GS too) so that the obviously longer two handed weapon has a higher reach than a stupid dagger. (In fact make this true across the entire game. I'm not sure why range mechanics are completely avoided for melee weapons.). If the animation actually looks like it should hit, then it should hit.
• Bring back confusion. If it was really "useless" then there was no reason to remove it. As far as I'm concerned its a bit of free extra damage. If this was useless, then so is Sigil of Air/Fire, and also Body Blow bleeding. The "Useless" argument is even more dumb the better your Might generation is.

I also think that confusion on hammer was not that bad at all to be removed. Imagine alternative berskerker condi build (for all game modes) which stacks confusion and main weapons are mace/torch and hammer. Rupturing Smash (hammer berserker primal burst) could be given some confusion stacks, like 5 in PvE and 3 in PvP/WvW. Even autoattack chain could get 1 stack of confusion (or if traited with hammer trait). Plenty of possibilities.

Hamm is amazing,but you need to add quickness to it like frenzy. Just on berserk hamm is kinda shit because of the frontal cone burst instead of it being full aoe like it should. But on Sb or core it's pretty good espec in wvw. Add absorb sigil + celerity or severance and using frenzy util. Comboing 5 + 2 can be a massive burst.

@"XenoSpyro.1780" said:How to fix hammer :

• Move current Hammer 3 to replace Auto Chain 3, and make new Hammer 3 a thrust attack that gives 300 range non-cleave knockback. (Use Sword 3 animation)

600 range, AOE, 7 second cripple every 2 seconds sure sounds reasonable, no idea why noone thought of that before. :astonished:

• Increase the effing range (apply this to GS too) so that the obviously longer two handed weapon has a higher reach than a stupid dagger. (In fact make this true across the entire game. I'm not sure why range mechanics are completely avoided for melee weapons.). If the animation actually looks like it should hit, then it should hit.

That's pretty much a whole different discussion about the overal state of the weapon ranges in the game. At the current form, there's no reason to give hammer a special range treatment, especially considering how loaded with cc it is.

• Bring back confusion. If it was really "useless" then there was no reason to remove it. As far as I'm concerned its a bit of free extra damage. If this was useless, then so is Sigil of Air/Fire, and also Body Blow bleeding. The "Useless" argument is even more dumb the better your Might generation is.

Who ever said it being "useless" was the reason behind removing it?

the new trait that fills adren with cc's is an awesome step in the right direction.I think ham would be in a much better spot if ham 4 got the gs 3 treatment. make it hit twice with a travel distance of 360. an evade would be sweet too, but the ability to refill your adren by 2 bars with one skill would be awesome. also what if ham 3 had a half sec taunt lol? that would be fun.

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

Should be, because the rest of hammer CC is AoE with the sole exception of Backbreaker.

As for talking Traits, tweaking traits can benefit some weapons better than others, and frankly discussing how a weapon performs or how we would like it to perform without discussing the relevant traits is how power creep and/or broken weapons happens.

Hammer does have some solid damage on it true, but it is also slow. As far as CC goes, Mace/Mace is taken in PvE for breakbars, not the hammer. As far as damage goes, its Axe/Axe or GS. The only time really when Hammer is justified is on a Spellbreaker when AoE boonrip is required.

So for hammer to see more use, make Hammer 5 cleave or be AoE, tweak some damage numbers (not a lot), update some traits that work with hammer.

Here are some other ideas:

Reduce CD on Hammer 5 to 20s from 25s. Reduce CD on Hammer 2 from 6s to 4s. That would result in a DPS increase over all on the weapon.

A separate suggestion: On Merciless Hammer, the 20% damage against CC'd foes competes with the better bonus from Berserker's Power, which is universal. If Merciless Hammer and Berserker's Power are to share a Grandmaster Tier together then Merciless Hammer would benefit from some tweaking, say increase the damage bonus to 25% or 30%? I think this may make Hammer be able to stand alone as a good weapon choice. I think though that the Damage increase should remain exclusive to hammer though in that case and not split like they have been with other weapon traits.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

That doesn't mean you should load the rest of a weapon with aoe cc. By what standards exactly is that reasonable?

As for talking Traits, tweaking traits can benefit some weapons better than others, and frankly discussing how a weapon performs or how we would like it to perform without discussing the relevant traits is how power creep and/or broken weapons happens.

You want to buff the hammer, but buffing the traits buffs hammer AND everything else that can be used with said traits. That's a terrible way to go about buffing things. It's buffing a class under the coat of "lets make hammer viable kek". Imo that's, again, not reasonable.

Hammer does have some solid damage on it true, but it is also slow. As far as CC goes, Mace/Mace is taken in PvE for breakbars, not the hammer. As far as damage goes, its Axe/Axe or GS. The only time really when Hammer is justified is on a Spellbreaker when AoE boonrip is required.

So for hammer to see more use, make Hammer 5 cleave or be AoE, tweak some damage numbers (not a lot), update some traits that work with hammer.

Sooo... it still has it niche, right? ;pBtw I understand that there are better options for "this" or "that", but the point here is I don't think that's a valid reason to buff "random traits" on top of overloading a weapon, because "if it has aoe, it means all of the cc should be aoe too!". And yes, the "tweaks" might be useful, but it's far from putting "current 3 on autoattack", raising range for -really- no reason or buffing barely related traits on top of making the cc aoe. If you want to cut a piece of a pie, you don't usually do it with a kittening shotgun and pray some lands in your mouth if you know what I mean.

A separate suggestion: On Merciless Hammer, the 20% damage against CC'd foes competes with the better bonus from Berserker's Power, which is universal. If Merciless Hammer and Berserker's Power are to share a Grandmaster Tier together then Merciless Hammer would benefit from some tweaking, say increase the damage bonus to 25% or 30%? I think this may make Hammer be able to stand alone as a good weapon choice. I think though that the Damage increase should remain exclusive to hammer though in that case and not split like they have been with other weapon traits.

Yeah, probably true.

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

As for talking Traits, tweaking traits can benefit some weapons better than others, and frankly discussing how a weapon performs or how we would like it to perform without discussing the relevant traits is how power creep and/or broken weapons happens.

Hammer does have some solid damage on it true, but it is also slow. As far as CC goes, Mace/Mace is taken in PvE for breakbars, not the hammer. As far as damage goes, its Axe/Axe or GS. The only time really when Hammer is justified is on a Spellbreaker when AoE boonrip is required.

So for hammer to see more use, make Hammer 5 cleave or be AoE, tweak some damage numbers (not a lot), update some traits that work with hammer.

A separate suggestion: On Merciless Hammer, the 20% damage against CC'd foes competes with the better bonus from Berserker's Power, which is universal. If Merciless Hammer and Berserker's Power are to share a Grandmaster Tier together then Merciless Hammer would benefit from some tweaking, say increase the damage bonus to 25% or 30%? I think this may make Hammer be able to stand alone as a good weapon choice. I think though that the Damage increase should remain exclusive to hammer though in that case and not split like they have been with other weapon traits.

So in all here is what I suggest for hammer:Hammer 2 CD reduced to 4s.Hammer 5 CD reduced to 20s.Add scaling damage to Earthshaker (1.0 coefficient at T1, 1.5 coefficient at T2, and 2.0 coefficient at T3)The first two changes improve Hammer overall for any spec while the last change gives Core some extra damage over Spellbreaker

I also think Rupturing Smash should be reverted to its prior incarnation, but with reduced daze duration (0.5s per wave).

I think with those changes alone hammer would be in a perfect place. I think Merciless Hammer should see its damage modifier increased, as it is a harder condition to meet than F1 spam, but that is not necessary for updating hammer.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

As for talking Traits, tweaking traits can benefit some weapons better than others, and frankly discussing how a weapon performs or how we would like it to perform without discussing the relevant traits is how power creep and/or broken weapons happens.

Hammer does have some solid damage on it true, but it is also slow. As far as CC goes, Mace/Mace is taken in PvE for breakbars, not the hammer. As far as damage goes, its Axe/Axe or GS. The only time really when Hammer is justified is on a Spellbreaker when AoE boonrip is required.

So for hammer to see more use, make Hammer 5 cleave or be AoE, tweak some damage numbers (not a lot), update some traits that work with hammer.

Is it that much of a hyperbole though? Seems to me like it's a fair depiction of a 'spray and pray' which some of the proposed changes in this thread definitely are. Hammer is a weapon with aoe and cc aspects, true. Which doesn't meean we automatically make everything AOE CC. Tweaking hammer is not limited to just the hammer skills, but what you proposed was not tweaking hammer, it was buffing random traits which miiiiiight have affected hammer too.So... you think that if you want to buff a hammer and you tweak specifically a hammer (which doesn't mean randomly buffing everything on its bar btw) instead of everything around it that also very clearly and easly affects other weapons is a "shotgun attempt"? What? How? I fail to see the logic here.

A separate suggestion: On Merciless Hammer, the 20% damage against CC'd foes competes with the better bonus from Berserker's Power, which is universal. If Merciless Hammer and Berserker's Power are to share a Grandmaster Tier together then Merciless Hammer would benefit from some tweaking, say increase the damage bonus to 25% or 30%? I think this may make Hammer be able to stand alone as a good weapon choice. I think though that the Damage increase should remain exclusive to hammer though in that case and not split like they have been with other weapon traits.

Hammer 2 CD reduction aims at what exactly?Hammer 5 is already at 20 when traited.Wouldn't that make it deal more dmg than AS +still have scaling cc duration? Em... That's reasonable how exactly? Do you want one weapon to do everything?

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:The only reason hammer isn't "viable" is because it fill a niche that players aren't willing to exploit. Unfortunately players (not ANet, players!) shifted the game toward seeking again and again the tools that are the most effective to use. In the end doing such a thing leave aside the tools that are the least effective in the players' priority list. It doesn't mean that these tools are weak but they don't fit as well as some other tools.

What will happen if the hammer is buffed to be the most effective tools? Players will ask for other tools to be the most effective. And if you add layers upon layers upon layers of buffs the only thing you create is a pointless cycle of powercreep.

ANet took a proper approach when they started to reduce weapon traits impact on specific weapon and gave them "universal effects". Going in the other direction by making the hammer trait "juggernaut" like isn't a good move.

Hammer is more of an AoE CC weapon. Hammer 5 however is not aoe, and it should be, or at least cleave.

As for talking Traits, tweaking traits can benefit some weapons better than others, and frankly discussing how a weapon performs or how we would like it to perform without discussing the relevant traits is how power creep and/or broken weapons happens.

Hammer does have some solid damage on it true, but it is also slow. As far as CC goes, Mace/Mace is taken in PvE for breakbars, not the hammer. As far as damage goes, its Axe/Axe or GS. The only time really when Hammer is justified is on a Spellbreaker when AoE boonrip is required.

So for hammer to see more use, make Hammer 5 cleave or be AoE, tweak some damage numbers (not a lot), update some traits that work with hammer.

A separate suggestion: On Merciless Hammer, the 20% damage against CC'd foes competes with the better bonus from Berserker's Power, which is universal. If Merciless Hammer and Berserker's Power are to share a Grandmaster Tier together then Merciless Hammer would benefit from some tweaking, say increase the damage bonus to 25% or 30%? I think this may make Hammer be able to stand alone as a good weapon choice. I think though that the Damage increase should remain exclusive to hammer though in that case and not split like they have been with other weapon traits.

You are missing the point. Hammer 2 and Hammer 5 play off of each other and Hammer 2 is a major DPS skill on Hammer. Reducing their CDs to 4s and 20s respectively gets the CDs to ~3s and 16s when traited. This brings Hammer 5 in line with other weapon 5's like Whirling Axe on CD, and allows you to get 2 Fierce Blows on a target knocked down by Backbreaker before the CC wears off (in the event they had no more stun breaks that is), which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

Literally any cd reduction on any skill would result in a higher dps for any weapon btw, just saying :DAlso are you talking strictly about pve buffs here?

@Sobx.1758 said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

No crap Sherlock :tongue: but those two in particular would be best for Hammer.

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"Sobx.1758" said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

My 'point' (although not super serious :d ) was that everything written between "Reducing their CDs" and "results in higher DPS for Hammer" wasn't really needed :D

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

Because for PvE I don't really mind, while for PvP/WvW it would already be overbuffed imo. Basically going from "it has a niche now" to "let's buff everything about it and then some traits too" isn't really an optimal balance choice.

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

But then that all depends on the changes no? And what was being discussed right now is just CD reduction on two skills on a weapon bar that is feast or famine with how the skills work. For WvW and PvP there is a great deal of stunbreaks and condi clearing that keeps hammer from performing better there. Spellbreaker gets mileage out of it because of the added boon rip, but for Core or Berserker there are not many reasons to take it. Updating a spread of traits over the trait lines would allow for a mode split, but also would allow for Core or Berserker to do things with Hammer that a Spellbreaker might not be able to do which is why I also brought them up for discussion over how to make hammer better.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

Pretty sure there was more on the table here than reducing 2 skills' CD.

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

Pretty sure the last thing a said on the matter was CD reduction on 2 and 5, adding scaling Earthshaker damage to better define Core Hammer from Spb Hammer, and reverting Rupturing Smash to the previous version. But then you decried about game mode splitting, to which I reminded you that Anet can't/won't spit weapon bars for modes and that if you wanted that then you would have to focus on traits, which was what I brought up originally, but you :-1: all over that so here we are back at square one. You can't discuss weapon bars without taking into account the traits that affect them, but if you don't want to talk traits then at minimum in order of what would best benefit hammer you have what I mentioned last:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

So in all here is what I suggest for hammer:Hammer 2 CD reduced to 4s.Hammer 5 CD reduced to 20s.Add scaling damage to Earthshaker (1.0 coefficient at T1, 1.5 coefficient at T2, and 2.0 coefficient at T3)The first two changes improve Hammer overall for any spec while the last change gives Core some extra damage over Spellbreaker

I also think Rupturing Smash should be reverted to its prior incarnation, but with reduced daze duration (0.5s per wave).

I think with those changes alone hammer would be in a perfect place. I think Merciless Hammer should see its damage modifier increased, as it is a harder condition to meet than F1 spam, but that is not necessary for updating hammer.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

which results in higher DPS for Hammer.

Why would it be limited to just PvE? I don't see that many hammer warriors, spellbreaker, or otherwise in WvW and Anet has already stated that they cannot/will not split weapon bars for game modes. They can do that for traits though, which is part of why I mentioned tweaking traits in such ways that may benefit hammer. Those traits could then be split for game modes if need be.

That's just because for some reason you started responding solely to the 2 skills' CD reduction, nothing implied you suddenly dropped off other ideas and you didn't, so don't pretend there isn't more on the table like I said. "And what was being discussed right now is just CD reduction on two skills" -the only reason only 2 skills were being discussed right now was because you decided to isolate them for some reason.I asked about the mode splitting because -literally as I said- who cares if it's slightly overtuned in pve, that doesn't matter. But yeah, if they don't split weapon bars then we're back to what I was saying: it would be overtuned.

I also :-1: all over the traits buff idea for EXACTLY the same reason I already stated earlier -shotgunning all over warrior under the cover of tweaking hammer.

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

So in all here is what I suggest for hammer:Hammer 2 CD reduced to 4s.Hammer 5 CD reduced to 20s.Add scaling damage to Earthshaker (1.0 coefficient at T1, 1.5 coefficient at T2, and 2.0 coefficient at T3)The first two changes improve Hammer overall for any spec while the last change gives Core some extra damage over Spellbreaker

I also think Rupturing Smash should be reverted to its prior incarnation, but with reduced daze duration (0.5s per wave).

I think with those changes alone hammer would be in a perfect place. I think Merciless Hammer should see its damage modifier increased, as it is a harder condition to meet than F1 spam, but that is not necessary for updating hammer.

Yes and I commented on that already.