Offense & Defense — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Offense & Defense

Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited October 11, 2019 in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

I've posted about this numerous times, but after doing a lot of research I've had some eye-openers.

"Damage scales more than Defense, so defensive stats are mostly useless."

This appears to be true on the surface, but actually isn't. Defense is only two stats that are weighted more or less equally, while (power) offense is three stats with distribution significantly weighted toward one of them (Power.)

So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be. The key thing to remember is that you never want to sacrifice Power for defense unless you're full condi or playing a full support build in a group. But taking some Toughness/Vitality instead of Precison/Ferocity actually isn't a bad tradeoff even in PvE and especially for solo/open world builds. People love to say "get gud and dodge moar", but this is kind of a brainless meme. If you're playing solo in the open world and regularly engaging multiple mobs - you'll eat plenty of hits. Bolstering your defense even a little bit can help you maintain battlefield control and makes it much less likely you'll get downed. The other thing that people seem to forget is that, while mastering dodging is very important, it also interrupts your outgoing damage. This means there are a lot of circumstances where absorbing damage is more efficient than dodging. Vitality + Toughness allow you to get away with doing that a bit more.

This is why so many sets have Power primary. I think making a Berserker primary with some Soldier or Valkyrie pieces mixed in is probably the best way to play Power in both PvE and PvP in many cases (yes, better than Maruader's) - you sacrifice no Power while having a healthy mix of Precison, Ferocity, Vitality, and Toughness.

<1

Comments

  • Patty.3268Patty.3268 Member ✭✭✭

    I used to see it the same way for a long time for the same reasons you mentioned. But over the years I have kind of changed my mind and now think that both playstyles are equally viable. Which works best for you is more or less personal preference and depends on your own skill, the class and your exact build. The thing is, both sides can bring countless examples of situations where their approach is better or at least seems to be, and can even back it up with numbers. So in my opinion, both or viable. Therefore I do agree with you that saying "Full offensive is the ONLY viable way to play" is nonsense. It's one viable way to play.

    That said, personally, I still prefer your approach and take some vitality via Marauder stats for all of my builds - except for warrior and necro, since they start with a large base health pool. Most of my builds also have some additional toughness (usually between 200-300), with the exceptions being the heavy armor classes and my fractal builds. In fractals, there's usually enough healing and protection that I prefer to switch the armor with toughness for additional Marauder pieces, gaining both damage and some additional vitality. I also don't have additional toughness on my Sc/WH FA Tempest, since that has 250 toughness from Earth-2, a lot of blinds, around 40-50% uptime on protection and 100% uptime on regen and vigor, and healing from auras.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:
    I’ve played in both soldiers and berserkers and found that I had more survivability with berserkers. The best defense in this game is having a good offense. The less time something has to kill you, the safer you will be. Defensive stats do not offer enough sustain to make up for the damage loss.

    No, that's the point I'm making. I used to think this too, but as you long as you don't give up Power, you actually gain more sustain than you lose in offense. I'm not necessarily saying it's always objectively better, but it's certainly more competitive than people think it is and is arguably optimal depending on how you're playing.

    For example, on my Revenant, I have near 100% fury uptime and Rolling Mists keeps crit chance so high that a lot of Precision is totally wasted and is much more useful going into Toughness/Vitality (or really any other stat.)

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:
    I’ve played in both soldiers and berserkers and found that I had more survivability with berserkers. The best defense in this game is having a good offense. The less time something has to kill you, the safer you will be. Defensive stats do not offer enough sustain to make up for the damage loss.

    No, that's the point I'm making. I used to think this too, but as you long as you don't give up Power, you actually gain more sustain than you lose in offense. I'm not necessarily saying it's always objectively better, but it's certainly more competitive than people think it is and is arguably optimal depending on how you're playing.

    Not from my experience. One of the easier ways for you to see this is to find something you can barely do solo in berserkers (e.g. killing an elite/champion) and then do it again in soldiers. Because if what you state it true, you'd have an easier time in soldiers.

    Edit: Just want to point out that I’m referring to strictly PvE. WvW is different depending on your class.

  • rng.1024rng.1024 Member ✭✭✭✭

    You also need to take into account resustain, because at some point you will meet the threshold where minimum damage and maximum defense meet resulting in an endless stalemate.

    Given resustain can significantly affect your effective hp, in many cases it can outright trump certain defensive gear/amulet choices (like warrior signet f.ex). And that's not even taking into account healing power scaling.

  • The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).

    The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @whoeverxwins.1279 said:
    The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).

    The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.

    No that's actually overstated. Toughness only generates threat against certain enemies, and this is a non issue if you're doing PvE solo.

  • @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @whoeverxwins.1279 said:
    The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).

    The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.

    No that's actually overstated. Toughness only generates threat against certain enemies, and this is a non issue if you're doing PvE solo.

    You are still way better off with more vitality against a bad dodge than toughness. And toughness won't save someone who insists on standing in AOE rings.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @whoeverxwins.1279 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @whoeverxwins.1279 said:
    The more toughness you have, the more of a target you are, especially in a group. I suppose good if you're the tank, but otherwise, you're better off with more vitality ie, Mauraders, than with toughness. I am currently only full beserkers on my Reaper and Soulbeast. The rest I have Mauraders (except Mirage, which is Vipers).

    The most important defense in this game is learning to DODGE.

    No that's actually overstated. Toughness only generates threat against certain enemies, and this is a non issue if you're doing PvE solo.

    You are still way better off with more vitality against a bad dodge than toughness. And toughness won't save someone who insists on standing in AOE rings.

    They aren't in a competition with each other. They actually are about equally effective (though with different applications) and synergize really well with each other. Toughness's benefit is that it increases the effectiveness of healing. Vitality's is that it helps counter condition damage. But they both increase the effect of the other. Having a small to moderate amount of both tends to work better than having only one of the two. It's exactly like Precision and Ferocity.

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.

    If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.

    If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).

    You.... really aren't understanding my point.

  • Knighthonor.4061Knighthonor.4061 Member ✭✭✭✭

    was this tested in PvP/WvW?

  • There are several important things to know when talking about defense in Guild Wars 2.

    The game tries to keep a fast pace in combat while making sure that active defense is rewarded more than passive defense (allegedly). This type of design choice is particularly noted with the Nerfs to Defy Pain on the Warrior some time ago, notably on the competitive modes, yet there are better options in PVE as well. However, the game does not like to provide much access to extremely powerful defensive skills. I'll pick on Warrior again just a little bit, but Shield Stance on the shield "5" is normally on a 25 second cool down for a 3-second guard. You're quite vulnerable for a whole 22 seconds before you can block for 3 seconds another time.

    That said, there's a pretty good balance between choosing to dodge something or choosing to use a skill to evade it in some fashion to otherwise mitigate damage. However this particular concept differs greatly in methodology between PvE and the competitive modes at large. There are few individual attacks that you would consider dodging in PvE. Instead you would typically Dodge to avoid an AoE on the ground that you cannot run out of quickly enough. At least for me.

    PvP & WvW are a whole other issue - there, a player needs to be recognizing the opposing players most dangerous moves. Typically you need to dodge someone's CC in order to avoid death by CC locking or just by the damage you'll take after being cc'd the first time at all. Unless you're fighting a champion in PVE, most of the mobs hits aren't going to be life or death. However in those competitive modes, literally every strike an opponent makes against you puts you precipitously close to defeat much faster.

    Another thing to keep in mind in this conversation is the idea of sustain as well, although not specifically relating to the primary heal skill's activation. Many, but not all, builds have some method of keeping you in the fight without having to spend the time to cast your healing skill. It could even be bolstered by food that allows you to lifesteal or regenerate over time Etc. Time spent waiting to be healed is not necessarily a waste by any stretch, but it prolongs the combat, not shortens it.

    As far as stats go, I feel like it depends greatly on the game of that you're playing. I'd write more, but its late. Maybe I'll check in tomorrow...

    Potential requires action in order to be realized.

  • Konrad Curze.5130Konrad Curze.5130 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    the problem is that mobs in this game do absolutly rdiculous amounts of damage. 5k autos with zero windup nor animation, oneshots with fast animations that get easily covered with other player's effects so you cant see the visual clues

    stacking defense is useless because even if you reduce their damage by 30%, 70% of TOO MUCH is still TOO MUCH. thats why you will always, always be better off killing the mobs as fast as possible so they dont even get to attack you

  • Xervite.5493Xervite.5493 Member ✭✭✭

    Its a braindead meta where nobody looks at defensive stats. I remember looking for a normal open world build on youtube and guess what I find almost everywhere, full berserker with scholar rune. Cant blame players though the mobs in general are very easy they attack and then stand still for a second or two as is the case with most mmos. But if you look at a game like path of exiles defenses and resist are a must and a part of almost every meta build build. Why is that? Because the mobs are aggressive and relentless unlike simply hitting hard they gang up on you and keep at it.

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.

    If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).

    You.... really aren't understanding my point.

    I get your point, I just disagree with it - unless a player has ping, fps or irl co-ordination issues, I think most people can get accustomed to playing with baseline vitality, healing power and toughness by learning to manipulate class traits and having a general awareness of positioning and when to dodge. Intentionally adding "tanky" stats via armour is generally a bad tradeoff (in PvE), since mobs begin to die (sometimes noticably) slower. More mobs = more damage.

    At the risk of sounding haughty, "git gud l2dodge" isn't a bad meme, since Gw2 combat puts a heavy emphasis on avoiding heavy burst damage.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    TL;DR damage scales up almost 10x from base damage values, stacking toughness and vitality make you survive 1-2 more hits you probably could have dodged.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:
    I’ve played in both soldiers and berserkers and found that I had more survivability with berserkers. The best defense in this game is having a good offense. The less time something has to kill you, the safer you will be. Defensive stats do not offer enough sustain to make up for the damage loss.

    No, that's the point I'm making. I used to think this too, but as you long as you don't give up Power, you actually gain more sustain than you lose in offense. I'm not necessarily saying it's always objectively better, but it's certainly more competitive than people think it is and is arguably optimal depending on how you're playing.

    For example, on my Revenant, I have near 100% fury uptime and Rolling Mists keeps crit chance so high that a lot of Precision is totally wasted and is much more useful going into Toughness/Vitality (or really any other stat.)

    I love it. This coming from the person who has made following posts in the past (and more, I'm just to lazy to go back further):
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/50192/we-really-need-rebalanced-attributes/p1
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/48480/do-you-think-defensive-attributes-are-generally-underpowered-in-pve#latest
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/23477/condi-balance-paradigm#latest
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/11229/attribute-rework-cleanup#latest
    etc.

    In all of which you have always complained that defensive stats are to weak and need buffing, and/or offensive stats are to strong and need nerfing.

    People, myself included, always told you that defensive stats are fine (even if not needed for much of the pve in this game) balance wise. Now suddenly you discover the value of defensive stats.

    Here is the basic rundown:

    • all PVE content is more than doable without defensive stats. That has nothing to do with the benefits of the defensive stats, but simply with the way the game is made and how defensive skills and active dodging works (and in general is enough to keep a player alive)
    • if a player struggles with a full offensive build, they should and can take some defensive stats. That was never contested
    • defensive stats work just fine in increasing survivability but will not make up for drastic player mistakes
    • some stat combos (like marauder) offer some defence at a low loww of offence (mainly because the offence counterpart berserker is a 3-stat combo)

    Metabattle has had a section on open world builds for a long time now. Woodenpotatoes is doing segments on, in his opinion, very good open world and story builds per class (though he focuses on power builds only).

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    No amount of defence stats helps you against oneshot mechanics, that why full zerk.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Aeolus.3615Aeolus.3615 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    TL;DR damage scales up almost 10x from base damage values, stacking toughness and vitality make you survive 1-2 more hits you probably could have dodged.

    Reason why some classes can heal 10k every 3-4 sec aoe ._., well one class that is...but it is not needed to play that in this game.... due how dumb and easy is to achieve overperformance.

    For my perception it feels game is more towards to over performance builds and classes than actually play well in team wich should be the real balance and design moto.

    Players that don’t care with playing those easier way to win with lower effort metas will always have issues in game.

    It’s a developer fault for not reaching interesting combat skill design...

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    TL;DR damage scales up almost 10x from base damage values, stacking toughness and vitality make you survive 1-2 more hits you probably could have dodged.

    No, this is completely incorrect and shows you didn't read my original post.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    This is why so many sets have Power primary.

    To clarify/expand on this, Power is a primary attribute on so many sets because it offers the bulk of the damage boost in the game, Precision and Ferocity combined offer less of a damage boost than Power alone.
    Calculations:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1006614/#Comment_1006614
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1006649/#Comment_1006649

    This is the relevant part:

    Base: 24
    Power vs Vitality/Toughness: 29
    Precision/Ferocity vs Vitality/Toughness: 36

    In that calculation I take a Ranger in full ascended using a Longbow and calculate how many auto-attacks at max range are required to kill themselves. At base values it takes 24 hits.
    Increasing Power, Vitality and Toughness by 1000 equals 29 hits
    Increasing Precision, Ferocity, Vitality and Toughness by 1000 equals 36 hits (a lot more than Power alone)

    This means Precision and Ferocity are terrible stats for damage, if not combined with high Power, this is by design of course, so builds can use multiple attributes and still do damage.

  • Voltekka.2375Voltekka.2375 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    This is why so many sets have Power primary.

    To clarify/expand on this, Power is a primary attribute on so many sets because it offers the bulk of the damage boost in the game, Precision and Ferocity combined offer less of a damage boost than Power alone.
    Calculations:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1006614/#Comment_1006614
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1006649/#Comment_1006649

    This is the relevant part:

    Base: 24
    Power vs Vitality/Toughness: 29
    Precision/Ferocity vs Vitality/Toughness: 36

    In that calculation I take a Ranger in full ascended using a Longbow and calculate how many auto-attacks at max range are required to kill themselves. At base values it takes 24 hits.
    Increasing Power, Vitality and Toughness by 1000 equals 29 hits
    Increasing Precision, Ferocity, Vitality and Toughness by 1000 equals 36 hits (a lot more than Power alone)

    This means Precision and Ferocity are terrible stats for damage, if not combined with high Power, this is by design of course, so builds can use multiple attributes and still do damage.

    "Yeah! Science!"

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The 50% damage bonus helps burst down mobs and end fights quicker. That generally means less mechanics, stress and (enemy inflicted) damage all around.

    If you want to point the finger anywhere, it's that we have enough base vitality and toughness to make sets like berserkers and vipers viable (and, therefore, meta).

    Except it isn't...... Full glass has always been risky, even among classes with higher base HP. Its dodges and invulnerability frames that allow the Glass Meta to work, since dying in one hit matters less when you can consistently avoid being hit/taking damage.

    This simple fact the game's design is exacerbated by the poor threat AI mobs pose; yet the line between Potato fights and Legit threats is based on number of strikes per second. Situations where the number of strikes overwhelms the players active defenses is what it takes to make things dangerous. But this 2 fold issues is made 2 folds further in how the Devs try to compensate by increasing the damage per strike to be more punishing to players who don't use, or can't manage active defenses.... only to have it scale out of control rapidly with Enemy count.

    So from a defensive perspective:

    • 1 mob attacking allows you to meter out your defenses and cool downs.
    • Multiple mobs are manageable if their attacks are heavily spaced out, or execute attacks with close timing to allow a batching effect for defensive actions
    • They stop being manageable as soon the number and timing strikes become effectively constant
    • And that problem made worse across the board with how mob attacks load their damage

    The Contrast to PvP gives clear examples to the underlying problem. PvP is about Opportunity, Pressure and Counter play. PvE, at its core, is a simple war of attrition. Thats why the most dangerous mobs in the game are ones that have attacks that are similar to what players have, or have special mechanics that makes Raw DPS ineffective. Those that don't are simply about who can reach lethal damage first; with the majority not even taking actions to avoid or mitigate damage at all.

    You take away the active defenses, you actively force players to have to soak damage. And in doing so, change the entire dynamic of combat and buildcraft priority.

    I think the downed state has a lot to do with the design of PVE encounters. There's a big part of me that wonders if the game would be better off without it.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

    It is an argument as you're trying to establish a relationship between two unrelated things when there isn't one.

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

    I disagree, therefore your argument (what little there tries to be) is invalid.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

    I disagree, therefore your argument (what little there tries to be) is invalid.

    Here you go: data is always evidence, it just isn't always enough to draw a conclusion. In this case, though, it is, because we're looking at simple data points and drawing a simple conclusion. Berserker's increases your offense by 50% over Soldiers, but Soldiers lets you take twice the amount of damage that Berserker's will. That means that Toughness + Vitality scales better for Defense than Precision + Ferocity does for offense.

    But, how's this for something better - let's let Ayrilana turn this thread into a preposterous & abstract argument about what does or does not constitute evidence - a very typical Ayrilana contrarian tactic, and then act like I'm the one who did something wrong.

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

    I disagree, therefore your argument (what little there tries to be) is invalid.

    Here you go: data is always evidence, it just isn't always enough to draw a conclusion. In this case, though, it is, because we're looking at simple data points. Berserker's increases your offense by 50% over Soldiers, but Soldiers lets you take twice the amount of damage that Berserker's will. That means that Toughness + Vitality scales better for Defense than Precision + Ferocity does for offense.

    But, how's this for something better - let's let Ayrilana turn this thread into a preposterous & abstract argument about what does or does not constitute evidence and then act like I'm the one who did something wrong.

    Nope, still fails to prove a solid point.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    Stop being such a contrarian. It's really unbecoming. As usual, I don't even know what argument you're trying to make, and I suspect you don't either.

    No. You're just refusing to make a counter argument.

    In case things weren't clear, I was arguing against your assumption that all data is evidence and against your assertion in the following:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    So the real contest here is to look at Berserker's vs Soldier's and see what the tradeoff is in terms of damage and defense. This spreadsheet does exactly that:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXxJl1yTzgVeeLtOdPpBk9nWyXmyhvJ1hGcEtnQ1H34/edit#gid=0

    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    It's not an argument - let alone one worth countering. You literally drag me (and others) into this nonsense in every thread. Not indulging it this time.

    I disagree, therefore your argument (what little there tries to be) is invalid.

    Here you go: data is always evidence, it just isn't always enough to draw a conclusion. In this case, though, it is, because we're looking at simple data points and drawing a simple conclusion. Berserker's increases your offense by 50% over Soldiers, but Soldiers lets you take twice the amount of damage that Berserker's will. That means that Toughness + Vitality scales better for Defense than Precision + Ferocity does for offense.

    But, how's this for something better - let's let Ayrilana turn this thread into a preposterous & abstract argument about what does or does not constitute evidence - a very typical Ayrilana contrarian tactic, and then act like I'm the one who did something wrong.

    A player's HP and the damage that they do are unrelated; they're not even on the same scale. You're also completely ignoring the stats of what they're fighting.

    Nice ad hominem. When you can't attack the argument, just attack the person.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @FrigginPaco.4178 said:
    There are several important things to know when talking about defense in Guild Wars 2.

    The game tries to keep a fast pace in combat while making sure that active defense is rewarded more than passive defense (allegedly). This type of design choice is particularly noted with the Nerfs to Defy Pain on the Warrior some time ago, notably on the competitive modes, yet there are better options in PVE as well. However, the game does not like to provide much access to extremely powerful defensive skills. I'll pick on Warrior again just a little bit, but Shield Stance on the shield "5" is normally on a 25 second cool down for a 3-second guard. You're quite vulnerable for a whole 22 seconds before you can block for 3 seconds another time.

    That said, there's a pretty good balance between choosing to dodge something or choosing to use a skill to evade it in some fashion to otherwise mitigate damage. However this particular concept differs greatly in methodology between PvE and the competitive modes at large. There are few individual attacks that you would consider dodging in PvE. Instead you would typically Dodge to avoid an AoE on the ground that you cannot run out of quickly enough. At least for me.

    PvP & WvW are a whole other issue - there, a player needs to be recognizing the opposing players most dangerous moves. Typically you need to dodge someone's CC in order to avoid death by CC locking or just by the damage you'll take after being cc'd the first time at all. Unless you're fighting a champion in PVE, most of the mobs hits aren't going to be life or death. However in those competitive modes, literally every strike an opponent makes against you puts you precipitously close to defeat much faster.

    Another thing to keep in mind in this conversation is the idea of sustain as well, although not specifically relating to the primary heal skill's activation. Many, but not all, builds have some method of keeping you in the fight without having to spend the time to cast your healing skill. It could even be bolstered by food that allows you to lifesteal or regenerate over time Etc. Time spent waiting to be healed is not necessarily a waste by any stretch, but it prolongs the combat, not shortens it.

    As far as stats go, I feel like it depends greatly on the game of that you're playing. I'd write more, but its late. Maybe I'll check in tomorrow...

    Most of this is true, however, it's a fallacy to distill all PvE into "you're fighting a single mob and dodge all of its slow, heavy hitting attacks" which is what I feel people are running with when acting like defensive stats are useless in PvE. This is clearly a caricature of PvE and not how most PvE combat actually occurs - certainly not when just doing stuff solo.

    In reality, you are often chain-killing and fighting hordes at a time while taking a lot of damage, most of which it isn't possible to dodge, so you absorb it, boon up, heal through it, and kill as fast as possible (which dodging slows you down in doing). But if increasing your defensive stats improves your Time to die more than Precision/ferocity improves your time to kill (which is what this data reveals), there's a compelling case to be made that giving up a portion of the latter for some of the former is very effective even in PvE.

  • Trise.2865Trise.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭

    "Glass cannons are glassy"

    Yup. Sure are.

    If we want ANet to step up their game, then we must step up ours.

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

    Or assuming that living on the east coast in the U.S. means that you have better odds of winning the lottery because a larger percentage of the winners are from there.

    A couple things that the OP is ignoring is how much damage is done to an enemy is relation to the enemy's HP and how much damage the enemy does to them in relation to their own HP. Using soldiers with a 50% drop in DPS, and twice the effective HP, can cause the enemy to out-sustain them depending on the enemy's stats. This is exactly what I found many years ago when I was deciding to go from soldiers to berserkers. Enemies that I struggled with in soldiers were less of a threat to me in berserkers because I killed them before they could become such.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

    Or assuming that living on the east coast in the U.S. means that you have better odds of winning the lottery because a larger percentage of the winners are from there.

    A couple things that the OP is ignoring is how much damage is done to an enemy is relation to the enemy's HP and how much damage the enemy does to them in relation to their own HP. Using soldiers with a 50% drop in DPS, and twice the effective HP, can cause the enemy to out-sustain them depending on the enemy's stats.

    Soldier's does 2/3 the damage that Berserker's does. Berserker's has between 1/3 and 1/2 the EHP that Soldier's does depending on class. Your argument is more likely to apply the other way around, with players out-sustaining mobs in Soldier's when they wouldn't in Berserker's.

    That's the entire point - Vitality + Toughness has a greater effect on TTL (not factoring in Dodge) than Precision + Ferocity does on TTK. People think it's the opposite and it isn't. I'm not saying that means V/T is always better than P/F. This depends on a kitten ton of variables, and you likely wouldn't want to run all Soldier's regardless. I'm simply saying it's a lot more balanced and competitive than people think it is and that there are compelling reasons to use some V/T including in PvE - at least some forms of it.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Harak.8397 said:
    My warrior runs Berserker weapons, (A,A / GS ) Knight armor and Marauder trinkets. I'll skip the build details but when all is said and done I have roughly 23k HP, just over 3000 armor and something in the ballpark of 2.4k, 2.5k power ( I forget... I abuse "for great justice" alot )

    Earlier this week I was farming Blood rubies in Bloodstone Fen and doing the meta event going up against the Jade Armors. I realise that most of the warriors with me in the furball were probably zerkers and doing more damage than I did but when the Jade constructs managed to send us all flying back, I was the only one getting back up ( with less than a 3rd of my HP ) and back at it. During that time, the others were being massaged off the floor behind me, not doing any damage and preventing the massaging players fron doing any themselves. By the time another big hit came, I was back at full health to eat it again ( thank you healers! )

    For older players like me who may no longer have the keen reflexes ( or skills ) we used to have, defensive stats allow me to not be a burden for my team while providing a fairly constant, if modest damage output.

    I understand that if you never get hit, offensive stats only is the way to go but yeah kitten happens.. and it has fangs.

    Right. But the idea that there's anybody that's so good at the game they never get hit is asinine. Maybe if you're just repeating the same simple encounter with a single mob all the time. That's why I said in the OP that "get gud dodge moar" is a brainless meme.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627
    Damage is applied equally against all mobs, so it "scales" according to the number of enemies your skills can hit at the same time. Toughness also is applied equally against all attacks - it reduces damage of every attack against you. Vitality however doesn't work that way, because hit points are a depletable resource. That can significantly affect your calculation, depeding on what you're fighting.

    By the way - again, you don't see the whole picture. For some reason you look look only at hybrid stats. What you should really look into is the survivability of dedicated bunker builds (nomad, minstrel). Only by looking at those (and looking at them in action, not merely at some calculations someone did) you will really see how OP can defensive stats be when properly used.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Astralporing.1957 said:
    @Einlanzer.1627
    Damage is applied equally against all mobs, so it "scales" according to the number of enemies your skills can hit at the same time. Toughness also is applied equally against all attacks - it reduces damage of every attack against you. Vitality however doesn't work that way, because hit points are a depletable resource. That can significantly affect your calculation, depeding on what you're fighting.

    By the way - again, you don't see the whole picture. For some reason you look look only at hybrid stats. What you should really look into is the survivability of dedicated bunker builds (nomad, minstrel). Only by looking at those (and looking at them in action, not merely at some calculations someone did) you will really see how OP can defensive stats be when properly used.

    Well, I'm intentionally only looking at Soldier's vs Berserker's in this case because the two stat spreads give an easy reference point for understanding the relative efficacy of Precision, Ferocity, Toughness, and Vitality, which is what I was most interested in. I'm not necessarily trying to compare different stat combos in general.

    Is it your opinion that bunker builds that use stats like Nomad or Minstrel work really well solo in PvE? Because that would be a surprise to me.

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

    Or assuming that living on the east coast in the U.S. means that you have better odds of winning the lottery because a larger percentage of the winners are from there.

    A couple things that the OP is ignoring is how much damage is done to an enemy is relation to the enemy's HP and how much damage the enemy does to them in relation to their own HP. Using soldiers with a 50% drop in DPS, and twice the effective HP, can cause the enemy to out-sustain them depending on the enemy's stats.

    Soldier's does 2/3 the damage that Berserker's does. Berserker's has between 1/3 and 1/2 the EHP that Soldier's does depending on class. Your argument is more likely to apply the other way around, with players out-sustaining mobs in Soldier's when they wouldn't in Berserker's.

    That's the entire point - Vitality + Toughness has a greater effect on TTL (not factoring in Dodge) than Precision + Ferocity does on TTK. People think it's the opposite and it isn't. I'm not saying that means V/T is always better than P/F. This depends on a kitten ton of variables. I'm simply saying it's a lot more balanced and competitive than people think it is and that there are compelling reasons to use some V/T including in at least some forms of PvE.

    But I can tell already you're also ignoring all the damage multipliers most power builds have from traits and sigils to make that comparison. Those compound rapidly via their multiplicative nature. I did the math on this before, and its not unusual to have raw damage values in the 7 digits, before being divided by the armor value and damage reduction traits. Theres also a thing where the damage reduction traits do the same multiplicative math in some cases (meaning they shrink in scale) while others can be additive (bigger reductions), so the math is kind of unintuitive.

    For reference, the tool tip damage is based on the assumption of a target with 2597 Armor, which is 380 points higher then the baseline value of Heavy armor + Toughness.

    So heres part of the issue...... HP grows linearly, toughness works on division, but Prc and Fer are multiplicative and compound with other modifiers. This is far from equal scaling between defense and offensive stats per point allocation.... especially when you start to realize you only need to meet certain thresholds to obtain certain TTKs.

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 12, 2019

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @starlinvf.1358 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Einlanzer.1627 said:
    Berserker deals around 50% more damage than Soldiers, but has less than half the effective HP. Combining that with healing skills and dodging, this means that defensive stats are actually a lot more effective than people believe them to be.

    People were telling you this each time you started a new thread, remember?

    In every thread I was asking for theorycrafting on Soldiers vs Berserkers to try to gain clarity and everyone was willing to argue with me without providing any evidence. I finally found it, and yes, the people arguing that defensive stats are better than most players think were right. So, I suppose you could say I've switched sides. Congratulations.

    The spreadsheet at the beginning of the thread doesn’t provide evidence though.

    It's called data. Data = evidence.

    Not necessarily. I can provide data that the world is flat, that doesn’t mean that it is. It’s also possible to take pieces of data and string together an assertion that isn’t true/accurate. Someone could take the damage difference between the stat sets, as well as the difference between HP, and then make an incorrect assertion about the two.

    I remember this from John Oliver. P-Hacking. Playing with your data so you find something that counts as statistically significant, but probably meaningless. Like correlations between eating Cabbage and having an Innie Belly Button, drinking Ice Tea and believing Crash didn't deserve best picture, and eating raw tomatoes and Judaism.

    Or assuming that living on the east coast in the U.S. means that you have better odds of winning the lottery because a larger percentage of the winners are from there.

    A couple things that the OP is ignoring is how much damage is done to an enemy is relation to the enemy's HP and how much damage the enemy does to them in relation to their own HP. Using soldiers with a 50% drop in DPS, and twice the effective HP, can cause the enemy to out-sustain them depending on the enemy's stats.

    Soldier's does 2/3 the damage that Berserker's does. Berserker's has between 1/3 and 1/2 the EHP that Soldier's does depending on class. Your argument is more likely to apply the other way around, with players out-sustaining mobs in Soldier's when they wouldn't in Berserker's.

    That's the entire point - Vitality + Toughness has a greater effect on TTL (not factoring in Dodge) than Precision + Ferocity does on TTK. People think it's the opposite and it isn't. I'm not saying that means V/T is always better than P/F. This depends on a kitten ton of variables, and you likely wouldn't want to run all Soldier's regardless. I'm simply saying it's a lot more balanced and competitive than people think it is and that there are compelling reasons to use some V/T including in PvE - at least some forms of it.

    I tested berserkers vs soldiers against veteran vinetooth by doing just auto attacks. I got it much further in berserkers before it downed me than I did in soldiers before it downed me. The DPS in berserkers was 3.7K and the DPS in soldiers was 2.1K so 2/3s difference was not what I experienced. The purpose of this was just to test the difference in sustain between the two stat sets and the difference in their damage output. I tried to do more tests but got frustrated as people kept trying to "help". Even those that were just ignoring it only suddenly became interested enough to attack when they saw I was attacking it.

    My argument is not more likely to work the other way around. The reason being that you're focusing on two unrelated stats while ignoring the DPS of the enemy you're fighting does as well as its HP. You're also arguing against people who have done extensive tests which formed the current consensus that berserkers is better. Just to clarify, by "people", I mean those years ago who tested this.

    In the open world, it generally won't matter. You can generally pile enough players onto things where you collectively do enough damage and the damage the boss does is spread out; not everyone is going to take damage from every attack. The trash mobs on the maps also have low health so they die fairly quickly to not be much of a threat in the first place.

    Edit: Actually, a better test of the DPS differences would probably have been to run a rotation on the golem using the two different sets as the damage will scale differently depending on the skill.

    If you want to agree to disagree, I'm fine with that. I don't take much enjoyment as of late in these online debates and almost immediately regret it when I get wrapped up in one.

  • @Einlanzer.1627 said:

    @FrigginPaco.4178 said:
    There are several important things to know when talking about defense in Guild Wars 2.

    The game tries to keep a fast pace in combat while making sure that active defense is rewarded more than passive defense (allegedly). This type of design choice is particularly noted with the Nerfs to Defy Pain on the Warrior some time ago, notably on the competitive modes, yet there are better options in PVE as well. However, the game does not like to provide much access to extremely powerful defensive skills. I'll pick on Warrior again just a little bit, but Shield Stance on the shield "5" is normally on a 25 second cool down for a 3-second guard. You're quite vulnerable for a whole 22 seconds before you can block for 3 seconds another time.

    That said, there's a pretty good balance between choosing to dodge something or choosing to use a skill to evade it in some fashion to otherwise mitigate damage. However this particular concept differs greatly in methodology between PvE and the competitive modes at large. There are few individual attacks that you would consider dodging in PvE. Instead you would typically Dodge to avoid an AoE on the ground that you cannot run out of quickly enough. At least for me.

    PvP & WvW are a whole other issue - there, a player needs to be recognizing the opposing players most dangerous moves. Typically you need to dodge someone's CC in order to avoid death by CC locking or just by the damage you'll take after being cc'd the first time at all. Unless you're fighting a champion in PVE, most of the mobs hits aren't going to be life or death. However in those competitive modes, literally every strike an opponent makes against you puts you precipitously close to defeat much faster.

    Another thing to keep in mind in this conversation is the idea of sustain as well, although not specifically relating to the primary heal skill's activation. Many, but not all, builds have some method of keeping you in the fight without having to spend the time to cast your healing skill. It could even be bolstered by food that allows you to lifesteal or regenerate over time Etc. Time spent waiting to be healed is not necessarily a waste by any stretch, but it prolongs the combat, not shortens it.

    As far as stats go, I feel like it depends greatly on the game of that you're playing. I'd write more, but its late. Maybe I'll check in tomorrow...

    Most of this is true, however, it's a fallacy to distill all PvE into "you're fighting a single mob and dodge all of its slow, heavy hitting attacks" which is what I feel people are running with when acting like defensive stats are useless in PvE. This is clearly a caricature of PvE and not how most PvE combat actually occurs - certainly not when just doing stuff solo.

    In reality, you are often chain-killing and fighting hordes at a time while taking a lot of damage, most of which it isn't possible to dodge, so you absorb it, boon up, heal through it, and kill as fast as possible (which dodging slows you down in doing). But if increasing your defensive stats improves your Time to die more than Precision/ferocity improves your time to kill (which is what this data reveals), there's a compelling case to be made that giving up a portion of the latter for some of the former is very effective even in PvE.

    Sure, and I'd like to address that now since it's part and parcel of where I left off.

    I'd like to go back to sustain for just a moment here because it is so much a part of this system. Traits like the Warrior's Might Makes Right (Strength): Gain health and endurance whenever you apply might to yourself. No internal cooldown.
    Healing: 133 (0.02)?
    Endurance Gained: 2

    Allows players to cleave and sustain quite handily in a throng of mobs, it's got a good amount of use in WvW for me, especially coupled with Magebane Tether which pulses Might packets for its duration. It's not even part of a Specialization line identified as a "support" or "healing" line compared to how overt that theme is on Tactics. However, other professions do this as well.

    Necromancer: Parasitic Contagion

    A percentage of your condition damage heals you. (Healing will not occur while lifeforce replaces health.) That's for all damage done to all mobs/players you're currently harming with your damage. It is entirely possible to sustain by piling on to these offense oriented traits and abilities that allow you to heal as you fight, the ideal method, since you do not need to stop to heal. It is here that "no two professions are equal" is more of a factor and where you can benefit more from adding a bit of Vitality/Toughness to the mix. For example, Revenant heal skills are often contingent on interacting with damage or impairing conditions in some way, and they do not scale very well, Ventari being the outlier here. It's better to use **Assassin's Annihilation: ** 1 second Internal Cooldown --- Siphon life from foes when hitting a foe from behind or the side, particularly if you want to try to sustain during a fight, though I hate the 1 second ICD and it really doesn't make sense when you compare it to something like Might Makes Right, but that's a whole other conversation about balance.

    Potential requires action in order to be realized.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.