Do elite spec tradeoffs mean rendering the elite mechanic useless?

[Chaba.5410]

@Vagrant.7206 said:The old function gyro had 5000 health

I wouldn't be surprised if the new function gyros have so little health because of some spaghetti code with the -300 vitality trait. Lmao.

[stone cold.8609]

@"Chaba.5410" said:"giving core more of a competitive chance"

Any of you play in the first year of the game? Any of you remember what classes were

? This idea of balancing elites against core is a big joke because it assumes that core was something great when history says otherwise. Nerfing elites to "bring them in line with core" doesn't fix what was wrong with many core specs in the first place. Engineer core was "jack of all trades, master at none". Yea, let's make "master at none" great again - don't blame people when they instead go play a class (or elite spec) that is master at its role. SMH.

I did and I completely agree. I was going to post something similar to this comment myself. The whole concept of making trade offs compared to core is flawed in my opinion because of this and will only lead to the professions with the stronger core specs staying stronger and the weaker core specs staying weaker.

The changes to Engie Scrapper and Holosmith are illustrative of how this approach doesn't work for PvE. For Scrapper, the first rework 2 months ago greatly improved an largely underplayed elite spec by finally making gyros work and giving it an interesting healing/support role that was starting to be used in PvE. Holosmith in PvE was in a pretty good spot, with both a condi and power build that were fairly competitive with other professions used in high end PvE, but by no means the top of any list. Now, in order to provide a meaningful trade off to the core spec, both Holosmith and Scrapper received fairly substantial nerfs (and the Scrapper elite skill was made even worse than before to the point that it is essentially non-functional). This in no way makes the core spec any more desirable to play, but only makes both elite Engie specs less desirable to play.

[Yasai.3549]

People who argue in the favor of backwards balancing (bringing down Elite Specs to the level of core through tradeoffs) don't know what they're saying.

They should be focusing on pulling Core up to Elite standards.

This isn't even an argument, it should have been this way from the start.

No one should be forced to play Core class because Elite got dumpstered, people should CHOOSE to play core class because Elite specs in a different direction.

They can simply do this by adding something good for each Core class that Elites are replacing with their own version as with Ancient Echo on Rev.

They can make Core Engi have a special little something which is replaced by Gyro or Photon Forge.

And this should not be the toolbelt elite.

The whole Toolbelt Elite feels more like direct slap to Scrapper on the same lines of cutting Steal range in half for some lazy unblockable.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

The idea of bringing e-specs in line with core is the kind of thing that you can't do piecemeal. All of the core abilities have been balanced around the e-specs, not the other way around. So, if Anet wants core to be balanced with the e-specs, the first thing they have to do is make core viable in all game modes by itself, and THEN you change the elite specializations, and you do this for all professions at the same time.

[Iozeph.5617]

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:New shroud/shades replace old one.F-Gyro did not make toolbelt dissapear.

It was not a replacement but an add-on. Making it take up elite slot is an actual trade-off and some justice to core engi.

As far as trade offs go the Scrapper now has no defining trait worthy of the name AND it loses part of what defines ANY engineer which is the toolbelt skills. On top of that these changes do nothing for core Engineer because core Engineer is still rubbish in spite of having all five toolbelt slots. It's been execrable for years and still is because on the whole -from base weapons- through kits, gadgets, turrets and even elixirs it's just a hot mess that's been left in the dust by every other profession thanks to power creep. There's no justice in that. All the loss of tool belt five(not to mention the abortion that is impact savant as well as the regen that was lost) does is make it so that now two out of three specs for the Engineer are gutter tier where before -at least for a while- the two elites had something to offer.

So thanks for that, ANet. In your continued efforts to pander to the mob you've succeeded not only in putting the "f" in f-gyro but Engineers in general.

[ILoveMonotony.1479]

Reducing the power level of an elite specialisation automatically brings the competing builds up. If you don't like trade-offs then you should advocate for a rework of the bloated abilities and traits introduced since HoT. One way or another the power level of all the specialisations added since 2015 needs to be lowered.

[Dadnir.5038]

Truth be told, scrapper is looking for it's special mechanism since HoT release. ANet has been clinging to the revive/stomp thingy desperately without being able to achieve something satisfactory since then. Scrapper is probably the elite spec that changed the most since it's release so it's difficult to say whether or not it's in it's final form or not.

As for tradeoff, they are necessary to keep the elite spec in a range were the core professions can be competitive. If they add something, there is a need to lose something as well.In case of the engineer it seem to revolve around the loss of the toolbelt spot for the elite skill. That said (it's my own opinion here), on one side you got the arguably usefull scrapper skill and on the other you got access to a full weaponset worth of skill. It's difficult to say that both are balanced.

What make me laugh the most is the idea that they will inevitably have to put a trade off on firebrand... There is so much powercreep onto their "tome" that the loss will probably feel unbearable.

[BarnacleBoy.6918]

@"Dadnir.5038" said:Truth be told, scrapper is looking for it's special mechanism since HoT release. ANet has been clinging to the revive/stomp thingy desperately without being able to achieve something satisfactory since then. Scrapper is probably the elite spec that changed the most since it's release so it's difficult to say whether or not it's in it's final form or not.

As for tradeoff, they are necessary to keep the elite spec in a range were the core professions can be competitive. If they add something, there is a need to lose something as well.In case of the engineer it seem to revolve around the loss of the toolbelt spot for the elite skill. That said (it's my own opinion here), on one side you got the arguably usefull scrapper skill and on the other you got access to a full weaponset worth of skill. It's difficult to say that both are balanced.

What make me laugh the most is the idea that they will inevitably have to put a trade off on firebrand... There is so much powercreep onto their "tome" that the loss will probably feel unbearable.

That’s the funniest part about the way they started to enact these “trade offs”. If anet intends to bring down all elite specs, firebrand gets 3 incredibly powerful kits- a straight upgrade from the base Fskills.

What is the plan Anet? -300 concentration? How does one add a trade off to a class that gives up nothing to become the best support in the game? How do you balance a class/spec that has been power crept to the front of the pack, while other classes were nerfed/balanced AROUND Fb to fit other niche rolls an Fb cant fill?

Honestly I’m completely in awe of this. Think about all the balance passes in the last year, that were geared towards giving classes roles in raids, BASED off they way Elite specs, specifically PoF specs, were performing at the time. Imagine all the times a balance patch gets released, and how many of the changes are implemented when looking at all the classes as a whole. We’re going to end up with implementation, past or present, that is counterintuitive to the “trade offs” that anet adds. These “trade offs” don’t exist in a vacuum, and anet has never balanced a class in a vacuum, so why are you implementing “trade offs” in a vacuum?

[Chaba.5410]

@Elmo Benchwarmer.3025 said:Reducing the power level of an elite specialisation automatically brings the competing builds up. If you don't like trade-offs then you should advocate for a rework of the bloated abilities and traits introduced since HoT. One way or another the power level of all the specialisations added since 2015 needs to be lowered.

Someone still not clear on the idea that not all core specs are even balanced with each other. Balance should be made against actual competing builds, not simply because of core.

[Kuulpb.5412]

@Vagrant.7206 said:

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:

@Vagrant.7206 said:

Except the new shroud/shades add some MASSIVE bonuses to core necro. F-gyro has always had extremely limited utility. Why does the f-gyro require a more significant tradeoff for what is actually worse than the core skill?

That's a problem of core necro being really bad, those "MASSIVE bonuses" just put necro elites in line with other elites, not above them. Once we go back to core, necro is sorely behind the rest of the pack, least PvE wise.Rest assured a lot of necros would gladly accept elite nerfs, if core was properly buffed making them alternate playstyle and not must haves to catch up with the rest of the world.

My point is that while the F-gyro was a strict "addition" as someone here called it, it wasn't a massive bonus over core. But they've made this "elite" mechanic complete garbage now, to where it can't even finish a downed person who attacks it once or twice. And then it sits in the toolbelt and occupies a slot where other actually useful skills once were. It's an "elite mechanic" that passively harms the user.

If they're not going to buff its health (at the very minimum), I'd rather they delete the entire thing altogether. That way they could give up the charade of scrapper actually having an elite mechanic.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:

@"Kuulpb.5412" said:as a necromancer main I can safely say scrapper gyro taking f5 is not "a replacement" that works, the gyro system becoming wells was bad enough, and now they lose their mechanic in exchange for what is effectively a bad warbanner ( warrior elite) smaller range, no boons, warbanner can't be destroyed, if it's replacing the possibility of huge CC, then it should be something that works, but you have to basically stand on top of the target to cast this, so why not just res them anyway?

Warbanners didn't stomp downed ppl. That for starters was the biggest issue with function gyro. Not to mention function gyro did not need 180s to be used again. You're comparing an elite skill that is made to have huge impact, has huge cooldown and requires an elite slot, to a free utility, that costed nothing save equipping scrapper traitline.

Warbanners do stomp downed people

.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:Now actual cost (F5 slot) has been introduced. As for how effective this new gyro is - that is up for debate, but the old one was pretty disgusting to say the least. Paired with nigh unkillable, cc heavy scrapper it meant guaranteed stomps or resses. Hell even without those scrapper has ways to seal the deal, like stealthing a downed ally, then ressing them.

Hard to call the old function gyro "disgusting". The old function gyro had 5000 health, and, when traited, one stack of stability, and a 10s lifespan. This meant that a downed player and a nearby ally could easily deal with it if they chose to. The downed ally could either waste the clock on the gyro (ele, thief), or remove the stability and let their ally help.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:Or the elixir R. or...let's just say that ressing and stomping are pretty powerful on engi. And if most engies don't take advantage...that's not my problem.

Ah yes, the all-powerful Elixir R. I've seen that in so many PvP matches since HoT dropped that I can't believe it still exists.

Really, does it still exist?

/s

I used to use Elixir R back when I did pvp, but I hate pvp so That was a long time ago :P, I would throw it and res myself, I never used it for other people, I'd get up and kill the guy killing me.

[Iozeph.5617]

@Elmo Benchwarmer.3025 said:Reducing the power level of an elite specialisation automatically brings the competing builds up. If you don't like trade-offs then you should advocate for a rework of the bloated abilities and traits introduced since HoT. One way or another the power level of all the specialisations added since 2015 needs to be lowered.

I agree with the majority of this with the exception that even if you nerfed all existing elite specs to a comparable level of power with one another- you still have the problem of certain core specs being superior to others just due to their mechanics or ease of use.

Say this great nerfing happens. Core Engineer is still going to be a joke compared to most other core specs and I believe this is the sort inconsistency that's being overlooked when people talk about nerfing damage across the board for elites and calling it a job well done. Some, perhaps not all, core professions need- no, they deserve to be rebuilt from the ground up if only to keep them current. Nothing wrong with diversity but having to be a concert pianist to get a decent level of performance from your chosen profession is a flawed design mind set that needs to disappear.

[Vagrant.7206]

@Kuulpb.5412 said:

@Vagrant.7206 said:

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:

@Vagrant.7206 said:

Except the new shroud/shades add some MASSIVE bonuses to core necro. F-gyro has always had extremely limited utility. Why does the f-gyro require a more significant tradeoff for what is actually worse than the core skill?

That's a problem of core necro being really bad, those "MASSIVE bonuses" just put necro elites in line with other elites, not above them. Once we go back to core, necro is sorely behind the rest of the pack, least PvE wise.Rest assured a lot of necros would gladly accept elite nerfs, if core was properly buffed making them alternate playstyle and not must haves to catch up with the rest of the world.

My point is that while the F-gyro was a strict "addition" as someone here called it, it wasn't a massive bonus over core. But they've made this "elite" mechanic complete garbage now, to where it can't even finish a downed person who attacks it once or twice. And then it sits in the toolbelt and occupies a slot where other actually useful skills once were. It's an "elite mechanic" that passively harms the user.

If they're not going to buff its health (at the very minimum), I'd rather they delete the entire thing altogether. That way they could give up the charade of scrapper actually having an elite mechanic.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:

@Kuulpb.5412 said:as a necromancer main I can safely say scrapper gyro taking f5 is not "a replacement" that works, the gyro system becoming wells was bad enough, and now they lose their mechanic in exchange for what is effectively a bad warbanner ( warrior elite) smaller range, no boons, warbanner can't be destroyed, if it's replacing the possibility of huge CC, then it should be something that works, but you have to basically stand on top of the target to cast this, so why not just res them anyway?

Warbanners didn't stomp downed ppl. That for starters was the biggest issue with function gyro. Not to mention function gyro did not need 180s to be used again. You're comparing an elite skill that is made to have huge impact, has huge cooldown and requires an elite slot, to a free utility, that costed nothing save equipping scrapper traitline.

Warbanners do stomp downed people

.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:Now actual cost (F5 slot) has been introduced. As for how effective this new gyro is - that is up for debate, but the old one was pretty disgusting to say the least. Paired with nigh unkillable, cc heavy scrapper it meant guaranteed stomps or resses. Hell even without those scrapper has ways to seal the deal, like stealthing a downed ally, then ressing them.

Hard to call the old function gyro "disgusting". The old function gyro had 5000 health, and, when traited, one stack of stability, and a 10s lifespan. This meant that a downed player and a nearby ally could easily deal with it if they chose to. The downed ally could either waste the clock on the gyro (ele, thief), or remove the stability and let their ally help.

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:Or the elixir R. or...let's just say that ressing and stomping are pretty powerful on engi. And if most engies don't take advantage...that's not my problem.

Ah yes, the all-powerful Elixir R. I've seen that in so many PvP matches since HoT dropped that I can't believe it still exists.

Really, does it still exist?

/s

I used to use Elixir R back when I did pvp, but I hate pvp so That was a long time ago :P, I would throw it and res myself, I never used it for other people, I'd get up and kill the guy killing me.

Oh yeah, back when it was core only, Elixir R was useful in situations like that. It was kind of like AED before AED. Now it has virtually no utility in PvP.

[draxynnic.3719]

@BarnacleBoy.6918 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:Truth be told, scrapper is looking for it's special mechanism since HoT release. ANet has been clinging to the revive/stomp thingy desperately without being able to achieve something satisfactory since then. Scrapper is probably the elite spec that changed the most since it's release so it's difficult to say whether or not it's in it's final form or not.

As for tradeoff, they are necessary to keep the elite spec in a range were the core professions can be competitive. If they add something, there is a need to lose something as well.In case of the engineer it seem to revolve around the loss of the toolbelt spot for the elite skill. That said (it's my own opinion here), on one side you got the arguably usefull scrapper skill and on the other you got access to a full weaponset worth of skill. It's difficult to say that both are balanced.

What make me laugh the most is the idea that they will inevitably have to put a trade off on firebrand... There is so much powercreep onto their "tome" that the loss will probably feel unbearable.

That’s the funniest part about the way they started to enact these “trade offs”. If anet intends to bring down all elite specs, firebrand gets 3 incredibly powerful kits- a straight upgrade from the base Fskills.

What is the plan Anet? -300 concentration? How does one add a trade off to a class that gives up nothing to become the best support in the game? How do you balance a class/spec that has been power crept to the front of the pack, while other classes were nerfed/balanced AROUND Fb to fit other niche rolls an Fb cant fill?

Honestly I’m completely in awe of this. Think about all the balance passes in the last year, that were geared towards giving classes roles in raids, BASED off they way Elite specs, specifically PoF specs, were performing at the time. Imagine all the times a balance patch gets released, and how many of the changes are implemented when looking at all the classes as a whole. We’re going to end up with implementation, past or present, that is counterintuitive to the “trade offs” that anet adds. These “trade offs” don’t exist in a vacuum, and anet has never balanced a class in a vacuum, so why are you implementing “trade offs” in a vacuum?

Yeah, I'm just going to copy-paste something I put in another thread, since I think it applies here as well:

@"draxynnic.3719" said:Again, one thing I think the "elite specs need harsh downsides" brigade seems to forget (including ArenaNet's balance team this time around, which really worries me) is that there is an inherent opportunity cost in taking an elite spec - the third core spec you could have taken otherwise. This is a significant tradeoff for most professions, and for those where it isn't, the problem is usually that they have too many core traitlines that don't bring enough to the table. You could say that elite specs also get weapons and skills, but these are balanced against the core weapons and skills which could be taken instead: if they prove too powerful, they get toned down individually, so choosing an elite weapon or skill is usually a choice rather than a powerup. The reason why new weapons and skills are linked to elite specialisations is to reduce the potential of getting GW1 situations where skills which are individually balanced become horribly broken when in the right combination.

Some tradeoffs on top of this are worthwhile to keep the elite specialisations distinct and give more reason to keep with a core build than just the opportunity cost of a core traitline, but I think adjusted top-bar skills are sufficient or more than sufficient to achieve this. In past balance patches, the concept of tradeoffs has mostly been around adjusting the topbar skills (in the case of berserker, the minor that adjusts stats while berserking is still a net benefit: you can account for it by boosting your toughness to compensate and still come out ahead) - elite specialisations that already naturally replace the core topbar skills, like guardian and necromancer elite specs, have largely been left alone.

The additional penalties - the vitality loss on Scrapper and the loss of Illusionary Persona - feel like overkill to me, and overkill that pushes them into overly specialised builds. The new Impact Savant, for instance, forces Scrapper into power builds - and condition Scrappers weren't exactly prevalent before the patch, so they got kicked while they were already down. Chronomancer doesn't have such an obvious "this is where you're being forced to", but it's been made a lot harder to use to the point where now there's a good chance that experienced players will only use it for buffbots or niche builds for situations where you don't expect to use shatters in the first place.

To be honest, scrapper has always been a relatively weak traitline. If you're not taking hammer, gyros, or using the Juggernaut/Mass Momentum build (and flamethrower was "purity of purposed" into being a condition-oriented weapon, so it doesn't synergise well with the new Impact Savant) there's not really a good reason to take scrapper as a traitline: the main reason why you don't see core engis much was that unless you're running Static Discharge (which holosmith does better nowadays) core engineer utilities that aren't elixirs or kits just aren't really worth taking, so Scrapper was taken for the opportunity to use gyros than anything else. The core engineer traitlines themselves are actually pretty good (and the same can be said of the core mesmer traitlines, with the possible exception of Inspiration after all the nerfs that line has taken).

Now, though: I'm honestly inclined to think that it's possible that there are scrapper builds that would be better off if used on characters that haven't fully trained the elite specialisation. Losing access to Sneak Gyro, Shredder Gyro, and especially Bulwark Gyro would hurt, but it might well be worth it for any build that isn't Power-based. And when you get to the point where you might start seriously thinking that just not having half of the specialisation unlocked to avoid being saddled with a punitive grandmaster minor might well be worth it is probably a point that indicates that it's probably gone too far.

(And, honestly, the new effects on the adept majors that seem oriented towards making it so that function gyros can actually do something useful apart from reviving and finishing... are technically doing so, but really aren't doing anything to make the function gyro mechanic actually feel worthwhile in PvE.)

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

It’s because anet has no idea what a trade off is. These changes to elite specs just prove that point.

A trade off is the following

Skill A does effect X at the cost of Y.Skill B does effect Z. If Z is successful, you take penalty W.

For example let’s say Skill A is Thief Steal for Daredevil. Steal will do it’s effect X which is to grant the user stolen abilities and inflict vulnerability. The cost Y would be to consume 2 initiative on Steal cast.

Another example. Skill B is reaper shroud. Reaper shroud will do effect Z and grant you shroud abilities. If shroud is used at less than 50% life force, you take penalty W, which inflict 5 stacks of vulnerability unto yourself.

These mechanics are trade offs. Trade offs are supposed to ENCOURAGE build diversity not mutilate it. As you can tell from the examples above, both situations can be used to benefit the userFor example A 2 initiative cost for steal cast means you get boosted damage from lead attacks or Assassin’s Reward.For example B, if you have curses, you can inflict that 5 vulnerability onto an enemy on entering shroud, or consume it for life force/health points with other various traits and utilities.

Those things encourage build diversity.

Simply nerfing steal range like ANets current form of “trade off” means you effectively kill things like PP daredevil which usto be a thing but is now so gimped due to the range differences...

This whole idea of trying to pigeon hole specs into specific play styles (like daredevil is supppsed to be a duelist or something) just kills build diversity and it’s super sad to see that after years of people wanting trade offs to fix balance they do it completely wrong.

[ILoveMonotony.1479]

Obviously some builds will always outperform others. This has always been the case, be it in vanilla, HoT or now PoF.

What is possible though is to reduce the power difference between builds. The closer the power levels are, the better for the game.

[Chaba.5410]

@Elmo Benchwarmer.3025 said:What is possible though is to reduce the power difference between builds. The closer the power levels are, the better for the game.

Obviously. Let's be clear we're talking about elite specs compared with core here though, not builds in general.

[starlinvf.1358]

@BarnacleBoy.6918 said:

@"Dadnir.5038" said:Truth be told, scrapper is looking for it's special mechanism since HoT release. ANet has been clinging to the revive/stomp thingy desperately without being able to achieve something satisfactory since then. Scrapper is probably the elite spec that changed the most since it's release so it's difficult to say whether or not it's in it's final form or not.

As for tradeoff, they are necessary to keep the elite spec in a range were the core professions can be competitive. If they add something, there is a need to lose something as well.In case of the engineer it seem to revolve around the loss of the toolbelt spot for the elite skill. That said (it's my own opinion here), on one side you got the arguably usefull scrapper skill and on the other you got access to a full weaponset worth of skill. It's difficult to say that both are balanced.

What make me laugh the most is the idea that they will inevitably have to put a trade off on firebrand... There is so much powercreep onto their "tome" that the loss will probably feel unbearable.

That’s the funniest part about the way they started to enact these “trade offs”. If anet intends to bring down all elite specs, firebrand gets 3 incredibly powerful kits- a straight upgrade from the base Fskills.

What is the plan Anet? -300 concentration? How does one add a trade off to a class that gives up nothing to become the best support in the game? How do you balance a class/spec that has been power crept to the front of the pack, while other classes were nerfed/balanced AROUND Fb to fit other niche rolls an Fb cant fill?

Honestly I’m completely in awe of this. Think about all the balance passes in the last year, that were geared towards giving classes roles in raids, BASED off they way Elite specs, specifically PoF specs, were performing at the time. Imagine all the times a balance patch gets released, and how many of the changes are implemented when looking at all the classes as a whole. We’re going to end up with implementation, past or present, that is counterintuitive to the “trade offs” that anet adds. These “trade offs” don’t exist in a vacuum, and anet has never balanced a class in a vacuum, so why are you implementing “trade offs” in a vacuum?

If we're really gonna drive FB into the ground? Tomes share a global cool down.

[starlinvf.1358]

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:It’s because anet has no idea what a trade off is. These changes to elite specs just prove that point.

A trade off is the following

Skill A does effect X at the cost of Y.Skill B does effect Z. If Z is successful, you take penalty W.

For example let’s say Skill A is Thief Steal for Daredevil. Steal will do it’s effect X which is to grant the user stolen abilities and inflict vulnerability. The cost Y would be to consume 2 initiative on Steal cast.

Another example. Skill B is reaper shroud. Reaper shroud will do effect Z and grant you shroud abilities. If shroud is used at less than 50% life force, you take penalty W, which inflict 5 stacks of vulnerability unto yourself.

These mechanics are trade offs. Trade offs are supposed to ENCOURAGE build diversity not mutilate it. As you can tell from the examples above, both situations can be used to benefit the userFor example A 2 initiative cost for steal cast means you get boosted damage from lead attacks or Assassin’s Reward.For example B, if you have curses, you can inflict that 5 vulnerability onto an enemy on entering shroud, or consume it for life force/health points with other various traits and utilities.

Those things encourage build diversity.

Simply nerfing steal range like ANets current form of “trade off” means you effectively kill things like PP daredevil which usto be a thing but is now so kitten due to the range differences...

This whole idea of trying to pigeon hole specs into specific play styles (like daredevil is supppsed to be a duelist or something) just kills build diversity and it’s super sad to see that after years of people wanting trade offs to fix balance they do it completely wrong.

In their quest to be even more like World of Warcraft, they failed to realize that the only way to be like World of Warcraft is to BE World of Warcraft. Their entire game system is not portable to anything else.

[Zin Dau.1749]

This is Anet's great vision for "tradeoffs".

Let's say you want to be a great singer. So you need to have great vocal skills. However, as a tradeoff, we're gonna punch you in the throat.

Or you want to build a F1 racecar where speed is king. So you can have the most aerodynamic chassis imaginable. However, as a tradeoff, you can only have a 1 horsepower engine.

[ZDragon.3046]

Not at all but i think scrapper in general has struggled to be given a place or identity... maybe not even that its identity is just over shadowed by other professions with too much power. Scrapper should be a tank right but people bring chrono tanks etc.... so whats the point of brining a scrapper when you can just bring a chrono.... or something....

Engi has always been a odd balls profession to start with in my opinion so im not quite sure what scrapper was really suppose to do for it. With holo its clear cut dps with scrapper it seems they want it to be a kiter/tank but its just over shadowed by too many options. Renegade, Chrono, Warrior possibly,

IF anet really culled boons around the board and handed out a few to each profession that they were good at producing and sharing and didnt allow everyone to have everything or one class to give everything or nearly everything professions like scrapper would have a better place and identity in the game.

I dont think the trade offs of taking it make much difference here. You are looking at the picture from the wrong perspective.

[Matoro.9708]

This is your daily reminder turrets are one of the worst skills in the game and serve only afk farmers and tagging stuff. Despicable. I have an easy plan for the fix:

1. Remove their auto attacks. These are worthless competitively anyways. They now use only their overcharge skills.
2. Put their overcharge skills on mantra like cooldowns using ammo. You can either detonate by activating with 0 charges left, before they recharge, or simply reinstate the toolbelt detonations, but I know I prefer the former.
3. Give them your own stats. You should know if a bunker boi is using turrets because they'll hit like a wet noodle. A berserker engi's turrets will blow over in the wind. Tradeoffs, baby. Similarly, let them proc relevant traits, like on crits, etc. (Having your target caught facing you and a turret at their back should totally proc flanking strikes.)
4. Opposite for boons. Just because you have 25 might doesn't mean your rocket turret does. Maybe the tech is too complex for this, fair enough. But it'd be an interesting play to throw potions onto your turrets to boost them. So let's let them have boons.
5. Ideally, reinstate some of the old traits. Otherwise, profit.

[Ruufio.1496]

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:I say good job a-net. Sorry but i was quite often on the receiving end of scrapper as a necro and let's make some things clear:

1. old gyro + scrapper = guaranteed stomp. There was no defense.
2. F5 moa was disgusting. I pop lich or other transform, it gets shut down by toolbelt skill...
3. being able to ress/stomp without putting your neck on the line or burning a crucial skill is a big deal

Maybe some fine tuning is needed here and there, but i say good riddance to f-gyro and F5 moa on scrappers.

Receiving end of a SCRAPPER as a NECROMANCER....

Really?

[rdigeri.7935]

@Matoro.9708 said:This is your daily reminder turrets are one of the worst skills in the game and serve only afk farmers and tagging stuff. Despicable. I have an easy plan for the fix:

1. Remove their auto attacks. These are worthless competitively anyways. They now use only their overcharge skills.
2. Put their overcharge skills on mantra like cooldowns using ammo. You can either detonate by activating with 0 charges left, before they recharge, or simply reinstate the toolbelt detonations, but I know I prefer the former.
3. Give them your own stats. You should know if a bunker boi is using turrets because they'll hit like a wet noodle. A berserker engi's turrets will blow over in the wind. Tradeoffs, baby. Similarly, let them proc relevant traits, like on crits, etc. (Having your target caught facing you and a turret at their back should totally proc flanking strikes.)
4. Opposite for boons. Just because you have 25 might doesn't mean your rocket turret does. Maybe the tech is too complex for this, fair enough. But it'd be an interesting play to throw potions onto your turrets to boost them. So let's let them have boons.
5. Ideally, reinstate some of the old traits. Otherwise, profit.

It'd be a nice start for sure..

If they have ammo for overcharges, then it's actually perfectly okay if turrets start their cooldown when they're placed, not when they're exploded; that way if you need to change their position, you can detonate them and place them instantly again, given that they've been there for a while.And repositioning them doesn't reset the cooldowns of overcharges.

[Matoro.9708]

@rdigeri.7935 said:

@Matoro.9708 said:This is your daily reminder turrets are one of the worst skills in the game and serve only afk farmers and tagging stuff. Despicable. I have an easy plan for the fix:

1. Remove their auto attacks. These are worthless competitively anyways. They now use only their overcharge skills.
2. Put their overcharge skills on mantra like cooldowns using ammo. You can either detonate by activating with 0 charges left, before they recharge, or simply reinstate the toolbelt detonations, but I know I prefer the former.
3. Give them your own stats. You should know if a bunker boi is using turrets because they'll hit like a wet noodle. A berserker engi's turrets will blow over in the wind. Tradeoffs, baby. Similarly, let them proc relevant traits, like on crits, etc. (Having your target caught facing you and a turret at their back should totally proc flanking strikes.)
4. Opposite for boons. Just because you have 25 might doesn't mean your rocket turret does. Maybe the tech is too complex for this, fair enough. But it'd be an interesting play to throw potions onto your turrets to boost them. So let's let them have boons.
5. Ideally, reinstate some of the old traits. Otherwise, profit.

It'd be a nice start for sure..

If they have ammo for overcharges, then it's actually perfectly okay if turrets start their cooldown when they're placed, not when they're exploded; that way if you need to change their position, you can detonate them and place them instantly again, given that they've been there for a while.And repositioning them doesn't reset the cooldowns of overcharges.

I didn't even think of that, that is brilliant. Throw mine works that way too, and this would make a big difference. Thanks man!

[rdigeri.7935]

@"Matoro.9708" said:I didn't even think of that, that is brilliant. Throw mine works that way too, and this would make a big difference. Thanks man!

I realized one slight issue with the system yesterday; if the detonation is the last "mantra", that means you can't detonate it unless you've used all the charges up. This might not be a big deal, it just doesn't enable you to destroy it AND keep the charges at the same time; only if you pick it up.But this might even be a good thing