Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Marked debuff kills roaming


Babylonn.5027

Recommended Posts

How exactly is one "punished" for a marked debuff when "roaming" is meant to at bare minimum cause havoc for the opposing team? If you are roaming, one would think they are at least good at fighting, or at least testing builds learning to fight in smaller scale...

If one was a good "roamer" and actually "roamed" and was not a "ganker" it wouldn't matter whether they were marked or not. Marked = more fights, but a roamer should be good at fighting and thus have no issues with more peeps coming at you when marked... but wait...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I absolutely love all the post slamming people for using "braindead" stealth mechanics lol constantly using feilds and skills to stack invisibility, then picking out the best target etc least theres some set up even if small. Gues zerging is way more less braindead lmao spamming skills and playing frogger imwith big blobs of aoe spamfest, so much skill involved lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marked reveal is a bad thing no matter which camp you belong to when it comes to stealth. Let me explain.

Camp A: Thieves are overpowered and need to be nerfed further.

For people in this camp marked is a bad thing, because the nerf to thieves should be across the board in order to ensure they are balanced everywhere in WvW. However presently these people only believe thieves are balanced when they are marked. Its not at all fair that a class is overpowered everywhere across the map except near sentries/marked towers. If thieves are overpowered they should be nerfed, not given special little debuff near sentries to even the playing field to that specific part of the map.

OR

Camb B: Thieves don't need any more nerfs.

For people who believe that thieves are not overpowered then marked is a bad thing, simply because they specifically target one of the defensive/offensive tools that a thief uses and needs to both deal damage and mitigate it. Much like if sentries disabled warriors stances/blocks or disabled a rangers pet etc. Its completely unfair that a class that Anet balances with its access to stealth in mind should be ham stringed more than other classes when near sentries/Towers. Yes its easy to adapt and play around them, but why should they? If a warrior had no acces to invulns when near sentries you could argue they should just learn to adapt. Im sure warriors could adapt. But why should they adapt when no other class needs to? Wouldn't it be much easier and more effective if warriors just played another class that wasn't target by the sentries?

Thats how I see it regardless. I'm trying not to take sides here because I play a lot of thief so I'm sure I'm bias to some extent. But I don't believe static debuffs found around WvW should target one specific class as marked currently does. If a class is overpowered it should be nerfed in-order to be balanced everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...