Ceit.7619

I'm in the camp of, I actually fairly recently got legendary runes and this feels like a direct nerf to my goals. I 100% made these runes so I would be able to freely change around my builds without having to care about getting new things, farming old or new currencies, or feel like I am punished for trying random 'off-meta' runesets. I would have never bothered with them at all if it was just a flat stat increase and nothing else.

I don't have a problem with the skyscale grind, but this is an insane take to me. The only mount my Skyscale has effectively replaced is my Springer. Most of the time I just use it to get kinda high, and then I am switching to Griffon to zoom zoom. I still pretty regularly use Roller Beetle, Skimmer and Jackal, too. The best QoL Skyscale offers is letting me go afk without getting murdered while I go handle something irl.

The passive effect of Shift Signet seems to be operating in too strong of a manner. It states "Boons you gain are copied to your mech." However what appears to be happening, is that each time you gain a buff, it gains a copy of every boon on you at the time of the copy. So if you use Crisis Zone, Gain Protection/Alacrity for 6 Seconds, your mech will get it's 6 second duration, plus a copied version of your own. If you THEN use Barrier Burst right after, it will pulse Might/Fury/Vigor on you, but it will copy the buffs from Crisis Zone in addition to the barrier burst buffs for each pulse, as well as when you give yourself buffs with weapon skills or the like.

Your exact phrasing: Major: Wicked Corruption: Reworked. Vile Blast now additionally Corrupts Boons (3 in PvE, 1 in PvP). "Additionally". This trait, as it currently is, only increases Strike damage. There's no other way to take this sentence. If that was your intention, fine, but it wasn't an error in reading. Further added to the fact that you explicitly phrase the condition one to remove it's stacks, but whatever. As for the blight management, the only real way to maintain it currently is to be popping 2 elixirs on cooldown while rotating in and out of shroud, so that it only drops for a half-second. Doubling that would make this even easier (essentially making it 1 Elixir and ideal shroud rotation). I haven't personally seen attempts at a power harbinger benchmark, so I don't necessarily know what it competes at with an ideal setup. I didn't initially look at the top trait line as a pvp spec, given I don't really pvp regularly. I'd generally prefer this to be a PvE spec, given that high-end pve is the place where Necro has historically fared the worst, while it's always been a lynchpin in pvp modes with multiple elite specs. Better to have at least one elite spec focus on PVE, so we don't run into the "Well we nerfed you by 50% because it was broken in WvW."

The 1% damage per stack on Wicked Corruption was there in my initial reply, as you can see from the quote I made of it. The issue I see in 'streamlining' Blight in this way, then becomes over-strengthening the condition aspect, as a Viper Harbinger will be receiving 15% Strike Damage bonus on top of 15% condition bonus, without traiting for either. As it is right now, the builds give you a choice to focus on Power, Support and Condition. Doing this will heavily slant it in the direction of condi for the entire spec. Further, if you are under the impression that Blight as it currently runs already has a perma-cap of 25, then having a trait tier based on Blight is entirely meaningless in the first place.

You get 1% damage boost per stack of Blight, so increasing the maximum amount of stacks raises the bonus from 25%, to 30% (25 stacks vs 30 stacks). Also, Shroud 4 could easily fit into a dps rotation with Insidious Disruption in the Curses line, making it cause Torment while also being a gap closer. I realized after the fact that Blight doesn't have a damage bonus on it untraited though, so it isn't as extreme as I initially thought. It still would be adding 5% damage to the strike component, but completely remove it from the condition component? This would both be a large buff to the power setup, and a huge nerf to the condition setup. As Blight is right now, it would take some ideal situations to maintain Blight at 25 stacks over a long period of time. My thoughts on the Blight-adjusted stats was with this in mind, not yet incorporating the notion of over-doubling the blight generation from skill usage. So in regards to which one, it depends on the state of the rest, but either is problematic.

Generally agree that a pistol chain would be more fun, but this is basically never the case with pistols. Thief and Engineer are the only other pistol main hand users, and they don't get a chain either. Personally, if I were to fix something in the pistol kit, it would simply be to increase the amount of life force given from skills 2 and 3, in order to make it more dynamic with shroud usage. While it would be nice to have our skills synergize with core fear-traits, I kinda like the move away from fear. With the amount of torment focus we have in this class, fear is a dps loss due to the movement mechanics of it. A bit of weirdness in here. Blight is a massive damage boost as it is at 25% maximum, but your Dark Disciple adjustment cuts the hp loss in half, and adds an additional 5% damage. This would likely be completely broken in terms of balance. Then pair this with the Master Minor of an *additional* .5% per stack, raising the damage bonus from 30% to 45% total? From Minor traits. Bonkers. Wicked Corruption and Septic Corruption also no longer balance each other, as you are advocating removing the additional condition damage per stack, but retaining the additional strike damage per stack and simply adding to it to make it even better. 'Septic Barrage' would only be left with the poison effect on Shroud 2, which is severely underwhelming. For Dark Gunslinger, putting stat gains on Blight Stacks just seems like it would be frustrating to build around. The lack of a flat bonus makes it so people have to make annoying gear choices (I.E. Aim for sub-par crit or duration and hope you can maintain Blight Stacks, or ignore it and it becomes a wasted bonus). Over doubling blight generation, while simultaneously cutting Blight's negative effects in half, and increasing it's effectiveness, further unbalances the class. Blight would be trivial to keep an Maximum, be 40% less risky at maximum stacks, but increase damage by 45%, 75% for strike damage while traited with Wicked Corruption. We'd be getting hard nerfed in a week.

You guys are overthinking things with the concept of flying. Flying is super limited, and only feels broken after you know where you are going and what to do.

Rofl, I just scrolled up some and realized that he edited a one sentence reply into a paragraph after I had already replied to it. Class right there.

In what way would necromancer having a viable dps spec (Say, 34kish. Not 36-40k like other classes who output that kind of damage AND provide utility) upset the game philosophy in any way? If the philosophy is "Anyone can beat the game playing how they want.", How does raising the floor hurt this concept? It wouldn't ... and I never said I was against Necro getting DPS either ... that's something you decide to keep throwing in my face. I'm against the idea that Necro gets DPS just because people don't make good choices in who they team with. If you aren't against Necro getting a DPS boost, why do you magically end up on every post that comments about necros being bad at DPS? Because every post that comments about necros being bad at DPS is doing so because of endgame team difficulties. That's not a necro DPS problem ... it CAN'T be because I don't have that problem and lots of other people don't have that problem. So why are people that CAN play necro different from people that CAN'T ... EVEN though we play the same class, maybe the same build and gear, etc ? It's NOT a class issue, it's not a game mechanics issue. ... it's a player issue, it's about how people make choices. I'm not (and never have) had a problem with Anet buffing Necro DPS. DPS changes also never affected my endgame teaming ability ... because if you play how you want and team with people that also respect that ... it doesn't matter. So your problem is... a semantics problem? So you don't think the reason behind the request for more DPS is relevant? I'm going to argue that it's even MORE important than the request for DPS itself. Besides, a completely different discussion here is if more DPS is the answer to endgame teaming ... even you agree to some degree it's not. So let's just say that there are at least two problems with the reasoning here. I mean, if it's not relevant, why do you guys appeal so hard to push for more DPS on such a faulty reason to being with? I have a problem with semantics? I don't think so. I have a problem with people asking Anet to remove their ability to choose so others can tell them how to play. That doesn't JUST affect them. It affects everyone. Necromancers having lower end, but somewhat competitive dps would in no way effect your ability to choose who or how to play. I do not see why you keep trying to tie these two completely unrelated things together as if one is connected to the other. Maybe you want to play a Magi Scourge Healer. My elementalist is setup as a magi healing tempest. Is Magi Healing Tempest meta? No. Is it even wanted anywhere? No. Did it stop me from making it? No. If they made Tempest healing more desirable, would it change my decisions here? No. Now replace undesirable tempest healer with Necro dps, and it is all the same. Is DPS the one shot solution for necromancer as a class? No, it's a solution to improve their public environment of accessibility at no expense to anything else. That is the topic of the thread, so that is what they are talking about. Having more DPS wouldn't remove anyones ability to choose anything, it would give them MORE choices. Elementalist has meta builds, I choose a non-meta build. Your fear is 100% unfounded, but is definitely derailing the conversation.

In what way would necromancer having a viable dps spec (Say, 34kish. Not 36-40k like other classes who output that kind of damage AND provide utility) upset the game philosophy in any way? If the philosophy is "Anyone can beat the game playing how they want.", How does raising the floor hurt this concept? It wouldn't ... and I never said I was against Necro getting DPS either ... that's something you decide to keep throwing in my face. I'm against the idea that Necro gets DPS just because people don't make good choices in who they team with. If you aren't against Necro getting a DPS boost, why do you magically end up on every post that comments about necros being bad at DPS? Because every post that comments about necros being bad at DPS is doing so because of endgame team difficulties. That's not a necro DPS problem ... it CAN'T be because I don't have that problem and lots of other people don't have that problem. So why are people that CAN play necro different from people that CAN'T ... EVEN though we play the same class, maybe the same build and gear, etc ? It's NOT a class issue, it's not a game mechanics issue. ... it's a player issue, it's about how people make choices. I'm not (and never have) had a problem with Anet buffing Necro DPS. DPS changes also never affected my endgame teaming ability ... because if you play how you want and team with people that also respect that ... it doesn't matter. So your problem is... a semantics problem? Because you have the benefit of time and access to enough people to help pull you through endgame content regularly (or as regularly as you want), examining the statistics of performance is irrelevant? Nobody is even talking about whether necromancers CAN do the content. But the state of professions in relation to each other effects how agreeable the community is toward one another. If raising the dps floor of underperforming classes makes it so MORE people get the kind of enjoyment you are already privileged to enjoy, then that means more people are enjoying the game and their class of choice. There is a difference between whether there is a game mechanics or balance issue, and whether that issue EFFECTS you. It doesn't effect you. Great for you! It effects other people. Maybe let those people air out their concerns freely without detracting needlessly with no true goal other than disliking the way it is presented. If PUG groups improve because of a raised floor, your carefree guild wont change at all, but more people will be able to play in a less aggressive environment. Why fight against that, just because it isn't a problem YOU experience?

In what way would necromancer having a viable dps spec (Say, 34kish. Not 36-40k like other classes who output that kind of damage AND provide utility) upset the game philosophy in any way? If the philosophy is "Anyone can beat the game playing how they want.", How does raising the floor hurt this concept? It wouldn't ... and I never said I was against Necro getting DPS either ... that's something you decide to keep throwing in my face. I'm against the idea that Necro gets DPS just because people don't make good choices in who they team with. If you aren't against Necro getting a DPS boost, why do you magically end up on every post that comments about necros being bad at DPS? You add this strange little caveat to it, but I don't see anyone arguing that it's impossible for necros to complete content. Most people don't have time to find and form a community of like-minded people who are willing to spit in the face of all logic and numbers and take whoever with whatever. Taking a discussion that is about comparing statistics and turning it into a complaint about community-based ideals is derailing the entire point.

If you would recall, or scroll back up to witness, I never stated the dps was an explicit issue. The issue is that necromancer as a class has NO clearly defined role or place where they can be effective in relation to their peer professions. The reason people focus on necromancer dps being bad is because it is the only role necromancer can try to take in a realistic environment. Scourge healer is right next to my Tempest Healer, completely undesirable and ineffective in end-game content. Necromancer as a tank is not viable due to tanking in this game being about full mitigation with active skills over value mitigation via hp or defensive functions. Necromancers have no support to speak of, as they can provide no party buffs in any meaningful way (Barrier, I place in the healing category given that it scales off HP, and is really only for damage sponging or allowing HoT's to tick due to a lack of burst potential). The only role left is a damage dealing role, which they can fill in only a sub-par manner. Why do I think the dps difference exists? Could be many things. Developer oversight is a very real possibility, as Anet seems to have certain classes they focus more on (Guardian, Mesmer) and other classes they tend to ignore more (Necro, Engi). I don't know what the balance teams structure is like, and the fun bit is NEITHER DO YOU. You can only assume it is like this for a reason, but how about we flip that on it's head for a moment. In what way would necromancer having a viable dps spec (Say, 34kish. Not 36-40k like other classes who output that kind of damage AND provide utility) upset the game philosophy in any way? If the philosophy is "Anyone can beat the game playing how they want.", How does raising the floor hurt this concept?

It's a good thing that's never been my argument at all. No, your argument is it doesn't matter if necromancers are bad compared to other classes, because having competitive ability in roles is irrelevant if you play with people who don't care. But good job evading everything except a 'If' statement and acting like that is all there is to respond to. Like I said before, Gaslighting at it's core. Well, if you're going to tell me what my arguments are, you might as well just send me a DM for what my next post should be too ... because clearly you know better my own thoughts then I do. You have been quite vocal about what your arguments are, no mind reading or puppetry required. Then you shouldn't have a problem following. If you're just going to tell me what I'm thinking and what my argument is despite what I'm posting here, there isn't much point in me being part of that discussion. I agree, there is no point in you being part of this discussion, which actually is my original point. You are destruction to conversation, rather than being constructive. Would you prefer I only pull exact quotes? From someone who continually tries to claim that not only do you know what Anet's exact game philosophy is, but what anyone who thinks about it will come to the conclusion of is? You can mind-read entire swaths of the player population, but if someone re-phrases your comments, it is somehow putting words in your mouth you didn't say? Hilarious.

It's a good thing that's never been my argument at all. No, your argument is it doesn't matter if necromancers are bad compared to other classes, because having competitive ability in roles is irrelevant if you play with people who don't care. But good job evading everything except a 'If' statement and acting like that is all there is to respond to. Like I said before, Gaslighting at it's core. Well, if you're going to tell me what my arguments are, you might as well just send me a DM for what my next post should be too ... because clearly you know better my own thoughts then I do. You have been quite vocal about what your arguments are, no mind reading or puppetry required. People can state your points in different ways when they listen to them. I realize listening to what other people are trying to say is a little beyond the scope of your habits, but we're not all the same.

It's a good thing that's never been my argument at all. No, your argument is it doesn't matter if necromancers are bad compared to other classes, because having competitive ability in roles is irrelevant if you play with people who don't care. But good job evading everything except a 'If' statement and acting like that is all there is to respond to. Like I said before, Gaslighting at it's core.

Of course it passes the buck ... who has the control on the game design? That's like saying I'm passing the buck for driving the bus to the busdriver. The fact is plain: the threshold for succeeding in endgame content is low, so players can play how they want and succeed. There is no NEED for some 'competitive edge' to do that. The developers are the bus drivers, we are the passengers. Your arguments are like saying "if the bus is going too slow, blame the passengers who got on that bus, they should have known it was slow before they tried to get to work on time with that driver." There isn't one and I will say again, I'm not against necros getting improvements. This is strange considering how often I see you crop up to defend the status quo of necros being bad at things. If your entire point is "Yeah, Necromancers are bad, but just find people who are fine with that." I'm not sure what your comments are adding to the discussion, you're just trying to silence people who want positive change in their preferred profession. This is not true at all: I've already said what Anet's philosophy is many times: players can play how they want and succeed ... and frankly, that's exactly how the game works if you ally and team with people that think the same. If you don't, then that's on you, not Anet, to fix. This is not at all what I've come to believe their core game philosophy to be. If I were to put my finger on it, I would say it would be accessibility and a friendly environment. The more balanced the playing field, the more open and accepting people are of everyone which creates a more positive environment. Anet loves that their player base is often one of the most friendly, helpful bases by comparison to other MMO's who often possess a more toxic environment. Large potential discrepancies like these leave a large window for toxicity to grow from. Is it possible to find more casual groups to do stuff with? Of course it is. Nobody has made the point counter to that. Going to this point over and over again is just distracting from a conversation.

Right, so fixing it because of PVE balance is a nonsense to do so. No it doesn't if you choose properly ... just like any other choices you have to make in this game. The decision to make a choice that leads to difficulty in getting a team doesn't mean Anet needs to change the class so it ranks higher on the meta. Just make better choices. Again, I have NEVER had a problem with this, so it's not that there is some game mechanic cause it ... it's the result of players and their choices. There is no real good reason for Necromancers to be in the place they are in currently, from a utility or dps standpoint. The complaint here is the preservation of game philosophy. If necros are in a bad place for DPS, then the argument is NOT because a few people making bad choices can't get teams. ... and furthermore, you can't really say there isn't a 'real' good reason for Necro's current position, because you don't have a clue what criteria Anet is using to justify the current design on ANY class. The best we have are some vague statements about how shroud sustain 'balances out' the DPS output ... or something like that. So there is a cogent game philosophy that says one class should be bad at everything in endgame content? It's not even about DPS to me, if they had something, anything, that they could be competitive with. I don't really like that people don't want my Tempest healer, but I can't knock the class as a whole because they can be competitive in some areas, just not ones that are the lane I want to be in. Necros are not competitive in endgame pve in ANY role. Not tank, dps, healer or support. Not even asking top tier, just competitive. Edit: Forgot to say Healer. This doesn't make sense ... what 'competitive' edge do you need to get team if you play with people that embrace the philosophy of the game? You're just playing into the hands of the people that want to tell you how to play the game; YOU are part of the problem if you think this way. Just don't play the game with those people and whatever 'competitive' edge you think you need disappears. If enough people reject this kind of thinking, the people that tell you how to play become extinct ... the only reason this continues to be a problem for you and others that think like you is because you have decided to give up your choice on who to play with. The breakdown is simple: the ONLY reason you can't get teams that allow you to play necro is because you CHOOSE to play with people that are going to tell you how to play. If you throw yourself in with the population of people that don't understand what playing how you want means and the game is designed around that philosophy ... then OFC you're going to have problems. Like I said in the first place, your entire message completely passes the buck. The developers don't need, and shouldn't be expected to balance their game effectively. Players should just play classes that are meta, or create a social network of people who don't mind bringing along classes that need to be carried through the content. I will ask again, what cogent philosophy exists that says one class should just be bad at everything? The game is designed around necromancers being bad? What exactly do you think their philosophy is? All you do is state what you think it isn't.

Right, so fixing it because of PVE balance is a nonsense to do so. No it doesn't if you choose properly ... just like any other choices you have to make in this game. The decision to make a choice that leads to difficulty in getting a team doesn't mean Anet needs to change the class so it ranks higher on the meta. Just make better choices. Again, I have NEVER had a problem with this, so it's not that there is some game mechanic cause it ... it's the result of players and their choices. There is no real good reason for Necromancers to be in the place they are in currently, from a utility or dps standpoint. The complaint here is the preservation of game philosophy. If necros are in a bad place for DPS, then the argument is NOT because a few people making bad choices can't get teams. ... and furthermore, you can't really say there isn't a 'real' good reason for Necro's current position, because you don't have a clue what criteria Anet is using to justify the current design on ANY class. The best we have are some vague statements about how shroud sustain 'balances out' the DPS output ... or something like that. So there is a cogent game philosophy that says one class should be bad at everything in endgame content? It's not even about DPS to me, if they had something, anything, that they could be competitive with. I don't really like that people don't want my Tempest healer, but I can't knock the class as a whole because they can be competitive in some areas, just not ones that are the lane I want to be in. Necros are not competitive in endgame pve in ANY role. Not tank, dps, healer or support. Not even asking top tier, just competitive. Edit: Forgot to say Healer.

Right, so fixing it because of PVE balance is a nonsense to do so. No it doesn't if you choose properly ... just like any other choices you have to make in this game. The decision to make a choice that leads to difficulty in getting a team doesn't mean Anet needs to change the class so it ranks higher on the meta. Just make better choices. Again, I have NEVER had a problem with this, so it's not that there is some game mechanic cause it ... it's the result of players and their choices. Not for nothing, but the large majority of your responses can be summed up as gaslighting by any definition. You seriously try to make the point that everyone secretly knows that your view of these things are the only correct possibility of how things are, but somehow they go against both what you AND they know to be true, to complain for no benefit. Makes no sense. The critical reality here is that player feedback is often important. Player outrage often can and has gotten some things changed, including some things that were set for many years (I.E. Epidemic, Meteor Storm, any core that suddenly got a hard nerf because reasons.) There is no real good reason for Necromancers to be in the place they are in currently, from a utility or dps standpoint. You repeat over and over that clearly Anet wants it this way because that is how it's been, completely ignoring all of the factors that have been involved over the last 8 years. What would be a quick, easy explanation for why necromancer is in the pits in every category of endgame pve? The developers in charge of Necromancer balance, or class balance in general, probably don't play or care about the class very much. From what I've seen of all your posts to any thread I've seen in these sub, you'd fit in quite well with such a group. Saying over and over how it's a player perception problem is just passing the buck off the developers, and onto a player base that will obviously never fall in line with your opinion. It's easy to see why you are likely just someone who doesn't want the class as a whole to thrive in these environments, potentially because your own preferred classes would have more competition for their roles.

Sometimes throwing in Assassins for a few pieces. I'm not sure which thing I dislike more now though, the inflexibility of stats being on armor, or the new rune/sigil situation.

In PvP/Wvw Staff is a decent area denial/tagging weapon. In PvE it is hot garbage.

Just because you both can't be right doesn't mean you both can't be wrong. People keep trying to say which class is the spiritual successor of Ritualist. It's not Revenant or Necromancer. Guardian is the spiritual successor. It's all over their class. They already have Spirit Weapons in their base kit. Guardian is basically a melding of Paragon and Ritualist and would be the obvious choice over either Rev or Necro for such an elite spec, if it were to come about at all.

--> Crash <--Assertion: !m_handle || m_handle->IsIdle()File: ......\Services\Asset\Asset.cpp(111)App: Gw2-64.exePid: 1104Cmdline:BaseAddr: 000000013F900000ProgramId: 101Build: 89918When: 2018-06-26T19:48:45Z 2018-06-26T15:48:45-04:00Uptime: 0 days 0:01:05Flags: 0 I had been offline for over a half hour, got this crash report immediately upon trying to login to the character that was working on the story.

People asking for perma bans and IP bans, I'm not sure why they think it's a good idea to make it harder for the developers to track these cheaters. IP's can be changed to circumvent that, and free accounts get access to spvp. So rather than forcing these people onto new accounts to continue their antics until caught again, they can now be flagged and observed.