Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Unfortunately the way ANet sees the player base using skills is often very different to how they are actually used. So while it might not be a problem to you, me and a lot of other people, it doesn’t mean the skills team doesn’t see it as an issue. How do you tell if the ele is in frost bow or back to the weapon without looking at the UI? The skill use technically but that’s not a lot of reaction time to some skills and it also means there’s a number of animations you’d need to not use from frost bow on the bow. I do think we will see more of the lesser used weapons as el
  2. That’s because you need to look at it in the context of a correction to a skill that should have been changed a long time ago. I know they didn’t double the duration but I can understand that at 12s it was going to last a very long time, 24s at 100% burn duration which isn’t hard to get, so no doubt they tried to lower this without nerfing it too much. I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw the duration of burn split between PvE and PvP/WvW but honestly I think it’s probably better they revisit the skill in general as it’s a boring and dull signet active.
  3. I dunno have you tried playing a class because you enjoy the class? Just putting it out there. The only point that had merit is that playing sword can be almost unplayable on some encounters which is why I’d like to see a ranged power build make a comeback. Most likely will have to be in the upcoming expansion as buffing staff is just a bad idea in general.
  4. I’m not engaging with you on the performance of ele in PvE outside of saying it is still playable which it is, you have to see SBoon levels of nerfs for something to no longer be playable. Stop trying to drag me into a conversation irrelevant to what I’m talking about. My entire premise has been that fire signet was not touched when they made adjustments to many burn skills halving the stacks and approximately doubling the duration. This was always going to happen, anyone with an ounce of intellect knew it would happen. I think (just a theory) that it is likely to have
  5. Except I was talking about ANets handling of burns in general that we have seen over the years, this was for the third time, not applied to fire signet when most other burns got the treatment. It was clearly forgotten and has been addressed. They didn’t skill split the “reduce stacks but increase duration” between PvE and PvP/WvW initially. Honestly which part of this is hard to understand? The build is still playable and your whataboutism only shows what you’re really doing, just as the first page shows how degen the community is.
  6. Except the change to burning has been a global change in all game modes for most professions, as ANet has been very clear on condition builds needing ramp up times. I gave the example of where the signet was pretty disgusting emphasising where it was really strong for almost no investment, which I have been seeing a lot lately since condition ele has risen to prominence. This likely contributed to burns being looked at. The ele community honestly gives thief community a run for its money in terms of being degen, instead of getting offended maybe look at how you contribute
  7. If I remember the notes correctly it was a global change, this is in line with many burning changes made over the life of the game to make it less burst. Also many of you guys clearly only play one mode and didn’t see the signet memes, this signet did crazy spike damage for not a lot of investment, go condi build, easy +100% burn duration with I think Balthazar runes and you could dismount anyone in WvW. It was clearly an outlier, there’s clearly been efforts made to stop burning being too bursty, the ele community has become so degenerate over the years since they star
  8. Alright fair point, I get that. I guess so long and thanks for all the fish is pertinent here. GL with RL, I hear the it’s a really good game.
  9. I would be surprised if it is longbow or short bow for that matter, the reason is there are skins of frost bow for both of these weapons. Why should anyone care? Well ANet at least used to say you play the game and not the UI, this means you could use a frost bow skin and people wouldn’t know if you had frost bow out or not. It’s also one of the reasons ele is unlikely to ever had shield, hammer, axe or great sword as skins exist of all these conjures. Yes it’s not wasted on me that someone can use the skin for volcanus and then pick up a conjure but it’s not as likely as if the cl
  10. Obligatory “can i haz ur stuf??” Honestly a bit extreme deleting the legendaries given the legendary armoury and time taken to get them. I would highly recommend contacting support and getting it your characters and stuff restored and instead taking a few years away from the game. Work may be busy now and you want to focus on it but in 3 years you may have a little more free time, you may have someone wanting to play GW2 with you, you just don’t know. Liquid gold can be earned again, mats again but you can’t get back the hours put into a character and some of the legend
  11. I find using it when someone is chasing you (you’re kiting) so the phantasm attacks from the side or behind helps a lot. It’s AoE nature means you can usually get a few interrupts from it if outnumbered and in a condition build you can usually get it to hit for OK damage….compared to old mage anyway. I would say there are much worse phantasms, like warlock and warden
  12. I know what a harmonic oscillator is, many of us have been to college as well. The point is that you need to be explicit in your definitions so that people are using the correct context and frame of mind for what you're talking about. You're talking about state variables in discrete-time systems (The balance state for this game version only) however most people here may be thinking and talking about a continuous-time system (The balance state of the game across multipl versions). I believe you didn't state this till this page, if you did it was drowned out by the sheer volume of te
  13. Yes but we're not talking about a system that experiences a correcting force that is proportional to the displacement, you're now using a mechanical type of equilibrium so can we assume this is the equilibrium type you mean? You were talking about evolution not long ago so can we all be on the same page for which type you're applying? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_types_of_equilibrium You shouldn't apply a mechanical type equilibrium to game balance, it actually has it's own equilibrium type.
  14. Looking at Math's responses he didn't state it was in equilibrium, that was you. Given that ANet does balance and system updates and actively changes the state variables of the system over time I don't believe you can claim it is in equilibrium. You could make this claim about Guild Wars 1 however as that game is no longer receiving updates of that nature.
  15. My reply was to it working on a local scale from your comment but the rest is all referencing Justice not you, sorry for not being clear on that. Yes and this is exactly why my initial post I was pushing Justice to explain their use of a term and definition in context and state what the constent was explicitly. I don't think anyone has really disagreed about the basic premise too much other than it being too simplistic, missing multiple factors and that we're not accounting for ANet being able to at a whim change anything they want, adding, removing or
  • Create New...