Brunnsteinangel.2568

@Fire Attunement.9835 Here is my feedback for the Mechanist. First of all, I do like this spec a lot, but there are a few things that bother me and I deem them "need to be changed". 1. Mech Interface & Tool-Belt Instead of a copy-paste of the rangers pet interface, the mechanist should get access to the "Mech-Belt". It is the "Tool Belt", though instead of getting utilitys solted there, you can choose 1 of 3 skills for F1, F2, F3, and F4. F5 will be summoning your golem. These abilties have to sides, one is the "tool belt", but once you summon your golem they become the golem skills. The F2, F3, F4 are our Golem skills we have right now, the F1 will be a "support/heal" type (so we can use the med kit if we want to...) This would make the mechanist working even if the golem is down. The other idea is, that you can push your golem towards range/meele and so on via the mech-belt skills, without directly comiting to condi or power damage (that you due via traits). 2. Stat Conversion this is the thing, I do not understand: Why do we have to trait for the mech to pick up certain stats? They use _our_ stats to convert from, so we can only use the mech for what we play (support/boon, Condi, Power). So why not simply through in the minor adept "100% all stat conversion". Then we can pick and choose more freele in the master traits and we can get more interessting master minor and grandmaster minor, as those two feel very redundant. 3. Traits This is more of a "consequenz" for moving the skill choosing to the mech belt, then a necessary change The traits should still focus on boons, condi or power, but instead of giving attack, they should change them, so you could play a ranged condi mech. Even better, if those traits affect your weapon as well => e.g.Mech Arms: Single Edge Cutter becomes "Sharpened Jade": Mech atacks apply bleeding, as do your attacks. For the new minor traits there could be some stat bonus for using the mech, as well as one for not using it. As you still have access to Mech-Belt abilities without the golem, this would be doable. => e.g. "Adaptable Programming": When your Mech is summond, gain Power, Concentration and Condition Damage. When your Mech is offline, gain Vitality, Healing Power and Toughness. 4. Grandmastertraits All GM traits should be like the "Jade Dynamo" and have syngery with one of the core engeneer trait lines. Barrier Engine could use alchemie, while J-Drive could interact with Firearms or something. This would provide better snygery with the rest of the class and could lead to more interessting builds. These changes would be, what I consider "necessary" for the class to truly take of andbe great.

Yeah, it probably won't happen. Sadly. Though there is more then enough time. Coding an attack, trait or utility doens't take more then a couple hours. (if Anets coding isn't bonkers, which I don't think it is) The more "time consuming" thing would be to get a GOOD!!! design and class mechanic. But TBH there are SO MANY!!! good ideas in this forum, Anet can literally copy past one of those and Revs would be happy. The only thing Anet can't short cut and needs to actually work on would then be the animations. Downside may be, that we don't see it for the 4th beta or only a very rough alpha version (so like the Vindicator xD). But it can defnitly be done till february. For some math: Copy pasting a design idea fomr the forum and fleshing it out, aswell as discussing: 40 hours up to 60 hours Creating fitting weapon skills, utilities, traits: 12 traits + 5 weapon skills + 5 utility skills = 22 things to code => lets say 25 to have some air to play around 5 hours per thing to code => 5 x 25 = 125 hours which can be split between 5 devs to code, so we could actually note them with "just" 25 hours. QA Testing & balancing another 40 hours to include the tweaking Animations are harder to guess.... Say 12 (5 weapon, 5 utility, 2 extra) for 10 hours each => 120 hours. Can again be split, so lets say 3? animators? brings it down to 40 hour. All in all: 60 + 25 + 40 + 40 = 165 hours, with 10 ppl (game director, 3 animators, designer, 5 coders) split by a 40 hour week => 165/40 = 4,125 weeks. Which is makes it even possible to rufsh it out for the 4th beta if you cut for example on the QA or the animations. And there is nearly 4 times the time until release of EoD. (As I don't code my self, I asked a couple of my friends who work in GameDev, Coding, etc. to give me estimates)

SO, after a bit of time, I must say.... Vindicator really needs to be scrapped andsomething new needs to be redone (time would be enough for that...) Even more so, if I take a look at Herald or Ren. Neither of these specs relly "changed" the way, rev plays. New weapon, new legend, new buttons, but not really a new class mechanic. Something new with how the energy or legend swap works (overcharge mode but only one legend for example?) Even with Willbender or Cataclyst I can see some ways to create something good with what is there (though tbh the Cataclyst probably should also go back to the drawing board....) But the Vindicator? I can't see a way to salvage it. And as someone brought up the Scrapper at launch: Yeah, it was wonkey and not as good as today, but the overall theme and how it was supposed to work was there and working. Just the execution failed...Vindicator on the other hand... I am especially disappointed after seeing the engi trailer and reading the article about the medium specs... Heck do they sound awesome!

Tbh, it would be probably easier and faster for Anet to scrap the Vindicator and start new. Same for the Cataclyst, even though I could see one or two ways out. There is still enough time till EOD drops.

I see were you're coming from, and I do agree to an extend. Though I still argue that the dragon stance & dragon slash is (sadly) bad execution, not bad design. Design wise the dragon slash would be "single burst skill that does more damage the more charges you have". This leads to the interessting situation, in which you would be rewarded for not spaming, but timing your burst skill. This again is a direct contrast to the berserker, which rewards spaming the burst skill as often as possible. The main problem IMO is the flow and the way flow converts to the charges. I can think of several reasons they did this, but yes, it is rather clunky and not really "flowing". Though all in all I am not sure, if the bladesworn is a spec that should have a place in sPvP, though that is a different topic. Now, as I said I would do things a bit differently: 1. Dragon Slash: No changes here, expect it is always unblockable and ignoring blind. (GM traits get removed) In PvP the first and to an extend the second slash should be able to one shot ppl at max charges. 2. Dragon Stance: Keeping it, but adding 50% movement and some stabi pulse/breakbar or something along this line. Also: Others shouldn't see how many charges you have, which would make the stnace an interessting "weapon" for PvP: It would allow for bluiffing and scaring. 3. Flow: Scrap it, back to 30 adrenalin. We already established, that the charges limit your use, so why going with insane 100 Flow... 4. Charges: Instead of channeling your flow, I would go back to the ammunition skills: Every 3 spend ammunition of an ammunition skill is 1 charge. This works really well with pistol, as you can spend 6 and then 3 and have 3 charges already. It would also force the player to make a choice. Do I spam my abilities for charges or do I hold back, so I can react to situations? Charges would still be 10 for PvE, but only 5 for PvP for max dmg. 5. Traits: Now we can change the adept and even the GM traits to something more interessting. For exmaple: "Spare clip": Ammunition skills gain 1 charge and reduced CD. "Stronger Pwoder": Pistol Skills have more range and daze their target. "Reload!": Using an ammunition skill reduced your and your allies CDs. ... ... This would make the Slash & Stance more fluid and interessting to use, why also giving them some interessting play for PvP IMO. I hope this shows that neither the stance nor the slash is really the problem. It is the flow & charging.

The alliance stance as an idea could work, I agree with you. Having opposed skills/people/etc. But nothing in the whole e-spec makes it a thing. IMO mainly because there is a problem with the legens of Saint Viktor and Archemorus, in that they don't have any clear cut impression/identity. This leads to the problem that they don't give any direction on what they are about themself, which leads to rather boring utility skills, compared to some of the more iconic ones in the other legends. Not to mention any direction for the rest of the spec. What is Archemorus about? What is Viktor about? And just "healing" or "damage" isn't realy a great answer. That is what I menat, when I said "the leghend is the biggest problem IMO". Not the idea of a diametricall oposed legend in and on it self, but that the individuals representing it are bland. Though the flip over legend on its own is a problem (for the rev), as it is a legend swap within the legendswap,I believe there are better ways to work with oposing themes within a legend/e-spec. Example: "Seafarer" with an Legandary Ocean Stance. The oposing sides would be your F2 and F3 abilities, working like elementalist attunments, representing low tide and high tide, each affecting and agumenting your utility skills for EACH legend and maybe even beyond (weapon, movement speed, etc) Such a solution would make this spec a lot more interessting, as it would reconnect with the core of the class, instead of beeing limited to only the new legend. It would also allow for a better trait design, as one trait line could work around "low tide",one "high tide" and one around changing the tides. The only way out for the alliance stance as it is IMO is to make the skills suplementing each other, offering a "weaving" of your utilities and gaining increased benefits for doing so. But this would probably requier the Vindicator to drasticly change its identity AND the energy management system, as you need to stay a lot longer within the alliance stance to get such a system to work. But this in return while bring problems with core legends => do you still need them? Or do you only have one legend? What if you do not use the alliance? And so on. While the alliance stance is an interessting idea, like the dodge it is nothign that should be on the Rev IMO. Utility swap with in utility swap is not a good design. Instead a new utility category for another class might pull this of with great effect.

I argue that the dragon slash in and on itself is not themain stay if the design. It looks that way, due to 400k crits, but the main stay in my books are ammunition skills and the gun sabre. While I can't say how viable the Bladsworn COULD be in sPvP as I don't play it a lot, I argue that it wouldn't be a big thing design wise to drop the channel there to 1.5 sec and double the damage (not a suggestion, but to make the point) and it might work rather well. I will even argue that we will see a few changes to the dragon stance and maybe even flow, to make both work better, as yes they have been clunky. But again: Number problem, not design problem. Though I will also say, I would have done it differently, probably "X uses of ammunition skill grant 1 bullet" and thats the way you power the slash, while keeping "normal" adrenalin as well as the stance => less telegraph but more importance on the choice what to use when.

even without the dragonslash, the Bladesworn works rather fine IMO. And the test showed, that the slash probably needs just number tweaking => less damage for less channel or something. And probably more flow generation. But it works fine. You might not like the dragon trigger, but I know a lot of ppl that do. The Vindicator on the other hand is more then just numbers. Biggest point for it is, that most ppl dropped the legend just to get the spec working, as well as choosing the "fastest" dodge to trait for, or in other words, the dodge most similar to the normal dodge. So you effectivly make the spec as much "not the spec" as possible, just so it works. That is not "functional".

Yes and no. While I wanted to highlight the importance of a good "on paper design", usually it works in tandem with "implementation". Especially in game design, where you can rather easily creat a "prototype" with, you can and should include it in the design process: "on paper design" => proto-implementation => tweak of implementation => tweak of "on paper design" => proto-implementation 1.X => ... And as Asum said, you can design things simply around mechancis, BUT you still need something to tie it together => back to "on paper design" of theme and identity. The reason I focused on identity and "on paper design" was that most people can better imagine it and understand it, where as full on design processes are veeery xetensive and a lot of back and forth, and I see the "on paper design" as the bigger weakness of the current e-specs, less the mechanics. Tbh, the beta tests are still part of the design process, they are what I would call "reality check" => is the design possible/what was envisoined or orded/is it working. And yes, a lot of the names arn't great, no arguing there, and personally I would have tweak all designs differntly, but most do at least "work", despite those things. But they also have a few problems, simply because (IMO) corners were cut, when it came to the basic design work.

I don't agree with that. Yes, not everyone will like the Bladesworn gameplay, but that is GOOD! My profs always told me "You can't please everyone, so make sure some love your design and some hate it." And they are right. The biggest problem with the bladesworn on a gameplay perspective (IMO), is the over focus on the dragonslash and how it is use in conjunction with the flow mechanic. But those are "numbers". Personaly I'd keep the adrenalin, while spend ammunition form ammunition skills loads "bullets". And when you go dragonslash, those bullets determin your damage, instead of a channel. But even as it is, I like the Bladesworn for example and while there is some number balancing necessary, I percieve it as fun.

While names are just that, names, and we should be hang upon them, I do agree that sometimes a different name could do wonderss. Just wanna take a short look at the Harbringer, a spec I actually do have some high hopes for, because it is so different form the other necros. Rename is "Apothecary" and then bring the elixers in line with that. Maybe always an AOE effect or at least some throwable, because you "apothecary" your allies? And then rework some of the shroud animations to fall more in line with this "witchdoctor". But if I had to name the worst designs atm, that would be: 1. Vindicator cobbles mess, no design at all 2. Catalyst clear idea with a very interessting weapon, but failed to commit to a concrete design. The third spot would be empty, as I don't see any glaring design issues in the other specs. It is mostly numbers or comminting to an identiy, especially with the Willbender.

I only brought up Balthasar, because everyone knows what he's about and how this provides a clear direction for further development. I agree, that while kind of cool, would have some troubles, due to his identity as a human god. But as you noticed: There are many possible options, while staying within Cantha. And one thing I truly do not understand about the Vindicator is, how it feels so "non-cantha". Nothing about it screams "Cantha". Sure the "legends" are from Cantha, but you could replace them with any other duo and no one would notice.

So.... latley I have been playing core warrior as shout healer. And yes, also in raids. Works rather well, tbh. IMO it is more about older trait lines beeing "wonky" or "not up to par", while e-specs usually bring a lot of value. Just imagine we only had EoD specs, you probably would see a lot of core beeing used. But IMO HoT has quit a lot "straight upgrades" for some classes (Tempest, Berserker), while PoF has some crazy strong e-spec you pretty much always wanna use (Scourge, Firebrand)

You can take this is feedback or a comment regarding the last two beta events and the corresponding 6 e-specs we have seen so far. I work in a very design heavy job and I want to highlight something, which I think is one of the "big problems" for some of the e-specs: Design. Design is very important and I want to showcase this by comparing the Bladesowrn, probably one of the best class-designs in the game, to the Vindicator, the worst one in my opinion, as it doesn't have a design. Now, before you go and shout "but XYZ is bad!", I want to explain what I mean by "design" and what my comment is all about, as not everyone will have work-experience in a design releated field. While "design" differs from person and work field, for the most part it is "a fleshed out idea, that ties different elements into on coherent object". And that is what I will go with. What I will NOT talk about, are "numbers", anything about CDs, damage, specific traits or in other words, anything that could be changed with a simple balance patch. Another important point for those that do not work in design: A design is not a "one step thing", usually you start with an idea, build onto it, flesh it out, iterate, change things to fit your visions, bring in new ideas, change or throw away older ones and so on. Sometimes you have hundreds of iterations until you have the final, finished design. That beeing said, let's get started. Identitiy The first thing adesign usually does, is establishing an identity or a theme.. What are you creating? This can be anything, certain materials to be used, an emotion, certain elements and so on. A general "rule of thumb" is, that the stronger the identity, the better the design. This identity does two things: The first one is to allow "users" like us players to understand the design. What is it, how does it work, what does it revolve around? Just one look at the bladesworn and you see it is about ammunition abilities and its gunsabre, getting the dragonslash to land. The second and more important thing about this identity, is to provide "direction" for further work. In what direction do you want to iterate? What elements do you add? Why? Do they fit? People need to know what they are working towards. Again, the Bladesworn is a great example. "Mondernized Warrior", using "Black Ops gear" in form of armaments, using and revolving around ammunition skills, as they fit the "bullet theme" and so on. You have an identity, that provides the direction of what the other skills should look like, which ends in a coherent end result. Now let us look at the Vindicator. Just looking through the feedback forum, you notice that people don't know what this clas is supposed to be,. You have the new dodge, the flip-over legend, the greatsword... but nothing seems to tie the parts together. Ift becomes worse, when you look at the "single parts" and it becomes even more obvious, that the class is missing an identity. The greatsword is bland, "borrowring" so many used animations and skills, it hurts. It is not a bad weapon, but it is bland and doesn't fit in with the other revenant weapons. And it is no wonder, because what should the greatsword be like? Nothing in the Vindicator suggest that the GS should work a certain way, so it becmes a bland cpoy paste. The dodge is in a different spot. It is a "gimmick" and it shows. There are people that find the new dodge fun, but those people admit more often then not, that they rarly play revenant. And gimicks are exactly fpr new "unexperienced" people to draw them in, but they loose their attraction very fast. A lot of the skill tree is "wasted" in this gimmick, though it doesn't tie into anything else, not the legend, not the weapon, not other specs. If we look at the daredevil or the mirage, we see that a new dodge CAN work, design wise (PvP is a numbers thing). The daredevil is an acrobatic staff fighter, jumping around the enemy. The dogde is still a dodge, but changed to fit this theme. Same with the mirgae: An illusionist, that you can not hit. you even have those "shards" that give the doge buff again. And it works. it fits the spec. And with both classes, we have some focus around this dodge, that ties into other specs (dodge does X) of works within the spec it self (mirage stealth attack). But for the Vindicator, it is just a gimmick, just there for the sake of itself. Now to the biggest identity problem of the Vindicator, its legend. IMO rev is the ewasiest class to creat an identity for. Pick a legend, build the spec around what ever makes this legend special. But we have the Alliance Stance. One rather fitting comment about it named it "wet noodle-stance". We have two guys, with nothing special to work around. No special abilities, only a very weak theme of "working together" which doesn't get represented. If I had to guess, someone wanted to desperatly get the new dodge in, but it wouldn't work with "true" legends, so they picked those two. A huge mistake. Just to showcase it: Imagine Balthasar as Legend. Already you think about the GS beeing used with telekinesis, maybe a midrange weapon, utlities around fire, maybe might for "destruction". And the class mechanic? Maybe summon Balthasars dogs as an upkeep skill? Strong Legend => Strong Identity => clear direction for the design. Tie In The second important thing a design does, is asking the question of "how to tie it in". How will X fit into Y. At my workplace we usually have three variants of "tie ins", though we don't strictly use only one,, but a mix of all three, with one as the mainfocus.: 1. Harmonize This is where the bladesworn sits. You creat your design to harmonize with the exsisting surroundings, use things thate are already there and work with those. And that the Bladesworn makes use of amunition skills is creat, because the warrior already has quit a few of those. Personally there could be more machanical use of ammunition skills (maybe a minor trait), but I'd be happy to see the "Rune of the Bladesowrn" augmenting ammunition skills, not armaments. 2. Imrpove You use what is there and push it to the next level. The Tempest is pretty much as direct as it could be for this tie in: You take attunments and push them further with overloads. Another class that does this, would be the Berserker, again: "Straight upgrade". 3. Contrast You take something existing and trun it around by 180°. Best example would be the Harbringer shroud. Again very direct contrast to your usual Necro shroud. I already mentioned the Bladesworn and I can't say how much I love the focus for ammunition skills in this spec with the warrior. The Vindicator on the other hand.... Revenant is already difficult for "tie ins" as every spec is "stand alone" with the legend and skill tree. But even then, the Vindicator falls massivly short on any tie ins. It works only for it self, where other legends and traits still have some tie ins with others, usually by covering the weakspots of each other. The main problem here is again the weak identity. If it would have been a pure heal and support spec, you would have great tie ins with Ventari and Salvation. Damage? Shiro and Devastation. But the traits and legend doesn't support it, as the traits just focus on the dodge (which can be used for healing), while the legend doesn't work well with a dedicated role for either. Reasons The last part about design I want to talk about, would be "reason". Why do you choose X? Why do it this or that way? is Y the right way to go? You go back, recheck what you have created, take a look if you should change something, if things are still in line with the identity and if you desicions make sense. Again taking a look at the bladesworn, we see ammunition skills boosted in the skill tree instead of armaments. Why? because it works better with the older skills. We have a meele pistol. Why? Because there is no ranged main hand. Why does the gunsabre have so many ammunition skils? To tie in with the other ammunition skills. And so on and so forth. Looking at the Vindicator, there isn't a reason check. Why a new dodge? Because a new dodge. That is the extent of an answer. Why flip over skills? Because two legends? Again, the reason nothing more then "because we want it". Skill tree? Full of solutions to self made problems, that work around the gimmicks. The only thing that passes a reason check, is the greatsword. Why so bland and copied skills? 'Cause they work on other classes. Not the best explanation, but it is ok. Now, thanks for reading this huge post. I just wanted to highlight, while a good desgin and design process is so important. In my opinion, there are some worrying signs, that Anet doesn't spend as much time on their designs as they should. They can obviously deliver great ones, looking at the Bladesworn, but the Vindicator shows that a lot of corners seem to be cut. That's all I wanted to hgihlight. And yes: No e-Spec is perfect right now, but in some cases it is only a numbers thing. I wanted to showcase that some problems are a lot deeper.

I'd love to see the Khan Ur. Or some giant Sea Creature.

Yeah, Vindicator needs a redesign. It feels like the devs themself aren't sure, what they want the Vindicator to be. And the weak noodle legend of the Jade Winds first victims doesn't help. No clear theme, to tie it together, just some "hey, wouldn't that mechanic sound cool?" things. In all honesty: Back to the drawing board.

The biggest problem IMO with the aniation, the art and the medicore GS is, that there is no theme in this e-spec. Nothing you could follow design wise. Compare it to Renegade or Herald, when you had a theme and the design (mechanics AND optics) followed it. If the devs don't know what the Vindicator is supposed to look like, guess what, they can't make anything interessting.

Yeah, Vantari is a bit of a problem, but... maybe just move the Tablet over to F2? Then it would work again. So you always had the tablet, no matte the legend (IF Ventari is sloted) but you only got 1 heal skill? It would be interesting if they then add traits to the Vindicator that "do things" based on legend flipped.

No,not a second legend swap, but instead of swapping, you flip over. Skill by skill.

So, I want to share an idea here, which might help Anet when going further with the vindicator. Or not. Personally I find this idea intriguing and want to know what other rev-palyers think about it. The idea is simple: Arch and Saint get split into two legend. But the "flip over" will be the new "channel mechanic" of the rev. You choose two legends and once you use one skill, it flips over to the other legend. E.G.: You use "Pain Absoption" with Malyx/Jalis and it flips over to "Inspiring Reinforcements" We would be able to choose which skill is at which slot, so we would choose which skill flips over to which other skill. This would be the case for ALL legends. Anything that works with "Legend swapping" would activate on a "flip over" but in a weaker version. Lastly: We get all 10 pips (or maybe just 8 of them) for upkeep, as we don't switch legends anymore for the 50/75 energy reset. At least in my books, this sounds like an interessting way to use the flip-over legend/mechanic of the vindicator, while tying it into the rest of the class and giving us an interessting way to play. It would also work with the hybrid idea and build diversity, as you could go Ach/Shiro or Saint/Ventari very easily. Now, what do you all think about this?

I played WVW last night and for the first time in years I went back to Herald. And I noticed something. ... we already have a Flip-Over legend with Glint. And it works. It even mirrors the Alliance idea, with a "selfless start" in boon sharing and a "selfish flip-over" for damage and heal. ... Anet, did you forget about the Herald? And PLEASE take more notes from this e-Spec if you want to go the flip-over route. Not to mention, change Alliance up a bit and FOCUS it on one thing, preferable power damage, so it doesn't go after Heralds support. And pls tune Herald for PvE!

Confused Gameplay? I want to voice my thought once more, after spending some more time with the Vindicator and thinking about it. This time, I want to take a look at what our "gameplay mechanic" is supposed to be as Vindicator, because I think many problems go back to this mechanic not beeing there. As said mutliple times, the dodge is gimmicky, trhe flip-over klunky, the GS is bland. In my eyes the reason for this is, that there is no overall "theme" or concept behind the class. There is no clear idea "what the new way to play" is. Compare it to the Bladesowrn or Catalyst, you know exactly what your playstyle is about. Same for older Rev specs & legends. Not so with the Vindicator and the alliance stance. So, here is one ideathat you might want to consider: "Weaving Alliance skills" What does this mean? Each red skill gets an additional effect, depending on which blue skill you used before. Then it flips over, you use the blue skill get a "perperation buff" depending on the skill, use a "red skill" and get additional effects. Sounds complicated, I know, so I give you an example: You use the blue healing skill. Now the red chagre skill gives you also alacrity. You use the blue dodge back skill afterwards, now your red stun break applies superspeed and so on. If every skill gets the same bonus effect or if every oneis different is a whole other thing, but that is the base idea. The spec would be meant to be played, by using one legend side as a "set up" and the other as a "pay out". This would go perfectly with the traits, which now could also focus on this utilitiy weaving. For example this "setting up" could now buff, heal or damage and you could veen bring the dodge into the play. Critical hits could also aplly a "preperation proc", which would tie in with the pdps spec, maybe reducing the energy costs or things like that. Overall this would add a certain gameplay feel to the rev, that is not yet present and be engaging and interessting. If done right, it could even allow to "camp" the allaiance stance for longer times, so players do not have to focus that much on swapping legends, but on chaining their utilities, which would help with the "playing the UI not the Game" side of thing.

After trying to get into the spec again and then taking a bit time of to think, I want to offer the following suggestions: Greatsword: While rethinking the theme of this weapon would be great, at least overhall #5 and and think what #3 and #4 should actually do. They all don't fell great and there is no synergy within the weapon. Shortbow for example: #4 & #5 to keep enemies away, #2 to hit them, while running, as you can shoot "behind" you. Legend&Utilities: Completly rework them. 1. Only 5 Second CDs between each flip-over and HALF the energy costs. 2. Now make those utilities interact with each other, not "do the same thing". e.g. => Malyx Call to Anguish pulls in enemies to set up Embrace the Darkness, something like this needs to be there! 3. Make it viable to "weave" between the skills, so you actually want to hop between red&blue when you use the Legend. 4. DO NOT make one support and one dmg side in this legend, let both be both but with a focus to one side or the other. Due to the low CDs and Energy costs the effect can be smaller, but in stead you will use those skills more often. Traits: A LOT LESS focus on the dodge. Like replace ALL Master traits. Instead give some option the interact with weaving both sides of the legend. And Dmg modifier, etc. Playstyle: Think weaver but for the utilitys. While in Alliance you should "weave" through your utilities, gaining buffs, helping allies, increasing your damage and so on. It should be a lot faster with more emphasis on the utility skills. Greatsword should mirror/support this playstyle. => switch #2 with #3 but make it (along #5) a damage field, that ticks for a few seconds, instead of a single damage hit.

That's why I reused as much as I thought was usefull. Some traits are simply bad and should be replaced.

A bland, boring e-spec with too much of its identity focused arouind the dodge. Really sad to see, as the dodge and flip-over legend seems great on paper, but it feels bland, boring und klunky to play. Give it a real theme, make the GS more exciting and think over what the traits do and what the legend is/does, then there is hope. "Saving" the Vindicator - Revenant - Guild Wars 2 Forums This is a post I just opened, in which I went through and "salvaged" the Vindicator, giving it a theme and tying it together, as it is truly sad to see such great ideas wither.