mixxed.5862

Lol. Okay. The context was "The MAT Final had Double Rev on both teams. I thought balance was supposed to increase class diversity and representation?" to which CMC replied with that. Correct, and that was what? Over half a year ago?! Back then the condi revenant builds that are problematic now didn't even exist! It was power rev all the way and that got nerfed hard in february - with all the other powercreeped kitten. Power rev indeed requires some skill to play decently (although it's still overperforming). (edit) I dug it up, here's a link to the thread:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1099919#Comment_1099919 I mean sure, it's a nice meme. But complaining incessantly about the developers while citing something that's hardly relevant today and is not at all applicable to the current balance of the revenant profession just to make a dev look bad... that's ridiculous. "This class is winning and performing very well but that's just because only GOOD players are playing it" is hilariously backwards line of thinking regardless of when it was said. Top players will play whatever is meta, and they did and still are playing Revenant because it is meta not because of any special attachment to the profession per say, and that quote is really only one balance patch ago. Maybe you should read the post again that you're referring to. I'll copy it here for you: He doesn't say at all what you claim. He says the best players favor power rev. Which was factual at the time. After all it's always the same couple of players that win the mAT - no matter what comp they're playing. So, why did they favor it? Because it's the best build around or just because they liked playing it more? He says in the very next sentence - so you don't misunderstand - that rev is "definitely strong" and is being reevaluated.As we all know today that resulted in nerfs to revenant across the board like the removal of stunbreaks on legend swap, less endurance regeneration, higher energy costs on utility skills, nerfs to might/boon stacking and of course the blanket power coefficient nerfs. All good changes which brought power rev more in line and even made it more skillful. Although it needs some more changes now. The current state of condi rev however is entirely unrelated to Cal's post from half a year ago. That build clearly is favored by monkeys. Tldr; If you read just the one sentence right after the one you keep "citing", you're entire argument falls flat. You've got it backwards, just like he did. The best players didn't FAVOR rev. Rev was picked by the best players because at that point in the game after super charging the Sword Off hand skills and nerfing the most prominent counters to rev it made Revenant hands down the best class in the game for a variety of roles, specifically both Team Fight Damage and +1 Roamer. Revenant spent a huge chunk of Path of Fire largely considered unviable in high end play. Considered even worse than Water Weaver. At which point it was abandoned by players both high end and low end. It's not that rev appealed to high end players who stuck through it through thick and thin. High end players realized the necessity of it after it's buffs and gravitated towards it. Just like we're seeing now. You're correct, although some of the best players still stuck with power rev throughout all of PoF. Because it's fun. Obviously later on the devs came to the conclusion it was in fact overperforming now, and not simply a community favorite anymore. That's why it received many nerfs. So, in light of that, I don't understand why you're so obsessed with that quote. Because he didn't say "yes, rev's kitten broken and we'll nerf it"? Instead of "rev was favored by the best players this mAT but that doesn't necessitate a nerf by itself, we'll reevaluate revenant ourselves"? Yes, the quote's funny when taken out of context. But I think it's a little immature to use it for your agenda against the devs.

Lol. Okay. The context was "The MAT Final had Double Rev on both teams. I thought balance was supposed to increase class diversity and representation?" to which CMC replied with that. Correct, and that was what? Over half a year ago?! Back then the condi revenant builds that are problematic now didn't even exist! It was power rev all the way and that got nerfed hard in february - with all the other powercreeped kitten. Power rev indeed requires some skill to play decently (although it's still overperforming). (edit) I dug it up, here's a link to the thread:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1099919#Comment_1099919 I mean sure, it's a nice meme. But complaining incessantly about the developers while citing something that's hardly relevant today and is not at all applicable to the current balance of the revenant profession just to make a dev look bad... that's ridiculous. "This class is winning and performing very well but that's just because only GOOD players are playing it" is hilariously backwards line of thinking regardless of when it was said. Top players will play whatever is meta, and they did and still are playing Revenant because it is meta not because of any special attachment to the profession per say, and that quote is really only one balance patch ago.Maybe you should read the post again that you're referring to. I'll copy it here for you: He doesn't say at all what you claim. He says the best players favored power rev more. Which was factual at the time. After all it's always the same couple of players that win the mAT - no matter what comp they're playing. So, why did they favor it? Because it's the best build around or just because they liked playing it more? He says in the very next sentence - so you don't misunderstand - that rev is "definitely strong" and is being reevaluated.As we all know today that resulted in nerfs to revenant across the board like the removal of stunbreaks on legend swap, less endurance regeneration, higher energy costs on utility skills, nerfs to might/boon stacking and of course the blanket power coefficient nerfs. All good changes which brought power rev more in line and even made it more skillful. Although it still needs some more changes now. The current state of condi rev however is entirely unrelated to Cal's post from half a year ago. That build clearly is favored by monkeys. Tldr; If you read just the one sentence right after the one you keep "citing", you're entire argument falls flat.

Lol. Okay. The context was "The MAT Final had Double Rev on both teams. I thought balance was supposed to increase class diversity and representation?" to which CMC replied with that. Correct, and that was what? Over half a year ago?! Back then the condi revenant builds that are problematic now didn't even exist! It was power rev all the way and that got nerfed hard in february - with all the other powercreeped kitten. Power rev indeed requires some skill to play decently (although it's still overperforming). (edit) I dug it up, here's a link to the thread:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1099919#Comment_1099919 I mean sure, it's a nice meme. But complaining incessantly about the developers while citing something that's hardly relevant today and is not at all applicable to the current balance of the revenant profession just to make a dev look bad... that's ridiculous.

Yes, PvP is still fun. Basically there was a huge balance patch for PvP in february that reduced damage across the board. Healing and sustain were reduced in the same way. It was very necessary at that point. Pre-patch you would burst someone down in 2 or 3 hits. Now there are a few builds that have so much sustain they overshadow the rest of them. And they aren't very fun to fight against. But by and large the game felt a lot better - before everyone and their moms gravitated towards condi rev. The next big balance patch will probably fix that. It'll be out some time this month (the usual cadence has been every 3 or 4 months for years now). So, while the PvP's still recommendable these forums aren't. They're full of negativity and condescending comments towards the developers. The devs have been very consistent with putting out smaller balance fixes every couple of weeks. They're making true on that promise and it already is a real boon for PvP. Still, you'll see the same bunch of forum dwellers complain incessantly. As per usual. Now that we get smaller patches more consistently they cry for bigger ones because "Anet promised" (they didn't).

LOL, I've played a warrior for so long that I only ever say the rune as 1s instead of 2s for others my bad. Still It is probably also balanced around Engis swapping kits, Eles swapping attunements, and Necros going into Shroud. They probably ran the numbers back before launch and found that 9s on the sigils was what it took to keep Warriors, Eles, Necros, and Engis from breaking them. My guess is they just went with (weapon swap cd) - 1 second, so it doesn't bug out due to desync.

That's true but if ur using sigils not dependent on weapon swap and just apply their effects on cds a weapon swap cd reduction can be a nice qol. I suppose it's only really problematic on warrior when you want to run a sigil of energy/intelligence/cleansing. Especially energy is too good to give up and it's especially annoying when you need the endurance but it doesn't proc. I'd like to try it on core guard as well. Unfortunately you're stuck with lynx anyway. Yeah exactly, sometimes I run it on warrior to not make the weapon swap on non discipline builds sting so much.I've been playing with it even running discipline. There's good synergy with the traits and it changes how you play (a little). It's probably overkill but I like it with hammer/greatsword. I think it even makes kind of sense with a traited hammer.

That's true but if ur using sigils not dependent on weapon swap and just apply their effects on cds a weapon swap cd reduction can be a nice qol. I suppose it's only really problematic on warrior when you want to run a sigil of energy/intelligence/cleansing. Especially energy is too good to give up and it's very annoying when you need the endurance but it doesn't proc. I'd like to try it on core guard as well. Unfortunately you're stuck with lynx.

No, you misunderstood. The point of the rune is to be able to weapon swap with a shorter cooldown of 8 seconds. But if you do, you miss out on the very powerful procs from weapon swap sigils. That's why it's currently not worth playing with Rune of the Warrior: You offer up another, powerful rune to deny yourself the even more powerful on swap effects. The benefit the rune brings is small, the trade off is much larger.

But Rune of the Warrior reduces the recharge on weapon swap to 8 seconds! If you swap your weapons on cooldown (which is the point of the rune) you'll get your sigil procs only half the time.

You're probably right. But having a rune that doesn't even work with most popular sigils is a little strange. u know lowering cooldowns on sigills etc will give certain professions an big buff?For example Druids/Soulbeast extra forms, Ele's Elements , revs legends .... they all trigger sigills too. Then even more frequently without having to choose the warrior rune I know. Although I thought it wouldn't break the game. They could always tie the cooldown reduction to the rune as well. But then that'd probably be too much of a hassle.

This rune is pretty cool. The shorter recharge on weapon swap feels good. I'd like to run it more often in PvP. However it doesn't synergize with any of the sigils and traits that proc on weapon swap. Please reduce the cooldowns on these to 8 seconds :)

A global cooldown on virtues sounds perfect but I don't see the devs doing it any time soon. Instead they could at least rework Renewed Focus for now: It reduces cooldowns of Virtues by a set amount. F1 by 20 seconds, F2 by 30 seconds, F3 by 45 seconds (= in line with the cooldowns on core virtues). This is intended to reduce the constant spam of Firebrand virtues by a bit.

Yet hammer on Warrior will be in a far better spot post-nerf. Fail evidence based on feelings. If you don't know how to deal with Warrior hammer skills, you are simply not a good player. There will be NO REASON to avoid or waste endurance on hammer skills because they do no damage, therefore vs. good players you get evade spammed harder because why dodge a 0.01 coefficient when I can save it for your other skills? You are also not baiting stun breaks with a 0.01 coefficient. Sorry, but your evidence is FAIL. You clearly don't fight good players and your evidence is not good enough. If you're talking about WvW, anything works in WvW. We are talking about sPvP where people actually are more tryhard mechanics wise.No, I'm talking about sPvP. Why do you mention "evidence"? There won't be evidence before we've played with the changes for a fair bit and the meta begins to settle. While all damage is gone from hard CC skills, the CC aspect itself will be much more valuable. Stun breaks are generally on long cooldowns and most classes lose the majority of their stability access. Passive stunbreaks are completely gone. The viability of hammer will largely depend on its ability to stunlock opponents for extended durations - which will likely be possible with most professions after the nerfs! (Likely exception: Firebrand) Of course you'll need to initiate your combo with one of your faster stuns and proper timing, as you do now. If you get a good CC combo off on an opponent that has previously blown all stunbreaks, you're still likely to get the kill. Fierce blow does excellent damage on stunned (full adrenaline eviscerate level!) and in a proper chain you'll be able to recharge it through backbreaker. Swap weapons and follow up with burst. Once you've wasted your enemies stunbreaks, damage is not the issue. Tldr: With BIG nerfs to the frequency of stunbreak and stability access across all classes hammer will serve a purpose: CC lockdown.

Yet hammer on Warrior will be in a far better spot post-nerf.

I love your changes. However keep an eye on Scourge in particular. It may still be too strong after the patch. Also Throw Mine on engi will be busted when traited if you go through with this.

Wow, this is huge! The balance changes look phenomenal. Seems like I'll be playing some GW2 soon.

you could've picked a better option for your argument, no one in their right mind is going to use hammer anymore if anyone even did. I get what you're saying but you're the one who doesn't understand. so op things get nerfed, some up things that didn't get nerfed become more attractive options. except too many of those options are still unusable because of how bad they are. they could follow up in the future with buffs to these useless things which I hope they will. No, hammer won't be nerfed. It's about to get the BIGGEST BUFF it ever got! Yes, it'll do less damage however its CC will be a LOT more valuable. Hammer will be all about control. So the pertinent question to ask is whether after the patch your opponents will eventually run out of stunbreaks. Most stunbreaks will be on a 40+ second cooldown, every trait that allows for frequent access to stunbreaks (Rev, Necro, Druid etc.) will be straight up deleted from the game, passive stunbreaks will get their cooldowns adjusted to 5 MINUTES. Stability durations will be reduced, access to stability cut and some builds will even lose their access to stab altogether. Mirage will only have a single dodge, Rev's dodging will be neutered. On some builds disengages and mobility will be reduced considerably. Once you've caught your enemy in a CC chain you swap weapons and follow up with a burst. But will you be able to? I think so! However it'll all depend on the new meta.

While I think the concept behind the shade rework is fine, it won't have the positive effect you wish for. Basically it will nerf Scourge slightly in PvE, hit it very hard in PvP and even buff it in WvW while promoting a ranged meta. It will go counter to all your objectives! Don't increase the target caps in WvW (only) and you have a harsh enough nerf that could finally bring some overdue change to the WvW meta! Later on you can rebalance both the CD and duration of shades to buff the spec until it is in a good place in every game mode. You'll end up with a Scourge design that is harder to play and more fair to play against.

I'd suggest increasing the target cap only on the supportive Shroud skills/aspects (F2, F3, Desert Empowerment trait, barrier application on Harbinger shroud) while the offensive ones/aspects (F1, F4, F5, Path of Corruption trait) stay at 3 targets. All of them still get the radius increase.Alternatively just remove the target cap increase in WvW only and be done with Scourge. The rest of the changes look fine. But it will depend on how you handle Sand Savant whether they'll equate to much.

that's the biggest BS I've read so far in the forums. I don't care for your meta build or perfect rotation. The class is not fun to play anymore simply because it works on a timer. I've been playing warrior for almost 7 years and this is the worst ive seen it. Like others, I also went back to core warrior and removed berseker from the traitline. Yeah I agree, it's not fun. Sitting at 30 adrenaline for 10 seconds with nothing to spend it on is stupid. If they follow up on it, reduce the cooldown to ~8-10 seconds it could end up being a good change for berserker. It makes the spec slightly more distinct from core warrior and probably facilitates balancing. But the long cooldown on Berserk funnels it too hard towards spamming rage skills or waiting on a cooldown 50% of the time.For PvP and WvW the reworked spec seems to be better already so that's a plus.After all if I trusted the devs to do the right thing in a timely fashion I'd be quite content with the changes. Sadly the skills team addresses balance only infrequently, most of the time they just ignore current balance issues and do unrelated stuff. So expect to be waiting for a long time...

Oh really? Yep!

I don't see a big problem with swapping builds on the fly. Everyone can swap to a roaming set-up while alone and be back on the zerg load-out once they've catched up. There's nothing unfair about it. It enables more flexibility to adapt to fights of varying size and encourages swapping out your build on the spot so you can engage that player you'd otherwise need to run from (on your warclaw...). I don't think counter picking for every 1v1 will be a big thing. When you roam on your core warrior you don't want to play spellbreaker. Furthermore, most builds can already adapt for condi/power just by switching out a utility skill and maybe a trait. Even if some experienced roamers end up using the system to their advantage, if they come prepared and adapt their build correctly to every situation - it's just another skill to master! Though a short cooldown upon leaving combat sounds reasonable.

The changes in general are good and they're more valuable in all game modes. Only bulwark and stealth gyro are rally problematic imo. Bulwark Gyro currently is overperforming in 1vX situations. While in teamfights you need to use it carefully, when you're in your own it's an easy big barrier for an extended amount of time. You need only click it off CD and your fine. That's a real flaw with it's currently design. I'd prefer if they applied a barrier and an Aegis initially, while the pulsing effect only happens according to the number of allies around you. If you're by yourself there are no pulses, per ally it pulses ~300 barrier per second and if you're surrounded by 5 allies it pulses for the maximum amount. The new Stealth Gyro isn't a well designed skill. It now is but a very long stealth without counterplay to it. Plain boring! My suggestion would be to combine the best of both designs: You spawn a stealth gyro (that can't be stealth and follows you) on use, but the stealth pulses on you instead. When the gyro is destroyed you and every ally nearby is immediatly revealed.

Please add an option to reduce the size of all the damage numbers on the screen. They just add to the visual clutter and it would make for an easy fix I guess.

From my point of view this is a really welcome change. It will make match-ups more balanced and varied! And with alliance's of over 500 players there will still be much space for communities to form. Another big plus is that it opens up the system for guilds to recruit new players. A flaw I see conceptually however lies in capping alliances around player count solely (and possibly guild number, although having that be very restrictive would be a real bad idea imo). An alliance formed by only the most dedicated WvW guilds would achieve a much higher playtime over the week than a big community guild with averagely active players would. And I believe the difference would be quite huge.If that is the case the developers would need to decide what player limit could be detrimental to world balancing in the long run and what would still be fine. Under the presumption that an alliance forms filled with only very active players. They'd need to set the player limit rather low and it'd be much more limiting for the already existing WvW communities than it should.A solution for that would be to set an activity cap for an alliance. This would be the limiting factor for alliances formed by the most active guilds and therefore allow for a less restrictive max player count. The old WvW communities wouldn't need to split up as much. So here is my idea on how to help with that:1) Next to the player count (indicating e.g. 632/1000 players) there would be an activity bar (indicating e.g. 90% of maximum alliance activity reached). For example the devs could set 30% of a world's total playtime as the alliance's activity cap.2) Whenever a new player follows an alliance, by setting their WvW guild, his personal playtime/activity value is added to the alliance's activity level.3) Once the alliance's activity level reaches 100% it locks, preventing any more players from following it.4) If it were that simple, players could easily exploit the system by playing less for some time / only playing on EotM etc. This way whole servers managed to open for transfers in the past, and for alliances it would be far easier. Players certainly'd do it to overstack their alliance.5) To prevent this from happening, players automatically unfollow an alliance when it hits 110% of its max activity (=e.g. 33% of a world's total playtime). As they will need to refollow now the activity cap at 100% will be reached early, forcing at least one guild to leave the overstacked alliance.A possible problem with this is that player activity may be fluctuating way too much overall for this to be viable.