Huskyboy.1053

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps. This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response. How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem. How do you not see how that could easily get abused at any level to ban better players?Because I'm assuming that there would be some safeguards against it. It's not reasonable to assume that, when a system is implemented, the developers will do literally nothing to prevent any problems. This is what I mean when I say you're being antagonistic, you hear a good idea and you think "How can I make this situation as negative as possible and have no faith in anybody?" It's not productive, and it's not nice.

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps. This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response. How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupidHow so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps. This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

Here's an automateable idea for the dev team: Amulet-based performance floors, but only for top-rated players. Ban for 24 hours if top-rated players don't meet the floor. Let's say I'm the top-rated player on my team, i.e. highest MMR rating. If I'm playing Berserker amulet, but I get 20% or less of my team's damage and kills... did I really try my best? I'm the best player on my team, I should be relatively outperforming my teammates. In my humble opinion, if you're the best player on your team and you're using Mender's amulet (even on sword Weaver), you should get at least 30% of team healing. If you don't, your rating is improper or you're throwing. So here's some ideas based on popular amulets, the percentages are just general ideas: Sage: 25%+ kills and damage, 25% healing.Carrion: 28%+ kills and damage.Berserker: 28%+ kills and damage.Demolisher/Marauder: 25%+ kills and damage.Mender's: 30%+ healing, 28% defense. To be clear, this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team. This is to penalize players deliberately throwing games, or for being generally unfit to play (drunk/need to sleep/very distracted). I don't think increasing MMR penalty is a good idea, it wouldn't really do all that much to really good players since they'll just rise back up quickly. But bans prevent them from throwing frequently and from annoying people with their unexpectedly bad play.

I don't know if there are all that many bots, a lot of them are just PvE players. I always ask people if they are a bot before I report them no matter how bad they're playing, and I almost always get a sarcastic or sincere response. So frankly I think the issue might be more that PvP is pulling in a boatload of really bad players who are only there for the rewards. The nice thing would be for Anet to nerf rewards for people who lose.

I appreciate the thoughtful response. I can't say I agree that getting around 4k extra shroud was a big win, as most bursts (ex. core Greataxe) burst for more than 4k per hit. Considering you're losing both a stunbreak and a stack of stab, you will eat far more than that 4k shroud as a result of not being able to avoid that damage. That being said, my point was that dagger used to be able to finish people very quickly, which is important to power necro given its bad sustain. But you might be correct that the overall decline in damage has been an advantage for core necro.

I was running a core power build a while back that looked like this: [&DQg1KRM9MheiAJsAvQFwATAB5AAuAXYAegEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA=]Equipment: [&DQg1KRM9MheiAJsAvQFwATAB5AAuAXYAegEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA=] Strong damage, a bit of team support via Transfusion, very fun but still vulnerable. Yet having tried it post Feb 2020 nerfs, not only does the lack of stunbreak + stability from Foot in the Grave make it much glassier, the dagger damage is bad! There was no call for this, MH dagger on necro is already a tough choice given that necros do very poorly in melee, so what gives? And why was dagger 2 nerfed in healing, damage, and the ability to use it with your back turned? This was a terrible decision, I can't put it any other way. It's killing build diversity and for what purpose?

I like that idea, I hadn't thought about that. I think that reducing the casting time would make it too abuseable tbh but that's just me. The skill isn't as bad as some people are saying in regard to power builds, but it's just UP enough that core power is clearly not viable.

Call me crazy, but it seems like Life Blast is one of the least useful skills in the core necro kit. Condi necro doesn't get value out of it and power necro can't afford to just sit in shroud and spam it, as you have no utilities in shroud and as necro you get focused. Since core power necro is fun but relatively unviable, one nice thing to do would be to extend the range to 1500. This is hardly a game-breaking change, but it would allow power necro to snipe from a safe position. As the skill does upward of 4k damage per hit with high levels of might, it's a good option for damage, but right now the fact that you're vulnerable precludes any realistic chance of using it. Increasing the base power damage and scaling of Dark Path would also be helpful.

The ERP community takes this as a AFFRONT to our HUMANITY

Firstly, I'm sure we'd all like objective proof of you actually outskilling top players. Secondly, where did you get these damage figures from? PVE raid hero’s. Ask any of them. They will tell you rev power damage is the lowest by far....right but you are sayin that Rev has "pvp specific damage and CD nerfs to even further lower this damage." Which is the only relevant part of your statements since nobody cares about PvE damage. If you go to Vallun's balance thread, you'll see Bryvanent commenting on how certain things could be changed around to balance out Rev damage.Rev is very vulnerable to condi but overperforms versus almost all direct-damage specs; ideally it could have more defense against condi but not be quite so slippery against direct damage specs.

Firstly, I'm sure we'd all like objective proof of you actually outskilling top players. Secondly, where did you get these damage figures from?

Gotta say that's exactly why I stopped watching it, I don't need that kind of "excitement" in my life and there are plenty of other shows revolving around intrigue that are as good. And if I want medieval warfare/magic there's LoTR. Art is a great way to explore issues more fully, including death, but I don't really appreciate it just as a thing to titillate consumers. I'm not really a consumer of the GW2 plotline unless it results in me getting certain armor/weapon skins, I would be if it was more insightful and geared towards adults. I really enjoyed Prophecies, though the increasing complexity of the plotline (Lich/Shiro are manipulated by Abaddon, who seems like the ultimate bad guy, but then it turns out Destroyers are actually agents of The Great Destroyer who is controlled by Primordus, who is only one of a number of elder dragons. Whenever this plotline ends I fully expect the elder dragons to actually be agents of whoever bullied the forum moderators in middle school) lost me after Nightfall. I bought EotN to keep up with friends and the new challenging PvE content. Maybe that's something that can be addressed in GW3, if it comes about.

A couple more terms: Duelist: A build that excels in 1v1 situations.Overextending: Same thing as Over-rotating. Used more frequently (in my experience). I'd also change a few:Disengage: Leaving an ongoing fight. People use this term even if someone has already died in the fight.Soft-CC: I'd change this definition to exclude Vulnerability it's a condition but not really a CC in any way since it doesn't control or affect the player's actions.

Lives in a forest, loves nature, one with the trees, speaks with british accent. Sylvari much? Sounds like a Bosmer from Elder Scrolls more than a High Elf. Depends on your lore I guess.