Obtena.7952

I'm not sure that's entirely fair to say but if it's not clear what I'm saying, then a simple statement is in order: Dagger could use a buff or a change, but not because it's bad in PVP/WvW. That matters because buffing it for the wrong reasons will result in crap. If you want to understand why I think that, you will have dive back into my posts. Personally, I prefer to explain my thinking.

I don't see how #2 can't be fixed for consistency and maintain a reasonable life siphoning effect while maintaining counter play. Being inconsistent is, I believe, completely intended in that case, as life siphoning effects are rather valuable already. As for the bleed bonus on #2, there is no shortage of bleeding going on in PVP/WVW and to be honest, it's a bonus; if dagger had a way to easily bleed, the whole premise that there is a bleed bonus on #2 would be superficial. It's not a bonus if you can reliably obtain it with so little thought or effort. No, dagger should not have a bleed application because of #2 bleed bonuses. Besides, you said it already; necro is not devoid of ways to apply bleed to get that bonus either. We know Anet is keen on counterplay ... all these things simply reinforce that. I would also be really careful about classifying this as a 'power' weapon; it's certainly not intended to be a high DPS weapon ... if that was the case, we would see Anet incrementally improving its damage, just like they do for Axe every 6 months. Anet demonstrates patterns. If people recognize them, they can understand what things are meant to be ... and what they are not. I agree that 3 leaves a bad taste in the mouth with the bleed corruption; if we have to eat a damage condition on a sustain weapon though ... that's the implementation I would prefer. Ideally, my preference is for no corruption at all; I don't even get why this makes sense to Anet. I think they really miscalculated the risk/reward of corruptions on Necro. Other than this, the effects it provides seem pretty appropriate. Consistency is a rather elusive request anyways; you can say that about ANY skill you can dodge, block, interrupt, etc... again, we know Anet wants to provide counterplay, making things more consistent seems to me contradicts that.

Build diversity doesn't mean you get any build you want to specify. Anet can promote and provide diversity in lots of ways and still have playstyles that aren't available for a class. Besides, while build diversity is nice, how much is really needed? I mean, optimal performance in this game is driven by optimal builds ... diversity on a very wide scale doesn't make much sense as a goal here. This is simply a case of thinking that you can marry lots of diversity into a narrow space of optimal builds. That's unrealistic. You want to play a fast, consistent, but less burst melee weapon, in PVP/WVW. I don't get how that's NOT what a dagger provides you now. What do you even mean it's not 'consistent'? What change on dagger would add consistency to it so it would work for you?

You got one part right here. It's not good to assume that axe got buffed strictly for PvP, I'll give you that. Then comes the question... why was it buffed? I'm sure as hell it wasn't for OW PvE. that's easy ... Anet tells us why, it's in your example. I never said Anet doesn't buff things because they lack performance, but it's not a given that if a weapon lacks performance in a specific game mode, Anet needs to buff it. That's a different thing. Notice in your example ... Anet doesn't say they are buffing axe because it lacks damage ... in GAME MODE WHATEVER. I don't have a choice for a fast, consistent, but less burst melee weapon. Dagger should have been that but it isn't consistent. Nothing fits the criteria so i have nothing to choose from, hence, no choice except to change playstyle and either go with utility of staff, or cleave and slow burst of GS. Do you understand what build diversity is? I think that's what Anet is currently campaigning for with the current PvP/WvW splits. Then you don't have that option to begin with ... and that's not unreasonable at all. That doesn't mean you have no options for a good PVP/WVW build, it just means that the specific option you want isn't available. This isn't Burger King. You don't get it how you want. YOu don't get to define exactly what you want the class to be or do. That's unreasonable.

Dagger mainhand being one of them. Which is why people want it to be buffed and why this thread was created. To discuss what should be done. That's not true though so ... again, maybe you think it's relevant to ignore parts of the game to justify your thinking, but that doesn't make it true. Op was complaining about dagger in PVP/WVW as well ... besides, this might seem outrageous to you but again ... Anet isn't balance to meta anywhere ... so why would anyone assume that 'not good in any game mode' is a relevant reason to buff it? THink about this ... what does Anet do with warrior? They have almost ALL the weapons, but there are just three game modes. So if every weapon needs to be good in every game mode, then each game mode need about ... 4-5 weapons to be good in each for warrior? That's just unrealistic ... that line of thinking falls right apart. That's not how weapons are changed. It can't be and it doesn't NEED to be. That would be a luxury in the best case, a nice to have in the worst. You're whole argument assumes dagger needs to be a 'good' weapon (good in quotes because your metapushing) for SOME game mode. Assuming it's not good because it's not meta anywhere (which seems to be what you are saying), then I would say it doesn't ... The real assessment is that dagger has a reason to be and does it well. The question is not if dagger is good, but if that reason to be (or its concept) is useful. This is really simple; dagger is a sustain weapon; it has the most LF regen, a direct life siphon and some kind of weird corrupting immobilize ... you tell me where that could POSSIBLY fit in the meta where competitive PVE is about long-term damage output and team sharing, where PVP/WVW is about burst damage, team sharing and CC. It doesn't, and nothing you could do with that weapon would ever make it fit 'good' in those game modes without reworking it completely right from the concept. Anet could do that, but despite you and others continued ignorance to it's usefulness in OW PVE, I find it hard to think of what Anet's motivation to do so would be. So what if say they were to add, either via Quickening Thirst or directly, the ability to share the healing from Life Siphon with up to 5 nearby allies, emphasizing a healer type necro that has been encouraged through Blood Magic. Would you be against that idea?Frankly, I don't think it makes sense to add permanent effects like the ones you mention to a weapon. Weapon skills are 'on demand', so something like "on hit, siphon life to people" would be more appropriate. Of course, I doubt that would make the weapon more desirable for the game modes you're interested in.

Dagger mainhand being one of them. Which is why people want it to be buffed and why this thread was created. To discuss what should be done. That's not true though so ... again, maybe you think it's relevant to ignore parts of the game to justify your thinking, but that doesn't make it true. Op was complaining about dagger in PVP/WVW as well ... besides, this might seem outrageous to you but again ... Anet isn't balance to meta anywhere ... so why would anyone assume that 'not good in any game mode' is a relevant reason to buff it? THink about this ... what does Anet do with warrior? They have almost ALL the weapons, but there are just three game modes. So if every weapon needs to be good in every game mode, then each game mode need about ... 4-5 weapons to be good in each for warrior? That's just unrealistic ... that line of thinking falls right apart. That's not how weapons are changed. It can't be and it doesn't NEED to be. That would be a luxury in the best case, a nice to have in the worst. You're whole argument assumes dagger needs to be a 'good' weapon (good in quotes because your metapushing) for SOME game mode. Assuming it's not good because it's not meta anywhere (which seems to be what you are saying), then I would say it doesn't ... The real assessment is that dagger has a reason to be and does it well. The question is not if dagger is good, but if that reason to be (or its concept) is useful. This is really simple; dagger is a sustain weapon; it has the most LF regen, a direct life siphon and some kind of weird corrupting immobilize ... you tell me where that could POSSIBLY fit in the meta where competitive PVE is about long-term damage output and team sharing, where PVP/WVW is about burst damage, team sharing and CC. It doesn't, and nothing you could do with that weapon would ever make it fit 'good' in those game modes without reworking it completely right from the concept. Anet could do that, but despite you and others continued ignorance to it's usefulness in OW PVE, I find it hard to think of what Anet's motivation to do so would be.

Because that logic of don't buff X for PvP because there are other choices is stupid. Why? If that's the reasoning Anet implemented from the get go, axe would probably still suck like lahmia said because even before axe became good you could have just used scepter, staff with warhorn and OH dagger as off-hands. Yeah. So much for diversity in weaponry. Every weapon deserves to have a spot in a game mode so players could use what fits the playstyle they want. Personally, I don't like GS for power reaper. Too slow but dagger skills besides auto attacks suck. So I don't really have much of a choice. I highlighted the relevant part ... you have assumed Anet buffed those weapons because of PVP. You don't know that; a weapon getting buffed does not immediately imply it was because of PVP/WVW or even for reasons of performance. In fact, many changes are conceptual and if those changes result in good performance in a particular game mode, it's simply coincidental. The fact still stands; if 'because bad in PVP' is truly a valid reason for Anet to buff a weapon, then why after 5 years and multiple, dedicated balance patchs, do we have weapons that aren't good in PVP? You got it wrong. Weapons are not necessarily balanced because they don't perform well in any particular game mode; that CAN'T be the case because it would mean all weapons are relevant for EVERY game mode. Jeez, we have some weapons that aren't really good in ANY game mode. The reality of the game is so far from your thinking, it's not reasonable to think it could be true. Maybe you come back in 5 years, that might be true, but I would bet it isn't because it's clearly not Anet's priority. If it was, we wouldn't be here discussing it. Furthermore, what you like or dislike doesn't mean you don't have choice; you HAVE actually made a choice there; to purposefully exclude a relevant weapon from your repertoire. It's not a good choice, but you have made it.

I don't know ... what's the point you are trying to make? Necro has lots of good PVP weapons it can choose from NOW. We aren't talking about what happened 2 years ago or whatever. Are you trying to imply that in the past, Necros had bad PVP weapons, so dagger needs a buff relevant to PVP/WVW now? That's rather absurd.

I don't get why that's a problem; lots of weapons don't get used in competitive play over all the classes; that's not an exception that needs rectification, it's normal. There isn't some driving force that requires a weapon is used in competitive play. If someone is going to justify a weapon getting a buff because it's not used in competitive play, then they need to explain why it's necessary that every weapon has a reason to be used in competitive play when there are already other more appropriate weapons choices. I mean, it doesn't even make sense that a weapon that provides long duration sustain even be used in competitive play; that's not a winning strategy in those play modes in the first place. Dagger ain't perfect, but it certainly doesn't need buffs because of PVP/WvW. Think about it ... it gets a buff and what ... all the sudden it's better than the other options we have? CMON. Let's get serious. If dagger was at all to be at the same level as other good weapon options, it would be so much work it wouldn't even be worth it because options that are better already exist. It doesn't make sense.

That makes no sense. You're going to have to explain yourself if you're just going to grab something out of the 'random statement bag'. It doesn't make any sense to justify a buff to dagger because it's a terrible weapon in PVP/WvW. Just use the weapons that aren't terrible in PVP/WvW. That's WHY Anet has given us choice of weapons. OP hasn't really thought this through. Dagger isn't bad because it's not good in PVP ... so buffing it because of PVP makes no sense. Looks like you ran out steam and decided to start chirping me. Let's get back to topic. Dagger needs buffs? Not because of Necro PVP/WvW performance. Try again. I don't cry when I PVP/WVW with Necro ... because I know how to make good choices and pick strategies that win. So do lots of other people. That's why their are so many necros in WVW/PVP recently. You should try it.

If you aren't an elitist and think performance doesn't matter in PVE, then how do you explain you're completely opposite position that you need dagger to be good in PVP because of ... performance? So performance matters in PVP because you can fail ... but you can't fail in PVE because you can fight a mob in unoptimized setups for hours to kill it? That's just dismissive and dishonest. I'm pretty sure that while people might be less inclined to completely optimize their OW PVE builds ... they still don't take random gimp choices because 'they work'. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. People doing PVE don't want crap choices just like you don't ... but for some reason, your concerns matter, theirs do not ... got it. No, you aren't an elitist ... you're just an opportunist. I have commented on the subject throughout every post; buffing dagger because of PVP performance doesn't make any sense because there are better choices. You aren't telling us the truth here is what is happening. If dagger is so bad and you know you have better choices ... you already know you have a solution. The truth is that don't want to lose your massive LF regen that you get from Dagger auto by choosing more appropriate weapons in PVP. It's the same disingenuous approach people wanted to add a bleed to it because of Scourge. They wanted it all and made it sound like they they started at the bottom of the barrel to justify it. The most comical part of your thread is that you are justifying dagger buffs because of PVP? Last I checked, necro is no where NEAR the bottom of the PVP or WvW chain right now ... the idea that dagger needs to be even better because of necros PVP performance indicates to me that somehow, necros are wanting in those areas of the game? Come of it.

I don't see what any of that has to do with the fact that you can choose weapons to optimize your play, which holds true for any game mode for any class, including those that you feel don't count for anything. Everything works in OW PVE? That stands for any game mode ... everything 'works' everywhere, yet for some reason, your criteria for what works in everything BUT OW PVE includes 'being good'. That's a purely cherry picked argument to validate your position and nothing else. You can't exclude OW PVE performance from any justification to change something, just because you have invented the facts that it doesn't matter and it's not the majority and yada yada. The problems with dagger are thematic; not specific to any game mode. So justifying fixes because 'bad' in PVP makes little sense on many levels; primarily that we have choice to pick weapons most suited to strategies that work in PVP if the class supports them. Dagger weakly supports a long duration sustain strategy .. that's NOT a strategy I would recommend in PVP or WvW in the first place. Like it or not, long duration sustain playstyles are REALLY good for OW PVE, primarily in HoT and PoF. It might be convenient for you to ignore that, but it doesn't make your argument that dagger is 'bad' any more true. It's nonsense to suggest changing the dagger so it's suitable for a playmode where other weapons do it better. That's why choices exist ... because Anet knows this already. If there is a change to the dagger, it should be to make it BETTER at what it does now, not less crap for what it's not good at doing.

Again, you can't simply 'choose' where you want your statements to be correct and ignore the rest of the game; the answer is still the same: You have choice. Dagger being 'bad' isn't just a function of everything BUT OW because you want it to. OW performance is taken into consideration, even if you don't think it should.

I'm pretty sure I have brain ... dagger is NOT underperforming in PVE, that's for sure. That's just meta-think and shows a significant lack of awareness for how to use dagger in an optimal way for PVE.

Sure .. let's assume it is bad for everyone in PVP ... that doesn't mean you can conclude that the problem is with the dagger. Not every choice is intended to be 'good' in every play mode. That's not a reason to change it. It IS a reason to make better choices more aligned to winning strategies. Then again, it might just be a weapon that needs a higher skilled player to win with as well ... If you want to look at dagger 'problems', it makes no sense to isolate it to a specific game mode, complain about how bad necro's performance in that game mode is with that weapon, conclude it's a weapon problem and 'solve' the dagger problems based on necro's performance in that game mode ... like WHAT? The solution to bad performance in PVP with dagger necro already exists ... don't use it. If EVERY other weapon outperforms dagger in PVP, then WTH would you choose to use it in the first place?

I don't get your comparison here. If dagger is bad for you in PVP, don't use it. If NECRO is bad for you in PVP, don't use it. Not every choice in this game is going to yield desired results, dependent on the play mode. That's not a reason to change it because there are choices available to choose things that DO provide reasonable results for the play mode. If you think there is some justification because of 'not competitive' in PVP, etc... then you haven't taken into account that most of the result of PVP is dependent on the player. In otherwords, you can't make those statements because you don't know your opponents skill level when you experience PVP. Let's take another angle here; let's assume you are 100% correct. What makes you think that any of the problems you listed can be addressed in a bandwidth of 3 skills on one weapon without significantly changing it's theme or making it OP'ed? I don't see it happening. You are listing CLASS problems and you think that's going to be fixed with adjusting one weapon ... that makes little sense to me. Problems should be addressed at the level where they occur. Low survival isn't due to dagger skills, nor is low damage. Dagger is not far off from being a really good weapon; if it's still lacking in some play mode, that's not because it's a bad weapon ... it's because there are other more fundamental issues with the class OR that dagger supports a strategy that isn't winning in that game mode in the first place.

I don't get your question 'runs against' other classes. What you say is true for ANY class; all classes have weapons where the highest skilled player may not achieve the same results as other more average players on other classes. That doesn't seem to me to be a relevant comparison in the current state of the game. That's a consequence of how the game is designed; if you are suggesting dagger should be changed because of the results of intended game designs, you should check your barometer. Dagger, as a necro weapon, is about as close to a sustaining weapon as you can get, along with it's damage, I don't see it getting much better than it is. Improvements will more likely be thematic ... like #3 for some reason, corrupting you with bleed seems like it shouldn't do that. Personally, I don't have a 'survival' problem on necro, ESPECIALLY when I run dagger, so I really can't see an argument for changing it because of lacking survival in the first place. I mean ... if dagger is so bad for you, why are you playing it? There is a reason we have choice of weapons; not every weapon is going to be good in every situation; again, it's easy to speculate that's by design. There is no point in giving choice if the choice is in name only. Then again, maybe I got dagger theme incorrect ... it couldbe more about corruption than sustain ... so maybe 1 and 2 should get more corrupting flavour.

I never get this complaint; the identify of necro dagger is about draining life from an opponent; if that's not THE most clearly aligned weapon that a necro has thematically, I don't know what is. Some of the mechanics are a little off, but no one should question what its identity is. There isn't all that much to complain about; for a weapon that has 3 skills on it, it can only do so much to begin with. #1 is fantastic, 2 works well enough in PVE. I can only think that the risk of self bleed is not worth the reward of immobilize on #3. It has limited use in PVE. In direct response to the OP, #2 doesn't heal enough, but it's not technically a heal, it's a life drain, so it's never going to do as much as a heal equivalent would because of it's additional damage application. Dagger is not the terrible weapon people want to make it out to be. You think dagger damage and skill set is good given the lack of survivability in class? I am not looking at the dagger skills only but the complete thing. Depends what you define as 'good'. If you're going to come back at me with 'it's not meta', don't bother. Considering the dagger combines a reasonable damage output with a massive LF regen and health siphon ... I can't really see how its skill set doesn't address a class that has 'not good' damage or 'lacking' survival.

I never get this complaint; the identify of necro dagger is about draining life from an opponent; if that's not THE most clearly aligned weapon that a necro has thematically, I don't know what is. Some of the mechanics are a little off, but no one should question what its identity is. There isn't all that much to complain about; for a weapon that has 3 skills on it, it can only do so much to begin with. #1 is fantastic, 2 works well enough in PVE. I can only think that the risk of self bleed is not worth the reward of immobilize on #3. It has limited use in PVE. In direct response to the OP, #2 doesn't heal enough, but it's not technically a heal, it's a life drain, so it's never going to do as much as a heal equivalent would because of it's additional damage application. Dagger is not the terrible weapon people want to make it out to be.

You should have played it when the orbs were half as fast. But technically, scepter is a pretty damn solid weapon ... you got a frequent AA, a frequent symbol and a skill that keeps people put in that symbol. Other than some more interesting chain AA, how could you really want more than this? Thematically, I think it's a little weird throwing around magic energy balls as a Guardian ... it definitely feels more like a Elementalist-styled weapon. And yes the sound ... On the flip side, what other kind of weapon would you recommend in it's place? There isn't much choices ...

Weapon swap isn't a solution to bad kits because kits will still be bad if you get a weapon swap. Besides ... do you believe that a weapon swap can even come close to what variety you get with kits? GL with that.

The class concept is flawed for multiple reasons such as the imbalance between kits (at least if most of them were up to par) and other utility skills is too large, or that the pressure on utility slots is too much, especially when it comes to things like stun breaks where you have an opportunity cost, which is why engy has always had lots of passive stun breaks, problem is they are inferior much of the time because you have no control over them. If the concept is kits are a must (if they were all actually decent) and you are only intended to play engy with at least some kits, then the concept would make more sense if engy were forced to take at least one kit with a dedicated kit slot in addition to the utility slots, or at the least if kits were able to be switched into whilst you were stunned/dazed so they could put stun breaks in some of them, rather than the kitten passive ones and at the same time making certain utility skills less mandatory. Except the Anet solution since HoT has been firstly to make a weapon so strong (hammer), that could do so much, it compensated for only having one weapon, at least before all the nerfs, or to basically give engy an additional weapon anyway with Holosmith, the original "concept" of engy simply has not worked since HoT, it is outdated in the game in 2018. (and to be blunt unless you've spent all your time in PvP the engy concept hasn't exactly been working great in the rest of the game over the last 5 years) OK ... that still doesn't mean a second weapon swap is the solution to bad kits. The discussion here isn't about whether kits are not good, it's about the idea of adding a second weapon to eng. That's a much higher consideration outside of kits being bad.

Well, no it's not easy to understand because: It solves no problem; kits will still be terribleIt's contrary to the concept of the classEvery class is force to pick certain utilities to optimize. You can't claim you are punished if you purposefully exclude a significant part of your toolset from play. Kits are as core as belts are (Seriously, you went there?)Engi being in a bad state doesn't justify (or get fixed) a second weapon being added.

I have to say, I really can't understand your problem here ... so you AREN'T willing to swap into a kit to optimize your play ... but you ARE willing to swap to a different weapon for it. That's assuming that you even HAVE a weapon worth swapping to ... Seems like you're arguing semantics to me. You keep eluding to the fact that other classes aren't forced into using certain things ... but that's completely wrong. If you want optimized play on other classes like you are saying you want here, you are MOST DEFINITELY forced into using certain things to get that on other classes. This argument makes NO sense because your claim is completely wrong. Not only that, but a weapon swap doesn't solve any problem and in fact, goes against the intent of the class concept. The idea just doesn't make sense. I get that you don't believe there is any kit worth using, but that's hardly a reason to justify getting a weapon swap. The solution is to fix the kits. You don't fix kits by giving people an rewarding way to not use them and then justify that by making false statements about how other classes aren't forced into specifics to optimize their play.

so your argument is let me be original and that's it? , like i said before, Eles have a good reason for not to have a 2nd set of weapons, engis on the other side not, that's a fact, we depend a lot on kits and this remove a lot of customization and options for the class, if i decide to go full elixirs with out a single kit, i'm in a inferior position compared to the other classes. Of course that not having a 2nd set of weapons is the core problem of the class, try to be effective with enginner with out using holosmith or any kit, good luck with that, i'm not saying that engi is useless, i'm just saying that engi with out a kit is like playing another game in nightmare difficulty and by adding the 2nd set of weapons engi would be in a good position, you know just like the other 7 classes. It would be amazing if engi could have a 2nd set of weapons if you are not using any kit or holo. But that's the point of the class ... you USE kits if you want to be amazing. Engi is not deficient because you choose to not use the tools that will make you amazing. Look at what you are saying ... Engi will never work without a weapon swap ... because you CHOOSE to not use kits. That makes zero sense. You can't say that if you decide to not use most of your toolset, the class sucks. I mean, you CAN say that but it goes without saying that if you don't use a big part of your toolset, you won't be good.