Silinsar.6298

It's the latest iteration of stealth sustain builds. Which usually comes with the caveats of only having mediocre mobility compared to other thief builds, not being able to defend camps, having to dodge sentries and getting screwed by reveal tricks. You can counterplay it with: Mobility (+ LoS) Projectile hate Reveal Cleanses CC It's like fighting a Harb that traded higher pressure and CC for stealth. Yeah, it's annoying, but there are builds allowing far fewer counter play imo. Especially when you are playing Holosmith.

Condi duration is extremely hit or miss. Yes, it's useless when condis get cleansed, but it wrecks so much when they aren't. Just think of +50% damage and CC duration... It just shouldn't vary that wildly, imo. Both application and removal are too frequent right now.

Imo, it's not celestial in a vacuum that is overpowered, it always comes with a build that makes good use of it. I also think it's fine that there are some builds that are best run with celestial. However, as others have mentioned, what leads to over-performing cele builds (without tradeoffs), is boon and condition duration. Both are too strong in the current state of the game. There's no way to properly balance boon & condi application with durations ranging from +0% to almost +100%. The impact of that is just too much. It's not about a flat damage / armor increase, it makes the difference between having a window to pressure, CC or recover against a spec or never getting the chance to. My preferred course of action regarding cele would be to cut the concentration and expertise it grants by half, making them minor stats and see where it goes.

Solo / pug roamer frequency (and tendency in +, -, = the last 1-2 months) in my experience: High: = Thief (Daredevil, followed by DE) = Ranger (pretty much all elite specs, immob druid's been getting popular) - Guard (mostly WB, some DH and FB) Medium: + Elementalist (mostly scepter Catalyst, some Tempests, few Weavers) + Mesmer (mostly Virt, sometimes Chrono or Mirage) - Engineer (most of them still Mechanists for some reason) Low: = Necro (mostly Harb, some Reapers) = Warrior (Spellbreaker leading by a small margin) = Revenant (mostly Renegades now, used to meet more Vindicators) Further notes: Thief and Ranger inherently have a well rounded kit for roaming: mobility, stealth, ranged pressure. Ranger does better as a bruiser, thief as a ganker / fight picker. Guard decline is mostly caused by players learning to counter Willbender imo, and it not being the best at cele bruiser vs cele bruiser fights while not having the escape ability of stealth classes. Cata is a 1v1 and team fight beast right now, but not the most mobile. It has both strong damage-focused and cele bruiser builds. Virt similarly has some builds that are very safe to run and will kill sooner or later, but struggles more to have big impact when it isn't attacked (due to the defensive, counter-attacking nature). Mechanist is the new Minionmancer... often feels like it's being played by PvE players doing dailies. Holo and Scrapper can be very potent roamers and their "population" seems quite stable, but they don't have the FOTM appeal to increase in numbers. Harb I see similar to Cata and Virt for solo roaming: It's main strength is being a strong (cele) duelist. However, it's more prone to getting focused. On the flip side: necros thrive with supporters. Warriors can also still perform well in fights, but are counterplayed more easily than other specs. Most builds play too "fair" to compete with the best of what other specs have to offer. Revenants... idk what happened to them. There's a fair amount of Renegade bruisers which seem to be decent but just not as dangerous or survivable as other specs.

Oh yeah, even 1vs1 engagements can be full of visual noise, depending on what is fighting what. And it's not just that some things are barely noticeable, it's also that the size / intensity of the effects mismatch the impact. Minor field effects that (de-)buff a little can be huge and imposing, while "hand wave" skills wreck you and game deciding effects show up as a little icon between dozen. It can be hard to tell if you're still in the range of PBAoE effects (and how they'll behave on slopes, but that's a whole other topic). There's pop-up text for miss / evade / block but none for projectile reflection, destruction or hitting stab. Some effects linger longer than their animation persists. Animations on channeled skills tend to get stuck. Some weapons replace animations with ones that are even harder to tell (apart). Etc., etc. Sometimes I wish GW2 had cast bars like GW1. Relying on cast and effect animations and visuals failed. They wouldn't solve everything but help in some scenarios and make the game a bit more transparent about what is happening.

You're stuck in the leap animation at that point, the only way to get out more reliably is to pay attention to the immob interval and not remove it shortly before it gets reapplied.

I don't quite get the second sentence. My biggest gripe with Warclaw is that it is such a good tool for bigger groups of players to chase down smaller groups. And for roaming, it basically skews / prevents fights that didn't start with a Lance hit, because if you then go ahead and try to dismount people by damage that still have full OOC speed and a leap dodge left (potentially putting you in a worse spot if they choose to take the fight) or let them go (and players love turning around afterwards when they see more of their team arriving while you still might be in combat). It's a mechanic that facilitates uneven fights and discourages initiating even ones especially at small scale. I get that they are wishes, but with changes like this you always have to be careful about what you wish for. Parts of them being implemented might actually do more harm than good if some things aren't considered and taken care of first.

About WvW: Honestly, I think it needs less mounts, not more. Tying them to supply also would mean the dominant server now has even more tools to stay dominant. Flying, jumping, porting... ANet doesn't even fix the exploits used to get into certain towers / keeps with profession skills. Every map would have to be revisited. I'm up for balance changes and ways to make siege & tricks more impactful. A bounty system comes with the caveat of needing a way to identify and track players. I doubt ANet will ever go this route since opponents in WvW are semi-anonymized and contact isn't encouraged. Before we get naval combat, they'd need to do multiple updates for underwater combat. This is something they moved away from in competitive modes, and do not fix bugs for.

The initial need for more stats on hybrid builds was caused by the trio of multiplicative scaling for power damage, aka the more power, crit chance and crit damage you have the better investing in each is going to be. In the past celestial barely got you the raw power needed to take someone out, and to make your conditions stick you needed to invest build choices into applying cover conds for example, opting for that instead of going for defensive traits or utilities. You still notice this vs some builds that don't hit a certain threshold of condition application - e.g. I can mostly kite and cleanse vs cele willbenders well enough to not really be pressured by the conditions. So it feels like a sturdier power build to me (with a well balanced 4 stat combination). Now some cele builds just have an easier time making power damage respectable (almost reaching berserker / marauder levels when they can apply constant pressure). And also applying condi pressure, giving them the potential to deal more damage than non-cele builds while getting the increased defense. I think a big part of this is the overall shift of what contributes to a build's effectiveness towards boons and conditions. Nowadays, even for power builds not focusing on them, which one doesn't utilize fury, might, quickness, defensive boons and/or utility conditions to to boost their performance? Due to that, duration increases make up for the lost raw power + precision + ferocity. That plus the "bruiser" meta, which makes healing and toughness matter a lot more (because things barely die during a single offensive sequence), supercharged celestial.

While ele benefits less from condi duration than necro, it benefits a lot from boon duration. And even though it lacks the cover condi spam of something like harb, condi duration still boosts low duration conditions considerably, because those won't be cleansed consistently.

Anything that can make up for the "loss" of damage usually thrives with cele. Be it strong hybrid damage, damage amplifying boons and/or traits. It used to much more of a defensive stat choice. Condi and boon duration is what pushes it over the top in most cases, because they are too potent amplifiers for both offense and defense.

For WvW, I think you'll have an easier start with ranger. They have some really solid bruiser builds that will allow you to have longer fights (and learn from them). Thief's good for escaping, the usual hit and run tactics work well vs some specs, simply fail vs others, and everything in-between is hard to learn when you don't know what you opponents are doing (hence not as enjoyable when starting roaming, imo).

It wasn't just the CD but also the cast time used to be 1/2sec, which made it one of the faster heals (though part of it is delayed). A lot of sustain (not just other heals) has been powercrept since then though, even with 20sec CD I'm not sure it would be the undisputed best heal on engineer. It'll still be good for builds able to combo well with the fields and needing the cond removal, while not minding that little stop on the move to make sure you can pick it up for lower CD. However: Med Kit offers everything and more than HT does with the downside of being slower and needing to go through kitswap. Having heal and cond remove separated can be an advantage. Elixir H has since been changed to grant all the boons, and with Alchemy+HGH you have a total of ~5sec prot every 20 sec which makes for a good trade when you can deal with conds otherwise. A.E.D. remains in its "generally worse, but decent on some builds" status. Gyro's prot isn't quite worth loosing the condi clear imo, but it is the fastest to cast and the field following you is nice. Coolant Blast now offering instant cond remove and a pretty decent heal (+extra effects) with enough heat makes for a good contender on holo.

Starting out, Scrapper is the most "core-like" elite spec, you only have to learn a few new abilities. The trait line itself provides good mobility (super speed) and utility (stomp / res gyro), from defense (stab, barrier) to offense (fury, might). Hammer is a great weapon. Holosmith's biggest advantages are the mobility, condi clear and bursts from forge. Using photon forge well is your bread and butter. I am personally not fond of sword since what it offers mostly overlaps with forge (melee attacks, leap, mid range projectiles). Don't play Mechanist, it's been nerfed multiple times now and has a stupid AI to deal with. Rangers are in a better state when you want a pet class. Right now they either lack damage or defense. You can make still make core work somewhat, but I wouldn't recommend that one either. If you insist on it, I'd suggest Explosives, Alchemy and Tools, those are the best core lines right now imo. Rifle's been in a bad state for a while now though so you likely need grenades for damage. GuildJen's builds are a starting point, but you certainly want to tweak them. My impression is that most of the good trait / weapon / utility picks are there but distributed over the top 3 builds and every single one by itself includes some questionable choices.

That's how it usually goes, yeah. Who's Susan?

I'm looking forward to alliances, I hope they change something for the better, but they don't address the core issue imo. That's the point I was trying to make. Base rewards for doing events / getting kills in WvW could remain, and scaling extra loot / XP / gold etc. be introduced that you get when there are fewer than X participants (regarding the event / kill, not map-wide). Keeps could provide extra rewards for groups <30, towers for ones <15 , camps and kills for ones <5 etc. (just making some numbers up). It could even be a dynamic system depending on players and enemies on the map. I know "reducing" rewards for big zergs somewhat goes against the spirit of cooperation, but risk, effort and time required should be taken into account. Mono-zerging being the most rewarding activity by far doesn't facilitate a fun matchup imo. I like that GW2 offers full rewards for everyone in PvE, but there the scaling of enemies matters and ensures the challenge also gets bumped up a bit. In WvW big groups however make things much easier and faster, so the reward system needs adjustment.

Disclaimer: my perspective comes from playing in the early (like "everyone was still leveling and we did it in WvW, so whoever already got his elite was OP" - early) days, I started out focusing on server community & score, playing GvG somewhat competitively for 1-2 years but played mostly solo and small scale for the last couple of years, with big breaks in-between. Also, EU. WvW and its multiple facets have always been fun and intriguing to me, and it kept me playing and coming back to GW2 like no other game mode. However, I guess I am not the only one feeling it has become kinda stagnant and / or less enjoyable for a while now, and it seems you meet more and more people playing the mode that might still like it, but become tired of it. I'll try to explain my understanding of some aspects of WvW. Anyway, I'll simply get going: One game mode to rule them all Players don't play a multi-faceted game mode anymore, they play multiple game modes that intersect. Zergs want to farm, guilds want to GvG / zergbust, roamers want to roam... this dates way back, but I miss the days when someone would put up a fight on a raid build, or you practiced to hold your own vs thieves on staff ele, just so you could stay alive vs focus groups in GvG. Builds have become more specialized with the expansions. And players know what they are good / bad at, so they tend to avoid taking fights outside their specialty. Why? Players care for different things, and PPT is getting less and less popular. And as a note, with PPT I don't mean just zerging to take a tower or defending one. My fondest memory of actually playing the game mode as a whole (and the way I still think was intended originally) where the reset nights where you had multiple guild groups, havoc squads etc. coordinating and arranging resources / "manpower" across maps, static and mobile scouts / roamers taking care of upgrades, supply and siege, etc... Anyway, I'd split the WvW motivations into 4 categories: Community / server / PPT: No matter the role and what you ("have to") do, in the end you try to contribute to the server's success. What I described above. Personal / competitive: you play to improve, perform and have interesting encounters (balanced or unbalanced). GvGs and duels are the best examples. But also "fishing" for fights in open field. Rewards: You are here for some item, achievement, daily and/or low-effort participation. Ever camped a veteran's spawn point? Drama / trolling: You are here for human interaction (outside the game's mechanics), the good and / or the bad. Don't tell me you never took any part in this. Group sizes != playstyles Zergs or roaming groups aren't homogeneous playstyles. Players do stuff in differnet group sizes for different reasons. Some join a zerg for the karmatrain, some for the fights and some to take a well defended objective. And some only want to one-up the group that killed them. This is the point where you might realize WvW has even more nuance to it than you thought, because every size of group built do excel at what they try to do can be something different entirely. There are roles, there are motivations and there are group sizes. This is what I would like people (and ANet) to recognize. Even in a zerg, there are multiple ways to play WvW. And quite a few more outside of it. Unity Discord So we all stand together... in different places... sometimes. At least when it comes to what WvW players want from WvW. And why we don't get along with each other occasionally. I dare say many in-game hostilities (and the sometimes earned reputation of WvW'ers being toxic) aren't caused by the game pitting us against each other, but because we approach WvW differently and want other things from our encounters. The simplest example: You run around looking for a fight, you meet someone just trying to get back to their group. What should happen? Should one be able to force / avoid this fight? My guess: different opinions. Design-wise, ANet gave us a mount which allows players to avoid many encounters they don't want to engage in (unless you are in the bigger group where it actually makes it easier to force a fight). This is not really something to be solved by ANet, but to be recognized. There isn't "one" coherent WvW playerbase, there's a lot of people wanting different things. And whatever they do to update / revitalize WvW has to take into account multiple playstyles and not just one. Alliances ... won't be the savior of WvW, unless they can actually restore the community aspect and make players more interested in PPT again. What do they address / balance around? Average PPT / participation. Nothing else (to my knowledge). Currently, match-ups are sometimes quite balanced in regards to overall score, but outside of a few hours in prime time, map participation still differs a lot on most maps. And maps become stagnant when short-term participation of one server heavily outweighs the others. I don't see how this is supposed to change with alliances. Making WvW more enjoyable again So, while long-term PPT and participation might be better balanced, short term player numbers on maps are not. And while most players aggregate in zergs, the issue with focusing on those is that they quickly establish which side has the upper hand. We need incentives to join and keep playing on maps we are outnumbered on (the removal of the extra pips for the outnumbered buff was the exact opposite of that). We need better rewards for playing in smaller groups. Instead of more overall numerical balance, we need changes to make unbalanced participation more fun & worth our time. Instead of trying to give us a zerg which numbers match the others', reward activities that don't rely on having a matching number of players on the map. Nerf mechanics that favor the bigger zerg, introduce ones that dampen the number advantage. If WvW relies on having similar numbers on the map at all times to be fun, it won't be most of the time.

At least for Holo, the Tools changes will make me consider running it instead of Alchemy. Tier 1: Optimized Activation makes up for Invigorating speed (and I do find the other options to be similarly effective, depending on what you're fighting). Reactive Lenses condi removal trumps Hidden Flask, imo (they are not comparable 1:1, but both have some good utility) Tier 2: Mechanized Deployment condi removal trumps transmute, it's just more and better controllable condition removal. No Emergency Elixir is some sustain loss, but Lock On / Takedown Round make up for that with their offensive utility, imo. Tier 3: Can't really say how much losing Compounding Chemicals will hurt, it's not a lot of healing, but it adds up. Losing HGH is tough, but getting TB CD reduction from Mechanized Deployment and a flat damage increase from Excessive Energy partially makes up for it (unless you're set on using multiple elixirs). So for the tier 3 majors, while not being as good as HGH when compared 1:1, I think all are decent. Kinetic Battery was too strong with 5sec quickness tbh, 2sec was overnerfed and I think 4sec would be fine but 3sec quickness makes it usable again, given you have multiple low CD TB skills. If you're running 2 gadgets, Gadgeteer becomes worth it and otherwise Adrenal Implant is a nice to have fallback pick. Tools will probably be a tempting alternative to Alchemy for me, a bit more offensive-oriented but still featuring good defensive utility. So overall I like how the pending changes make me ponder on taking different traits, utility skills, healing skills and maybe tweaking my stats (because of the increased condi clear and damage, but reduced survivability vs power, I might slot less vitality and more toughness).

Why was he off point in a 2v1?surely 2 people could hold the node against 1 person.. And I dont get how that is the fault of the person standing on the node? Wouldnt the butterfly who chases off point be at fault? and then how does that 1 guy suddenly become multiple people? Im sorry but your comment doesnt make sense. You're alone, fighting on a point, 2 enemies engage, you stall them (which at some point requires you moving off the node) while an ally closes in. He arrives and instead of helping you kill 2 enemies and then reclaim the node, ignores the fight to stand and recap said node, which leaves you to die vs the enemies and him shortly afterwards too. "Why are you off node?" is an easy question to ask when you weren't the one just fighting off 2 enemies for half a minute. 1-2 more node ticks isn't worth 2 deaths. well that's an entirely different story and situation to what you posted before. the first story was a 2v1 and the guy who was outnumbered managed to get a butterfly to chase him off point making it a 1v1 and easy kill for himself. Divide and conquer tactics. second story is more understandable as it involves a 4th player and a completely different situation.It was the situation I described in what you quoted. The other situation I commented on was a different situation unrelated to my comment on people ignoring teammates in trouble for the sake of nodes. I guess that caused the initial misunderstanding?

Why was he off point in a 2v1?surely 2 people could hold the node against 1 person.. And I dont get how that is the fault of the person standing on the node? Wouldnt the butterfly who chases off point be at fault? and then how does that 1 guy suddenly become multiple people? Im sorry but your comment doesnt make sense. You're alone, fighting on a point, 2 enemies engage, you stall them (which at some point requires you moving off the node) while an ally closes in. He arrives and instead of helping you kill 2 enemies and then reclaim the node, ignores the fight to stand and recap said node, which leaves you to die vs the enemies and him shortly afterwards too. "Why are you off node?" is an easy question to ask when you weren't the one just fighting off 2 enemies for half a minute. 1-2 more node ticks isn't worth 2 deaths.

I like the people who watch their teammates die 800-1000 range off point in a 1vs2 because the cap/decap is so much more important. And ofc they lose the point within 15sec because the enemies move onto them. I'd argue that 1v1-ing is generally a bad idea in sPvP unless you are a duelist but then again you should just camp a point and prevent that decap with your life. And if you aren't running a 1vX you'd be better off to try and carry the fight to your team mates and maybe even ping to attract someone +1-ing you. Of course it doesn't make sense to carry the fight to a point when you're getting ganked or something but this is usually where your team mates fight or at least should do so.And to let someone bleed out is also risky, you'd need to pay attention until they're dead, which is also preferably while you're standing on a node for those ppt.An endless scrapper fight is also generally a pretty bad idea independently from whether it's on-point or not tbh. Depends on what you play, what is moving towards the point and how likely it is to get enemies moving in from different sides. If you expect inc from spawn for example, moving a bit towards it means you can pressure enemies sooner and if they want to push the point they have to move past you and then still some distance. That buys you time and you can pressure them while they have to turn their back. If there're 2 enemies coming I feel like I can better stall as well, you can cc, kb, ... one to keep him back and if the other moves to the point you get them separated. Ofc that all comes with the risk of enemies being faster than you, getting the decap, or someone moving in through another route, dying off point, but you have to judge that based on the builds used and what's happening at other points.

S'all good :)To my understanding is that proof of concept is the bones of it :smile: What are your thoughts on it? A proof of concept requires some testing of that concept, to create evidence that it works or can work when fully implemented. In case of a new spec that would at least require prototyping of some skills (e.g. the new class mechanic) within the game. What you're presenting is a theory-crafted (with little detail, that'd flashing out how exactly each single thing in the spec works) idea, which is nice and can spark inspiration, but in no way it proofs the viability of the concept.

Sorry to be nit-picky, but this is a concept, not a proof of concept :)

Yeah, PvP has been getting less and less attention. You don't need change for change's sake (aka don't unbalance what isn't broken), but some new maps or game modes would have been nice. ANet tried with the siege thing (don't even remember the name) and death match arena, but then didn't give them a q and just left them in the dust. Removing the water combat from sPvP also was an early indicator that they just didn't want to put in the effort to fix / balance it. I don't think powercreep has reduced the skill requirement of the game. There are just more situations now that are decided by builds / team composition IF everyone has reached a certain skill level. And fights tend to be more one sided, so there generally are lesser moments in which to apply skill. But you'll still need experience to be consistently successful. And in some matchups the difference really shows.While a good expansion spec might carry a player in some situations, those in which it doesn't become the deciding ones. And those are harder than before, because more stuff gets thrown around in less time while compared to that you could take time to really ponder how to use your skills pre hot. That also makes PvP less noob friendly compared to pre hot, imo. It became more action + reaction heavy and less tactical but the tactical part didn't get removed, it's still there somehow, you just have less time to think about it :) If you want to get into the "good" tactical part of PvP you basically have to automatize the mechanical part (which takes a lot of practice). I think the downed / res mechanic itself is fine in sPvP. The skills around it that allow near zero risk and/or fast ressing, and the fact that ANet never really got to balance the skills of the downed state itself. And I'd have liked to see them trying to scrap rally. I get the idea to make an exciting comeback, but when you got a very even and balanced team fight, 2 people down on every side, one of them just dies while one of the other team has 1% and it turns the whole thing around so much that what could continue as a even fight is now a complete blowout... it just ends a good fight midway. I've never had any tournament ambitions, but from what I read and experienced myself (from those openly indicating they're part of it) many of the players engaging in the short ESL scene were downright toxic. You don't just need tournaments and rewards, you need a community people actually want to be part of. Kinda like the chicken / egg problem. What was there before: Few players because of little resources invested from ANet or little resources invested from ANet because there were so few payers?In GW1 there are low level arenas that would ease new players into PvP, you always play in a team (heros / henchies), mobs are set up in groups with reasonable compositions (frontline, casters, healers...) and use the same skills players can. The PvE in GW1 is basically teaching you PvP by letting you play vs bots with your own bots. And it felt very dynamic and tactical to me because of that. Imo GW1 is the better PvE and PvP game, but GW2 is newer, it's the better MMO and has a better combat system. Balance often is subjective. Sometimes an OP build seems less OP 2 months later because people figure out to fight it or adjust some things to bring more counters. Sometimes "OP" builds pop out of nowhere (without following a buff) because someone just discovered it handles the current meta well. Overhasty nerfs can be necessary in some cases, but I wouldn't say that was THE problem about ANet's balancing. ANet always tried slow and steady, to continuously gravitate towards the unreachable perfect balance. And it was just that, it worked, imo, it just wasn't good for keeping impatient players. And then they threw the whole thing, years of slow and steady balancing, a pretty well balanced state of the game, into the gutter with the trait overhauls & expansions. And they still stick to slow, but became less sensible (personal opinion) about how they handle things. And they scrapped the "steady" part, suddenly reworking things here or there (that might not need it to begin with) while doing nothing or almost irrelevant number changes in other spots. Imo, GW2 PvP (and also WvW) could have benefited massively from dedicated community managers (and balance/dev teams in the background). Discussing in detail (as much as I appreciate them, not just a post every couple of months) why things don't change fast, how they're handling it, what their view on it and the data is, previewing and opening up changes to discussions, do some weekend-event tests (like for pof) for greater balance updates, ... The PvP development is basically below an indie-dev level (at least the impression of how much dedicated resources they provide for it is) and those HAVE to engage with their communities to keep them interested and invested and to make more people take a look at it. As sad as the layoffs were, the restructuring would have been the chance to make PvP a little bit more of a priority. And while the devs should have really upped their game in some areas, the community should have done so too. Matchmaking mixes plat with low golds, so don't ask of others what you couldn't achieve yourself (and be toxic about it), be willing to teach people. Welcome noobs. Don't expect the devs to specifically cater to your ideas of balance. Be a little patient or try to adjust a bit. Make your own tournaments. Don't shout "OP!" without giving any real arguments as soon as you encounter something new, a better player or 1 day after a patch. I'm sorry, but powercreep has most certainly lowered the skill requirement. This is not even a contest. When I can smash keys and get results on a new profession...that's a problem. It simply should not happen. There is no "tactical" part, it's all reaction based. Elite specs just stuff everything in one build--evades, damage, cc, defenses with basically no tradeoffs. All you really get are glass cannons and bunkers, there's nothing in between.If you smash keys and get results, your enemy's probably caught unaware, in a bad situation for that matchup, has CDs, a build that's ill suited to fight yours, or simply is worse than you. You probably won't be doing this for long vs different enemies with different builds unless they are just smashing keys as well. You need some mechanical skill, intuition and reactions to even have a chance, yes, but if you think reactions are all there is I have to disagree. If you never keep track of what skills your enemy still has off CD, what skill sequences he might use, plan your stun break use, bait / wait out dodges etc., use skills, defenses, and/or mobility when appropriate you might still get lucky and win, but those are still errors that cost you.The last two sentences kind of contradict themselves, you argue there's only 2 extremes, glassy damage builds and bunker builds, but what you describe before is the thing inbetween: bruisers. They opt for a combination of continued DPS and survival and do that to varying degrees. They excel at different situations and have different tools. I see some imbalances, but probably not where you do and not so many. Your perception of (im)balance is different than mine. Sounds pretty subjective to me. GS/Axe berserker has clear weaknesses. It's melee only, telegraphed, can stealth or port, misses the SB and shield block, has no or very little CC ... That's not OP, that's an example of the concept of a highly damaging straight forward melee fighter. If you run into that and just smash your buttons, yeah, then might seem OP to you. But there are various counter play options.Saying one shots shouldn't exist is a preference for combat pacing. Having or not having one shots and higher TTK doesn't mean there's less or more balance. If you complain about gimmicks chances are they aren't as simple as you think and/or you just need a little more practice to deal with them. How do you know the current state of PvP specifically caters to anyone? If PvErs would like it, PvP should have lots of new players. How do you define "pvp elitists"?Expansions were made for PvE while PvP & WvW took collateral damage from the e spec introductions.

Yeah, PvP has been getting less and less attention. You don't need change for change's sake (aka don't unbalance what isn't broken), but some new maps or game modes would have been nice. ANet tried with the siege thing (don't even remember the name) and death match arena, but then didn't give them a q and just left them in the dust. Removing the water combat from sPvP also was an early indicator that they just didn't want to put in the effort to fix / balance it. I don't think powercreep has reduced the skill requirement of the game. There are just more situations now that are decided by builds / team composition IF everyone has reached a certain skill level. And fights tend to be more one sided, so there generally are lesser moments in which to apply skill. But you'll still need experience to be consistently successful. And in some matchups the difference really shows.While a good expansion spec might carry a player in some situations, those in which it doesn't become the deciding ones. And those are harder than before, because more stuff gets thrown around in less time while compared to that you could take time to really ponder how to use your skills pre hot. That also makes PvP less noob friendly compared to pre hot, imo. It became more action + reaction heavy and less tactical but the tactical part didn't get removed, it's still there somehow, you just have less time to think about it :) If you want to get into the "good" tactical part of PvP you basically have to automatize the mechanical part (which takes a lot of practice). I think the downed / res mechanic itself is fine in sPvP. The skills around it that allow near zero risk and/or fast ressing, and the fact that ANet never really got to balance the skills of the downed state itself. And I'd have liked to see them trying to scrap rally. I get the idea to make an exciting comeback, but when you got a very even and balanced team fight, 2 people down on every side, one of them just dies while one of the other team has 1% and it turns the whole thing around so much that what could continue as a even fight is now a complete blowout... it just ends a good fight midway. I've never had any tournament ambitions, but from what I read and experienced myself (from those openly indicating they're part of it) many of the players engaging in the short ESL scene were downright toxic. You don't just need tournaments and rewards, you need a community people actually want to be part of. Kinda like the chicken / egg problem. What was there before: Few players because of little resources invested from ANet or little resources invested from ANet because there were so few payers?In GW1 there are low level arenas that would ease new players into PvP, you always play in a team (heros / henchies), mobs are set up in groups with reasonable compositions (frontline, casters, healers...) and use the same skills players can. The PvE in GW1 is basically teaching you PvP by letting you play vs bots with your own bots. And it felt very dynamic and tactical to me because of that. Imo GW1 is the better PvE and PvP game, but GW2 is newer, it's the better MMO and has a better combat system. Balance often is subjective. Sometimes an OP build seems less OP 2 months later because people figure out to fight it or adjust some things to bring more counters. Sometimes "OP" builds pop out of nowhere (without following a buff) because someone just discovered it handles the current meta well. Overhasty nerfs can be necessary in some cases, but I wouldn't say that was THE problem about ANet's balancing. ANet always tried slow and steady, to continuously gravitate towards the unreachable perfect balance. And it was just that, it worked, imo, it just wasn't good for keeping impatient players. And then they threw the whole thing, years of slow and steady balancing, a pretty well balanced state of the game, into the gutter with the trait overhauls & expansions. And they still stick to slow, but became less sensible (personal opinion) about how they handle things. And they scrapped the "steady" part, suddenly reworking things here or there (that might not need it to begin with) while doing nothing or almost irrelevant number changes in other spots. Imo, GW2 PvP (and also WvW) could have benefited massively from dedicated community managers (and balance/dev teams in the background). Discussing in detail (as much as I appreciate them, not just a post every couple of months) why things don't change fast, how they're handling it, what their view on it and the data is, previewing and opening up changes to discussions, do some weekend-event tests (like for pof) for greater balance updates, ... The PvP development is basically below an indie-dev level (at least the impression of how much dedicated resources they provide for it is) and those HAVE to engage with their communities to keep them interested and invested and to make more people take a look at it. As sad as the layoffs were, the restructuring would have been the chance to make PvP a little bit more of a priority. And while the devs should have really upped their game in some areas, the community should have done so too. Matchmaking mixes plat with low golds, so don't ask of others what you couldn't achieve yourself (and be toxic about it), be willing to teach people. Welcome noobs. Don't expect the devs to specifically cater to your ideas of balance. Be a little patient or try to adjust a bit. Make your own tournaments. Don't shout "OP!" without giving any real arguments as soon as you encounter something new, a better player or 1 day after a patch.