BTW, in case you missed it, Ele is now a primary melee class

[Redfeather.6401]

I think Master's Fortitude should be moved to a core specialization and simply include melee range weapons in mainhand.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Master's_Fortitude

[Xaylin.1860]

 

On 2/19/2022 at 3:58 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

Tempest is, inherently, either melee or hybrid regardless of the weapon, unless it's a full healing, camp water build. If you're not overloading, you're just not making full use of your abilities. 

How can you say something like this but at the same time state that Shatters are fine at range. The hypocracy of it all, really.

16 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

You ask what the argument is? Basically, it's that elementalist shouldn't be in a situation where after three expansions, every elite specialisation has been melee-oriented, and where every new autoattack-capable weapon it has received since release has been melee-oriented.

Oh, now we are talking AA/MH? Bad move. Because from that perspective core Elementalist was 66% range and 33% hybrid. Naturally, it was likely to receive more melee focussed weapons since this is what it didn't have so far. Ironically, up to Catalyst, when classifying weapons based on ranged, a two handed melee/hybrid weapon was the only thing Elementalist really lacked after PoF.

Again, I can understand the saltiness. Personally, I wasn't looking for Hammer as either. But the numbers and argument made by the OP are heavily skewed in favor of an agenda that can't be supported objectively. Plus, putting Necro and Mesmer at only about 5% for melee is just so far removed from reality that I can't take it seriously. 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Xaylin.1860

[Obtena.7952]

Weird assessment ... did you figure out how many classes are and are not 'melee' by your definition OP? I'm willing to bet MOST are not ranged. Is there a correlation between your range categories and anything else to argue Ele shouldn't be melee or is Ele not being melee simply based on what you think it shouldn't be?

Edited February 22, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[draxynnic.3719]

9 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

 

How can you say something like this but at the same time state that Shatters are fine at range. The hypocracy of it all, really.

They are. A triple-clone shatter at range does 75% of the damage that a point blank shatter does. That's a smaller dropoff then, say, the difference between using a spread attack in melee range (so all projectiles hit) versus at the end of its range where only one or two projectiles are likely to hit. But nobody's saying that, say, ranger shortbow is melee because it has a spread attack. And a shortbow/axe ranger might well be throwing more such spread attacks than a mesmer shatters.

Having abilities that are a little more effective at close range (but are still worth using at longer ranges) does not make something melee or even necessarily hybrid.

When comparing to Tempest, shatters are a much smaller component of the overall expected damage output of a mesmer than tempest overloads are. And damage overloads do nothing if you're not within 360 range (and that's just the biggest, fire overload is 180 IIRC).

9 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

Oh, now we are talking AA/MH? Bad move. Because from that perspective core Elementalist was 66% range and 33% hybrid. Naturally, it was likely to receive more melee focussed weapons since this is what it didn't have so far. Ironically, up to Catalyst, when classifying weapons based on ranged, a two handed melee/hybrid weapon was the only thing Elementalist really lacked after PoF.

Anybody claiming that 240 or 300 range is "ranged" is arguing semantics in lieu of addressing what people are complaining about.

I also specified "autoattack capable weapon", not the autoattack itself. It's just a way of including mainhand and two-handed weapons into one category. Okay, so dagger water has a 600 range autoattack. It also has a 240 range PBAOE. Fire has a 400 range spread attack (and if shatters are somehow "melee" in your mind, what about a three-projectile spread attack that's likely to do 66% less damage if used at the end of its range?), and, again, a 240 radius PBAOE attached to a gap closing skill. Air and earth are undeniably melee unless you're going to make that ridiculous claim that being just out of sword's length is "ranged". Dagger as a whole is designed to be used as a melee weapon. It has standoff capability, but so does, for example, revenant mace.

Core elementalist was 66% range and 33% melee. It got tempest, which was explicitly stated to be intended to be used with daggers. It then got weaver with sword, and people applauded that. It's getting a third that's making people go hang in, didn't we already have enough? 

[Scavarius.6059]

i'm currios as to why it even matters. since the meta in any serious content is melee stack and blindly do a rotation.

[Obtena.7952]

5 minutes ago, Scavarius.6059 said:

i'm currios as to why it even matters. since the meta in any serious content is melee stack and blindly do a rotation.

It's a good point and seriously weird that some ele's want to be stuck with primarily ranged options ... then are going to turn around and complain how bad the ranged weapon performance is because the game is designed this way. Lots of people don't understand how the game works. 

Edited February 22, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

1 hour ago, Scavarius.6059 said:

i'm currios as to why it even matters. since the meta in any serious content is melee stack and blindly do a rotation.

Not everyone is interested in bottable content though, some actually prefer some challenge and play PvP/WvW and there melee stacking doesn't really work for the squishest class in the game.

[Obtena.7952]

3 hours ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

Not everyone is interested in bottable content though, some actually prefer some challenge and play PvP/WvW and there melee stacking doesn't really work for the squishest class in the game.

So, the implication here is what? Ele's are now primarily melee so they won't work in WVW/PvP because 'squishiest class'? That seems rather weird considering being in melee range is actually as much about defensive buffs and healing as it is offensive buffs and DPS, regardless of the game mode. 

Edited February 22, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

1 hour ago, Obtena.7952 said:

So, the implication here is what? Ele's are now primarily melee so they won't work in WVW/PvP because 'squishiest class'? That seems rather weird considering being in melee range is actually as much about defensive buffs and healing as it is offensive buffs and DPS, regardless of the game mode. 

The only Ele that will stay in melee groups in WvW are healing Tempests, because it's the only one that will have some survival chances. Staying there as a DPS is risky because of random damage flying around if it comes to open field, it may be justified in some tight spaces, but then you should expect to get 1shot.
In case of PvP, Ele have already enough of melee weapons, so giving another one is a bit of annoyance at this point. It'll work, sure, but we're in this gameplay since 2012, some changes to that would be great.
PvE doesn't matter, that content is pepega.
Problem here is that: as a squishest class you should have a range advantage, since as a range class you can always go back and do your rotation in melee range, but the moment you run melee weapon you're forced to only stick with other melee group, meaning you have no choice but eat everything and die a lot if you're unlucky.

[Obtena.7952]

7 hours ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

The only Ele that will stay in melee groups in WvW are healing Tempests, because it's the only one that will have some survival chances. Staying there as a DPS is risky because of random damage flying around if it comes to open field, it may be justified in some tight spaces, but then you should expect to get 1shot.
In case of PvP, Ele have already enough of melee weapons, so giving another one is a bit of annoyance at this point. It'll work, sure, but we're in this gameplay since 2012, some changes to that would be great.
PvE doesn't matter, that content is pepega.
Problem here is that: as a squishest class you should have a range advantage, since as a range class you can always go back and do your rotation in melee range, but the moment you run melee weapon you're forced to only stick with other melee group, meaning you have no choice but eat everything and die a lot if you're unlucky.

Well, that's the point to debate ...  even if you are the squishiest class (which is debatable considering the options available), you shouldn't necessarily have a range advantage. There are lots of ways to address squishy classes; ranged advantage isn't the only solution to that. Nothing I have seen in the last 9 years indicates Anet gives 'ranged' advantage out to make up for some deficiency in a class. In fact, in THIS game, ranged advantage is a TERRIBLE solution because  as I said, melee range IS where you are most likely to be engaged with the enemy AND your team mates in a fight. 

I mean, again, the game isn't designed for good ranged builds to begin with, so even if you got another one, why  have you concluded it fixes the problems you have with the current ranged options? To be frank, it's probably going to be as bad and then you are standing around thinking "Wow, I got three bad ranged options for PVP/WvW" instead of two. 

Frankly, the game design is exactly why there are MORE likely to get a wide array of melee options than ranged ones. You honestly think that with all our experience and game history, Anet is going to throw down some amazing ranged option for ele's despite the game design and balancing around boons, etc ...? 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[draxynnic.3719]

12 hours ago, Scavarius.6059 said:

i'm currios as to why it even matters. since the meta in any serious content is melee stack and blindly do a rotation.

Raids, fractals, and strikes aren't the only things people do (they're actually a minority), and even there, if ArenaNet is serious about making mechanics matter, that's a situation where you might want range. All it takes is for one boss in your so-called 'serious' content to have something like Phasing and melee stack-and-smack won't be looking so hot any more.

Elementalist was already well catered for in melee stack-and-smack. It needed more options more than it needed more of the same.

[scerevisiae.1972]

On 2/22/2022 at 1:02 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

Weird assessment ... did you figure out how many classes are and are not 'melee' by your definition OP?

It was given literally at the start of the post:

Quote

Definitions:
Melee: more than 50% of skills <= 240 range
Ranged: more than 50% of skills > 240 range
Hybrid: approx equal melee/ranged skills

 

 

[Obtena.7952]

3 hours ago, scerevisiae.1972 said:

It was given literally at the start of the post:

 

 

I'm not asking you what the definition is (because yes, I did read the post where it's defined). I'm asking you:

did you figure out how many classes are and are not 'melee' by your definition?

Edited February 23, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Xaylin.1860]

On 2/22/2022 at 8:49 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

They are. A triple-clone shatter at range does 75% of the damage that a point blank shatter does.

Theoretically, sure. But in reality that's not going to happen reliably. Not even in OW PvE. Because even mobs move. And Illusions not being the smartest when it comes to obstacles. On the other hand, Overload Air got quite some range and both Water and Earth are good defensively regardless of range. Heck, even Fire has it's benefits although it's probably not the best time investment at range. Why take different measures here? It doesn't help to make a point. 

On 2/22/2022 at 8:49 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

When comparing to Tempest, shatters are a much smaller component of the overall expected damage output of a mesmer than tempest overloads are.

Shatters are the core mechanic for literally every Mesmer with a significant amount of traits tied to them. How are they a much smaller component? Because it is a smaller % of the DPS bench? Cool. 

On 2/22/2022 at 8:49 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

Anybody claiming that 240 or 300 range is "ranged" is arguing semantics in lieu of addressing what people are complaining about.

I didn't do that. The OP set the rules. And from that perspective it's 66% range and 33% hybrid (not melee). By the definition of OP. Just as much as most Mesmer Sw/x set ups are hybrid (haha 🥴). Not that I think that this is a proper assessment of the situation... It's not. 

 

Again: I can understand the want. Regardless of the reasoning. But I personally just don't feel that the situation is as dire as people paint it. And I just can't take the "statistic" seriously. Sorry. 

[Obtena.7952]

2 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

Theoretically, sure. But in reality that's not going to happen reliably. Not even in OW PvE. Because even mobs move. And Illusions not being the smartest when it comes to obstacles. On the other hand, Overload Air got quite some range and both Water and Earth are good defensively regardless of range. Heck, even Fire has it's benefits although it's probably not the best time investment at range. Why take different measures here? It doesn't help to make a point. 

Shatters are the core mechanic for literally every Mesmer with a significant amount of traits tied to them. How are they a much smaller component? Because it is a smaller % of the DPS bench? Cool. 

I didn't do that. The OP set the rules. And from that perspective it's 66% range and 33% hybrid (not melee). By the definition of OP. Just as much as most Mesmer Sw/x set ups are hybrid (haha 🥴). Not that I think that this is a proper assessment of the situation... It's not. 

 

Again: I can understand the want. Regardless of the reasoning. But I personally just don't feel that the situation is as dire as people paint it. And I just can't take the "statistic" seriously. Sorry. 

There we go ... that's the point I see as well. The assessment is rather contrived to prove Ele 'shifting to melee' is wrong ... when actually, nothing is wrong with that shift... that's exactly the best situation any class could be in because of game design.

Edited February 23, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[draxynnic.3719]

14 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

Theoretically, sure. But in reality that's not going to happen reliably. Not even in OW PvE. Because even mobs move. And Illusions not being the smartest when it comes to obstacles. On the other hand, Overload Air got quite some range and both Water and Earth are good defensively regardless of range. Heck, even Fire has it's benefits although it's probably not the best time investment at range. Why take different measures here? It doesn't help to make a point. 

Oh, come on. Of course any skill whereby there's something that has to move to the target is going to be more likely to miss when used at longer range. Is ranger longbow a melee weapon now because your arrows are more likely to hit if you're standing in your target's hitbox?

I've played a fair amount of mesmer in PvE and sPvP. Sure, it's a little more reliable to shatter at point-blank range, but this has never stopped me from shattering at longer range if I didn't think it was practical to get closer. Furthermore, every mesmer elite specialisation has a trait or feature that supports making clones (or their substitutes) useful at longer ranges. Chronomancer has superspeed on clones that are commanded to shatter. Mirage has Infinite Horizon. Virtuoso has... well, the whole Virtuoso thing.

Tempest, meanwhile? If you're not within overload range, which maxes out at 360 for air, you're channeling for five seconds and doing no damage. Granted, there are times in sPvP where blowing a low-value overload for a bit of extra Swiftness to get to a combat is useful, but it's pretty obvious the intend of overloads is to get in close and deal damage with that pulsing AoE.

You're really going to die on the hill of claiming that shatters are "melee" while overloads aren't? Pull the other one, it has bells on. You're losing credibility every post you make where you don't drop this argument.

14 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

Shatters are the core mechanic for literally every Mesmer with a significant amount of traits tied to them. How are they a much smaller component? Because it is a smaller % of the DPS bench? Cool. 

Mesmers don't spend 50% of their time shattering.

14 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

I didn't do that. The OP set the rules. And from that perspective it's 66% range and 33% hybrid (not melee). By the definition of OP. Just as much as most Mesmer Sw/x set ups are hybrid (haha 🥴). Not that I think that this is a proper assessment of the situation... It's not. 

Except that if we look through the history of this thread, you made the claim that dagger was hybrid based on my statement that it's better to just look at the autoattack-capable weapons (since offhands generally just provide variations to the general playstyle set by the mainhand weapon). So if you're using my rules, you should use my rules in their entirety, and I set a larger radius. 

But even the OP set a range of 240. I think that's a little too short, since the difference between 240 and 360 is really splitting hairs, and that argument would have revenant mace be "ranged" which is clearly ridiculous. But 12/19 offensive skills with dagger/dagger only damage targets within 240 of the caster, and only one extends beyond 400. OP didn't specify what "approximately equal" was, so I think it's fair to say that ~63% within 240 can be said to classify D/D as 'melee' according to the OP's definition. Dagger alone is 7/12, and again, only one of the remainder has more than 400 range. Focus has 2 purely defensive skills, 1 with range of 240 or less, 1 with 300, and 4 with actually significant range. So dagger/focus works out to be 8/18 offensive skills with range 240 or less, 13/18 with range 400 or less. 

I said quite a while back that D/D and D/F probably should be the other way around by the OP's criteria. Mind you, I do concede that the OP's criteria results in some odd conclusions with weapons that have a melee autoattack and are obviously intended for melee, but which have a lot of close-range attacks on the remaining skills, which is why I prefer different criteria. By my criteria, dagger is just straight melee, because you're just not going to provide significant pressure with Vapor Blade, Freezing Gust, Gale, Flamewall, and Comet. 

14 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

 

Again: I can understand the want. Regardless of the reasoning. But I personally just don't feel that the situation is as dire as people paint it. And I just can't take the "statistic" seriously. Sorry. 

Because you're determined to split hairs to try to shoot it down.

This thread evolved out of an observation in another thread - the only reason the OP raised MH/OH combinations at all is because someone tried to claim that elementalist had equal numbers of ranged and offhand weapons because focus was a ranged weapon, and the OP basically went "ahah! If we count sets rather than individual weapons, that just makes it even worse because I can now double-count sword and triple-count dagger!"

What's ticking people off is that despite elementalist being advertised as being a "favours ranged" typical mage-type with a melee option, basically everything that's been introduced to it since Heart of Thorns (inclusive) has been oriented towards supporting that melee option. The phrase "tail wagging the dog" comes to mind here. Sure, there are aspects that were intended to support a melee option that can be applied to a ranged build, but the only thing that could really be said to have been added primarily to support ranged builds is the additional skills on Weaver. And they're a little disproportionate in their effect since staff and scepter weren't designed to have their skill 3s being super powerful.

The only reason why people are bringing up statistics and things is to prove the point against the people who are claiming that everything's fine.

But here's the thing. If we're going to go through all the professions and look at autoattack-capable weapons:

 

Warrior:

Melee: 6

Ranged: 2

Melee percentage: 75%

 

Guardian:

Melee: 5

Ranged: 3

Melee percentage: 62.5%

 

Revenant:

Melee: 4

Ranged: 2

Melee percentage: 66.7%

 

Ranger:

Melee: 4

Ranged: 4

Melee percentage: 50%

 

Thief:

Melee: 3

Ranged: 4

Melee percentage: 42.9%

 

Engineer:

Melee: 3

Ranged: 2

Melee percentage: 60%

 

Mesmer:

Melee: 2

Ranged: 4

Melee percentage: 33%

 

Necromancer:

Melee: 2

Ranged: 4

Melee percentage: 33%

 

Elementalist:

Melee: 3

Ranged: 2

Melee percentage: 60%

 

If you remove elementalist, there's a definite trend here. Scholars, which would generally be expected to be ranged-oriented, are: most of their weapons are ranged. Adventurers are about 50/50, with engineer having crept up from 0% to 60% because ArenaNet refuses to admit that engineer should just have a melee weapon on core already (and if you count kits, that percentage drops even if you count both flamethrower and holoforge as melee). Over 60% is the realm of heavily armoured soldier professions that you'd expect to be melee-oriented.

In this paradigm, elementalist sticks out like a sore thumb. As a percentage of its total available weapons, it has double the focus on melee as its scholar peers. It's up at the very top of the range of adventurers, and only a smidgeon below the heavily armoured guardian.

Do you really think an outside observer, new player, or anyone who came in before the expansions started dropping is going to be looking at elementalist and guardian and think that it's perfectly natural for elementalist to end up being just as melee-oriented as GW2's closest equivalent to the paladin?

And in practice it's actually worse than that. Guardian sceptre, for all some people complain about the projectile speed, is a good weapon overall. If you want to support, staff is a good option. Longbow has fallen out of favour in PvE, but has come back in in sPvP. Elementalist staff and sceptre? Well, they're better than nothing, but that's about all that can really be said for them in their current state. On top of that, a guardian can always run a ranged set alongside a melee set, while elementalist is forced to commit to a single set, with conjures (also fairly heavily nerfed) being the only means to break out of that.

People claim it doesn't matter because of the melee stack-and-stack meta in instanced group PvE, but here's my perspective: You can't rely on stack-and-smack in sPvP. You generally don't want to rely on melee stack-and-smack in WvW. In open world, I just don't take elementalist into most PoF and post-PoF maps except for story and map completion because dagger/X and sword/X builds are just so much better than staff or sceptre that it isn't funny, but as soon as you run up against a boss with mechanics that are hostile to melee, you end up feeling like deadweight for significant periods of time.

That's not a problem any other profession has. You could say "buff staff and/or scepter", but the elite specialisations have all been designed to work primarily with melee builds, and there's nothing to gain by running core ele. A ranged-oriented elite specialisation might actually end up buffing staff and scepter simply due to having traits and mechanics that are actually intended for it, rather than traits and mechanics that are "this will help you to stay alive in melee and/or stick to a target, but I guess they can also help you stay alive at ranged and/or kite a target if you insist". Furthermore, the less options you have, the more sensitive you are to the balance state of those options. Revenant basically had no ranged for a long time because hammer got nerfed to death for WvW (before ArenaNet started splitting) and shortbow had problems that were only fixed relatively recently. Elementalist is in a similar position now because both staff and sceptre have had relatively recent nerfs and ArenaNet hasn't found a way to adjust them back up without bringing back the reason they were nerfed yet. An additional weapon would allow them to design something that doesn't have the same balance risks that staff and sceptre have, and in the worst case scenario would simply offer one more weapon that would have to be bad for the elementalist's ranged capabilities as a whole to be bad. 

[Axl.8924]

On 2/21/2022 at 11:25 PM, Xaylin.1860 said:

 

How can you say something like this but at the same time state that Shatters are fine at range. The hypocracy of it all, really.

Oh, now we are talking AA/MH? Bad move. Because from that perspective core Elementalist was 66% range and 33% hybrid. Naturally, it was likely to receive more melee focussed weapons since this is what it didn't have so far. Ironically, up to Catalyst, when classifying weapons based on ranged, a two handed melee/hybrid weapon was the only thing Elementalist really lacked after PoF.

Again, I can understand the saltiness. Personally, I wasn't looking for Hammer as either. But the numbers and argument made by the OP are heavily skewed in favor of an agenda that can't be supported objectively. Plus, putting Necro and Mesmer at only about 5% for melee is just so far removed from reality that I can't take it seriously. 

But aren't all specs kinda hybrid in some way or another? You can heal and throw buffs or dps maybe not effectively and its possible to do that thanks to elements on weaver just not as well as tempest probably.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Axl.8924

[Puck.3697]

5 minutes ago, Axl.8924 said:

But aren't all specs kinda hybrid in some way or another? You can heal and throw buffs or dps maybe not effectively and its possible to do that thanks to elements on weaver just not as well as tempest probably.

pretty much and tbh if we reduce it down to actually ranged weapons with performance the numbers strike lower

as a Example: We arent making use of Mesmer greatsword in any real builds are we,

i find necromancer to be the strongest contender "Caster wise" it just has Much more caster options which are good options to it realistically, while Mesmers tend to get pinned into Sword+Sword / Focus as a Pure Melee build. although staff changes introduced a Alacmirage build (Although i will still say staff changes need reverting for mesmer, auto attack builds are horrid design)

i think players just pressumed Ele would likely get something ranged after weaver and arent veryt happy that it wasnt the outcome which is perfectly fine realistically, it seems weird to double down on Melee twice, ontop of this the fact hammer isnt a very good weapon also likely doesnt help those matters.

[draxynnic.3719]

13 minutes ago, Axl.8924 said:

But aren't all specs kinda hybrid in some way or another? You can heal and throw buffs or dps maybe not effectively and its possible to do that thanks to elements on weaver just not as well as tempest probably.

Strictly speaking, I don't think there's any elite specialisation that can't be run as hybrid. You can always add a bit of ranged from core to the most melee-oriented elite specialisation (probably reaper, all things considered) or vice versa. Most elite specialisations have a distinct slant, though, and you can see that in how they're marketed.

Every single elementalist elite specialisation has been marketed as melee. Weaver less than the others, since part of the marketing was showing off the new dual skills on staff and sceptre, but that's as far as it's gone. Which is in stark contrast to how elementalist is marketed in the base game.

[Axl.8924]

4 hours ago, Daddy.8125 said:

pretty much and tbh if we reduce it down to actually ranged weapons with performance the numbers strike lower

as a Example: We arent making use of Mesmer greatsword in any real builds are we,

i find necromancer to be the strongest contender "Caster wise" it just has Much more caster options which are good options to it realistically, while Mesmers tend to get pinned into Sword+Sword / Focus as a Pure Melee build. although staff changes introduced a Alacmirage build (Although i will still say staff changes need reverting for mesmer, auto attack builds are horrid design)

i think players just pressumed Ele would likely get something ranged after weaver and arent veryt happy that it wasnt the outcome which is perfectly fine realistically, it seems weird to double down on Melee twice, ontop of this the fact hammer isnt a very good weapon also likely doesnt help those matters.

 

I believe staff and scepter are longest range if i'm correct on ele although i hate using staff because its so rigid compared to using dagger which at least offers more mobility. I think overall Anet really does favor melee range over range range, and maybe it has something to do with pvp and complaints created if you can range someone.

[Xaylin.1860]

On 2/24/2022 at 11:06 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

Every single elementalist elite specialisation has been marketed as melee. Weaver less than the others, since part of the marketing was showing off the new dual skills on staff and sceptre, but that's as far as it's gone. Which is in stark contrast to how elementalist is marketed in the base game.

This a totally valid statement to make and I agree on that. But that's not really the whole story being discussed here, is it?

 

Again, please don't get me wrong. Personally, I'm totally fine with Elementalist getting more ranged options. I can also see why peoples expectations were disappointed with yet another not exclusively ranged spec. But that's about it. Expectations. There is no objective reasoning to why the e-specs are bad or inappropriate based on their weapons or overall range. Elementalist wasn't marketed to be more ranged than Mesmer or Necromancer (and it clearly isn't worst at range despite OPs statement). All scholars are marketed/described as more ranged than scouts and soldiers. Additionally, GW2 actually favors melee overall. So as others mentioned: Melee isn't bad - at least when it comes to performance.

 

In the end, the real question here probably is whether it can be expected for e-specs to build on specific core playstyles or offer more diversity. In my opinion, core Elementalist basically covers all ranged archetypes quite well already. Feel free to disagree. But from my point of view, the only justification for more range would probably mean being okay with more of the same unless the defining feature is not range but something else (e.g. weapon swap and 2 Attunements instead of 4 Attunements). Because otherwise you will end up with an "ANet stole from Acrobatics to create Daredevil"-scenario. However, if you feel that e-specs should create diversity and open up different playstyle, ANet actually mostly did a good job when looking at Elementalist. From this perspective, I'd argue that WH is the worst with the most overlap with existing weapons (and please let's not forget that there were many people actually asking for Sword) and the overlap between Overloads and Jade Sphere coming in second. Regardless of weapon, Tempest and Weaver play different than core. I can't really say for Catalyst at this point based on betas. But Hammer probably won't be the issue here. I'm way more bothered by Catalyst traits and ANet not being able to make Energy management for the Jade Sphere a relevant factor for gameplay than by Hammer.

 

Which brings me back to what I've already said earlier: In my opinion, a ranged e-spec would mostly bring flavor. Which is nice. But not needed from a gameplay perspective. I mean, what does Elementalist realistically lack from a ranged perspective? A Catalyst with, for example, Bow would probably play mostly like Staff or Scepter.

[Ace.1784]

On 2/25/2022 at 7:15 AM, Xaylin.1860 said:

This a totally valid statement to make and I agree on that. But that's not really the whole story being discussed here, is it?

 

Again, please don't get me wrong. Personally, I'm totally fine with Elementalist getting more ranged options. I can also see why peoples expectations were disappointed with yet another not exclusively ranged spec. But that's about it. Expectations. There is no objective reasoning to why the e-specs are bad or inappropriate based on their weapons or overall range. Elementalist wasn't marketed to be more ranged than Mesmer or Necromancer (and it clearly isn't worst at range despite OPs statement). All scholars are marketed/described as more ranged than scouts and soldiers. Additionally, GW2 actually favors melee overall. So as others mentioned: Melee isn't bad - at least when it comes to performance.

 

In the end, the real question here probably is whether it can be expected for e-specs to build on specific core playstyles or offer more diversity. In my opinion, core Elementalist basically covers all ranged archetypes quite well already. Feel free to disagree. But from my point of view, the only justification for more range would probably mean being okay with more of the same unless the defining feature is not range but something else (e.g. weapon swap and 2 Attunements instead of 4 Attunements). Because otherwise you will end up with an "ANet stole from Acrobatics to create Daredevil"-scenario. However, if you feel that e-specs should create diversity and open up different playstyle, ANet actually mostly did a good job when looking at Elementalist. From this perspective, I'd argue that WH is the worst with the most overlap with existing weapons (and please let's not forget that there were many people actually asking for Sword) and the overlap between Overloads and Jade Sphere coming in second. Regardless of weapon, Tempest and Weaver play different than core. I can't really say for Catalyst at this point based on betas. But Hammer probably won't be the issue here. I'm way more bothered by Catalyst traits and ANet not being able to make Energy management for the Jade Sphere a relevant factor for gameplay than by Hammer.

 

Which brings me back to what I've already said earlier: In my opinion, a ranged e-spec would mostly bring flavor. Which is nice. But not needed from a gameplay perspective. I mean, what does Elementalist realistically lack from a ranged perspective? A Catalyst with, for example, Bow would probably play mostly like Staff or Scepter.

I love this post because it really sums up my feelings.

Today I played raids using scepter/focus cond tempest. Was top dps, had a blast (even though it was a pug group).

Then I ran some dragon response missions (farming master of draconic ice title) using Power weaver sword/dagger, but I did often switch to staff to clear mobs. It doesn't really matter in this case, but I was also pushing out great damage while saving the squad.

Then I switched into WvW mode with Power staff weaver, and had my usual fun time playing Elementalist. My guild keeps tracks of a lot of metrics, and I was doing well in terms of damage, down contribution, and a few others.

The point of me stating this is that I played the ranged elementalist options in 3 contexts (2 if you really want to merge the PvE content) and they all performed very well at what they do. I too enjoy the range aspect of elementalist, so I complete a lot of my PvE and story content using staff or scepter/x. The elementalist range options from the base game are really good and extremely effective in the contexts they succeed at.

I don't typically play sPvP and when I do, I run the sword/focus weaver. I do talk to Ele players who utilize staff and scepter in sPvP scenarios who have a decent rank, but that's their story to tell not mine.

People on the ele forum blow things out of proportion. 

In fact, when I returned to this game from break (and I returned because no other game had a class like Elementalist), I did not know there were any issues with elementalist until I joined the forum or read the downstate memes on reddit.

[scerevisiae.1972]

yeah existing options for Ele are pretty decent like you say.

however, many of us have been playng those specs you mention since release.

fact is, there hasn't been a new ranged weapon for Ele for ***9 years***.

hammer could have been a novel take on a ranged weapon  -- 600-900 range, however Anet totally failed to deliver that, instead they made yet another melee weapon that just happens to have a few (kinda bad) ranged skills thrown in as an afterthought.

don't get me started on the stupid #3 skills which seem to only exist to pump up practise golem DPS benchmarks.

[Ace.1784]

22 hours ago, scerevisiae.1972 said:

yeah existing options for Ele are pretty decent like you say.

however, many of us have been playng those specs you mention since release.

fact is, there hasn't been a new ranged weapon for Ele for ***9 years***.

hammer could have been a novel take on a ranged weapon  -- 600-900 range, however Anet totally failed to deliver that, instead they made yet another melee weapon that just happens to have a few (kinda bad) ranged skills thrown in as an afterthought.

don't get me started on the stupid #3 skills which seem to only exist to pump up practise golem DPS benchmarks.

I too have been playing elementalist since release. In fact, I was a beta player who on launch switched to mesmer after the beta nerfs and the old version of the forums cried the elementalist was "weak".

After 2 days into launch, I switched back to Elementalist because it is more interesting of a class.

After playing hammer today, I realize hammer is similar to a melee/mid-range version of staff and shares a lot of the principles with staff before some of the nerfs and implements a bit of old school dagger/dagger.

 

EDIT: My break was around 6 months before POF to ~1 year after POF

Edited March 1, 2022 by Vinteros Asteano.1209

[otto.5684]

OP, you do not really need all the detailed analysis. Ele is a melee class with some ranges options. It is the most melee of light armored classes.

It would have made sense that the third elite would be ranged. I guess not.