Staff and Scepter not getting buffed condition damage to compensate for the loss of clones on Virtuoso is such a BIG oversight and flaw

[Obtena.7952]

14 minutes ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

It only tells us that they want cVirtuoso to be stronger, more specifically via bleeding. It doesn't tell you anything about why this is the option they picked. That's exactly where you are reaching. At best, we can assume that they are reaching for easy changes and low hanging fruit with few interactions (duh, of course that would be on Virtuoso only). But even that's just speculation.

That's true ... without Anet telling us directly, there is always an inference being made. Normally, I would have a problem with that as well, but we have 10 years of experience Anet doing this so is it reaching or just recognizing patterns in their behaviour? I mean, the nice thing is that in the last year, they have been explaining themselves in patch notes as well, so it's even less guessing as to why they do things. 

I have no doubt the 'why' of the bleed changes on Virtuoso traits is because THAT is the way Anet wants condi Virtuoso to be a stronger option for players. That's why I also think that any future changes that need to happen for Condi Virt will ALSO be based on Virtuoso-specific features. Before I simply suspected it ... now I'm pretty certain. Maybe I have to eat that hat someday ... but I'm sure it will be AFTER Anet has exhausted all their options to improve it on Virtuoso first. 

Quote

I was talking about the other blades. The "Explosion" ones, not the Clone ones.

We have attacks that are classified as blades and we have blades that are generated as a replacement for clones. You are saying more core weapons having attacks classified as blades is justified? 

I think my problem with this thread is that the problem of having access to good cVirt builds is not the same as the (non) problem of specific weapons not having similar performance between specs. 

Edited March 20, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Xaylin.1860]

14 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I have no doubt the 'why' of the bleed changes on Virtuoso traits is because THAT is the way Anet wants condi Virtuoso to be a stronger option for players.

I would be inclined to agree if the changes they made weren't the low hanging fruits. Just as I described. It might just be an economic decision and in no way based on their vision. Since you talked about long time behavior, just two example for them clearly communicating that they want to do or change something but not doing it anyway: WvW/alliances and 300s traits. You might be right that we might not see more changes for cVirtuoso. But your assumption of a direct correlation between balance notes and actual vision doesn't hold up. 

14 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

We have attacks that are classified as blades and we have blades that are generated as a replacement for clones. You are saying more core weapons having attacks classified as blades is justified? 

Well... simply based on the fact that we have blade weapons on core and at this point in time and cVirtuoso is basically stuck with Dagger as MH, yes, one might assume that there could be more blades added to trigger respective traits. Otherwise they might just go ahead and make it "Dagger skills and Psyonics cause bleeding on crit" and "Shatters cause bleeding on crit" and not waste time on stuff like that. Yes, it is not 100% the same as is right now. But the outcome is actually quite similar.

If it is not their original intention to have synergy with core, my bad. But that's a somewhat weird assumption to be honest, considering that's the whole concept of combining traitlines to begin with.

 

Regarding Scepter or Staff I agree with you. But there is logic in more synergy with GS, Sword, Focus. And there is also logic in better synergy/less overlap in effects with Duelling and Domination. And as mentioned before: there is absolutely no logic in (c)Virtuoso only being efficient with Dagger and then having a huge drop off in performance when pickinh any other weapon. 

[Obtena.7952]

10 hours ago, Xaylin.1860 said:

I would be inclined to agree if the changes they made weren't the low hanging fruits. Just as I described. It might just be an economic decision and in no way based on their vision. Since you talked about long time behavior, just two example for them clearly communicating that they want to do or change something but not doing it anyway: WvW/alliances and 300s traits. You might be right that we might not see more changes for cVirtuoso. But your assumption of a direct correlation between balance notes and actual vision doesn't hold up. 

Well, I'm sticking to my belief that if Anet is making a change to a class, those changes will be aligned to the concept of that class because of the lengths we have seen Anet go through to preserve class concepts in the past. In otherwords, no change will compromise the concept. The exceptions are when they do a complete concept rework, like they did on Herald and Scrapper for example. 

Quote

Well... simply based on the fact that we have blade weapons on core and at this point in time and cVirtuoso is basically stuck with Dagger as MH, yes, one might assume that there could be more blades added to trigger respective traits. Otherwise they might just go ahead and make it "Dagger skills and Psyonics cause bleeding on crit" and "Shatters cause bleeding on crit" and not waste time on stuff like that. Yes, it is not 100% the same as is right now. But the outcome is actually quite similar.

If it is not their original intention to have synergy with core, my bad. But that's a somewhat weird assumption to be honest, considering that's the whole concept of combining traitlines to begin with.

For me, that doesn't hold water. Weapons that have blades is not the same thing as weapons that have 'blade' designated attacks like the dagger. Anet choose to create this 'blade' designation and apply it to dagger only. I don't know why, I don't really care. They could add that blade designation to other weapons. They could do LOTS of things. I'm only going to talk about the things they did. I don't know what their intention is other than to make the optimal condi build on Virtuoso use Virtuoso-condi specific features. To me, that makes LOTS of sense.

Quote

 

Regarding Scepter or Staff I agree with you. But there is logic in more synergy with GS, Sword, Focus. And there is also logic in better synergy/less overlap in effects with Duelling and Domination. And as mentioned before: there is absolutely no logic in (c)Virtuoso only being efficient with Dagger and then having a huge drop off in performance when pickinh any other weapon. 

Well, let's take a step back here ... there is NO logic in cVirt only being efficient with Dagger? Let's not assume the target for the class design is 'logic' but more 'practical' and 'thematic'. Then there is sense in what they are doing. Again, an espec being effecient with its designated weapon is not something exceptional. An espec being poor performance with specific weapons from core ... also not something exceptional. 

There isn't a problem here; People wanting to have better performance with Staff/Scepter on cVirt that will challenge dagger as the weapon of choice on Virt would be a massive compromise to the evident intent. 

Edited March 21, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Xaylin.1860]

19 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

In otherwords, no change will compromise the concept.

Your opinion has its merits but this a statement which can't be confirmed by ANets past behavior. If you feel otherwise, we probably just disagree. Fine be me. 😉

 

19 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I'm only going to talk about the things they did.

Okay. From this point of view, their design or reason for introducing is just bad then. As I stated, blades aren't necessary to make Bleeding work on Virtuoso. There are simpler ways to achieve the goal . Before you start: Yes, it is their decision to make. Still, it is not unreasonable to point out flaws as a player.

 

19 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, let's take a step back here ... there is NO logic in cVirt only being efficient with Dagger? Let's not assume the target for the class design is 'logic' but more 'practical' and 'thematic'.

Well, let's not assume that ANet at any point in time made a statement that they wanted eSpecs to be only played with their designated weapons. There is plenty of evidence that this is not the case. Neither is it the case for overall synergy of eSpecs of core. Again, this would defeat the purpose of traitsystems. Maybe this is also a subject we disagree on. I can live with that.

19 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

People wanting to have better performance with Staff/Scepter on cVirt that will challenge dagger as the weapon of choice on Virt would be a massive compromise to the evident intent. 

I'm not people and I stated several times I don't agree with the sentiment of buffing Staff/Scepter for Virtuoso. Please have this discussion with someone else. 😉 However, I do believe that there should be other (viable and synergetic) weapon choices than Dagger for Virtuoso. Otherwise you're wasting a majority of your traits (or your weapon slots, depends). For this purpose, the weapons I mentioned make sense. It's common sense. Which, of course, doesn't mean ANet has to follow common sense even if they agreed. It is a fantasy game to begin with. And changing core weapons is additional work. It is still a reasonable expectation.

Edited March 22, 2022 by Xaylin.1860

[Alpha.1308]

On 3/12/2022 at 5:47 PM, Obliviscaris.6937 said:

I get suspended for two days for being correct, come back, and we're still nowhere.

same, girl

after putting GW2 on pause for other games coming out and updating constantly and actually listening to feedback for their games from the community that actually plays the game, then coming back here after my own suspensions for being frustrated because of, yep, getting no where

seeing the same poorly fabricated arguments over "pve damage numbers being fine = good entire espec" that i don't even want to bother replying to because it's the same garbage, irrelevant responses, every time

it's lovely to see absolutely nothing but "here's 2 seconds of bleed on the problem child that we're afraid of parsing "too much" good pve numbers on so we're balancing the entire espec around this one traits existence in pve"

 

 

Edited March 27, 2022 by Alpha.1308

[Alpha.1308]

delete double post becaused dem forum flaws

Edited March 27, 2022 by Alpha.1308

[Puck.3697]

Considering Condi was bolted onto this specc last minute the whole thing isnr thought out well. 

Condi virtuoso shouldn't of ever existed, Its completely limited the speccs flexibility. 

It shoulda just been left as a power DPS and it's traits made it more flexible. Instead of getting things that would give us a role in PvE they just threw another damage traitline at the specc and called it a day. 

1 hour ago, Alpha.1308 said:

it's lovely to see absolutely nothing but "here's 2 seconds of bleed on the problem child that we're afraid of parsing "too much" good pve numbers on so we're balancing the entire espec around this one traits existence in pve

Tbh they already broke that 😂 it's doing 41k, it's already broken the bar they spent majority of the beta ensuring no one did. 

I'm sure it will get followed up with nerfs tho, no way they will leave it that high realistically. 

Condi willbender and Condi virtuoso both stomped on the balancing realistically here. If you look for the next EoD elite on the market. They're benching 37k 😂. 

But yeah Condi virtuoso is a rushed mess the specc was not designed at core to support it and bolting it onto it has just basically reduced its options massively. I will never understand why they did it. 

[godfat.2604]

It’s hard to understand why a trait can be 5 times stronger in PvE (if we ignore cc having 0 damage and 300s traits), considering that mobs won’t cleanse that’s even 5 times more stronger. It’s really an odd design.

[SkinnyT.5382]

It seemed very obvious to me that if you were to play condi Virtuoso you would focus on blade skills which provide bleeding when traited correctly. Then you would supplement that with pistol, torch, and shatters which all can be traited to add condition.

You don't get to do everything with every Spec at all times. It's just not gonna happen. It's like complaining that you can't do as much healing on a Druid when you are using a shortbow as oppose to a staff. But to be more mesmer specific, is like complaining that you don't do as much condi when using Sword or Greatsword as a Mirage and therefore a specific boost needs to be given to them.

Frankly the majority of complaints about the Virtuoso has nothing to do with design, but more to do with some of y'all s inability to adapt. Bottom line is that if you want to do condi with a staff and scepter than you should not be playing a Virtuoso.

Edited March 27, 2022 by SkinnyT.5382

[Veprovina.4876]

14 hours ago, SkinnyT.5382 said:

Frankly the majority of complaints about the Virtuoso has nothing to do with design, but more to do with some of y'all s inability to adapt. 

Did you read 1 complaint about Virtuoso? It has nothing to do with adapting to a playstyle. Most people actually like the playstyle. Virtuoso's problems run much deeper than that.

[mungozen.2379]

50 minutes ago, Veprovina.4876 said:

Did you read 1 complaint about Virtuoso? It has nothing to do with adapting to a playstyle. Most people actually like the playstyle. Virtuoso's problems run much deeper than that.

I did laugh out loud at the post you quoted.  They aren't right but, they are also not wrong.  Some people like to complain and don't care to understand the profession.  You can actually tell how some people play the profession based upon how they talk about it, what buffs or nerfs they suggest, or other general complaints/compliments.

[Veprovina.4876]

12 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

I did laugh out loud at the post you quoted.  They aren't right but, they are also not wrong.  Some people like to complain and don't care to understand the profession.  You can actually tell how some people play the profession based upon how they talk about it, what buffs or nerfs they suggest, or other general complaints/compliments.

I get that but, as far as Virtuoso is concerned, every bit of latest feedback, and even feedback from beta has nothing to do with l2p issues. It's the same argument as when someone says "you hate it because it's cloneless"... And no, we don't. Someone maybe does, but that doesn't make it an argument. We're just pointing out issues that need to be addressed. Like for instance, i was actually hyped about a cloneless spec that can hold charges without a target cause that's the WvW dream! I was hyped about it being useful in WvW groups where clones never exist. But they botched that aspect royally. And mesmers need WvW group roles beyond the token boonstripper/veilbot. Why couldn't Virtuoso have been a ranged spike DPS spec? 

That's the issues people are having, and that has nothing to do with l2p. It has to do with Virtuoso's mechanics that are shut down by most other enemy mechanics.

 

And then, after the community has already moved on beyond "l2p, cloneless", you get a comment like this... I believe you laughed out loud, cause it's ridiculous! 😛 

Edited March 28, 2022 by Veprovina.4876

[godfat.2604]

Frankly I am also pretty tired of people complaining about other people’s complaining, and here I am complaining about people’s complaining about other people’s complaining. I think this is bad, and I hope everyone can just focus on the subject, rather than other people. Ironically I am doing the same in this post, so I won’t do this again. Just hope this can slightly improve the status of this sub forum.

[Obtena.7952]

18 hours ago, SkinnyT.5382 said:

Frankly the majority of complaints about the Virtuoso has nothing to do with design, but more to do with some of y'all s inability to adapt. Bottom line is that if you want to do condi with a staff and scepter than you should not be playing a Virtuoso.

Your post was good up to here. I think the complaints are related to the design. The question here is if the complaints are valid. In many cases, because the originator does not consider why something exists the way it is. They just assumes it's a mistake that needs to be fixed, then that would lead to an invalid complaint.

This thread is one of those cases: OP and others didn't consider reasons why it wasn't changed, why it's not a problem Staff/Scepter aren't 'compensated'. They just assumed Anet overlooked it. Is that complaint valid? It's hard to think it's a mistake considering Anet already acknowledged some existing clone-related features would not function with Virt. Why would Staff/Scepter not have ALREADY been part of that consideration by Anet in the first place? Seems to me it would have.

Edited March 28, 2022 by Obtena.7952