Hey, Anet, its time we sat down and talked about "tradeoffs"

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

Hey, Anet, relax CMC I'm not going to @ you this time (somebody @ him... I got in trouble for doing it too much). Listen, the tradeoff system you started to implement ended up extremely lopsided. You started out strong with Berserker, and then you realized you went to far and stopped giving proper tradeoffs, until Bladesworn that is...

Look, it's pretty apparent which specs are overperforming in any given game mode, and its those that didn't really get "tradeoffs" or in some cases got straight upgrades with a cast time or CD increase. I'm not going to point fingers specifically (okay I do in one case), but I want to dive into the three warrior especs and their tradeoffs.

Berserker:  Initially I overlooked the tradeoff because of that sweet, sweet damage, but you nerfed that, and then kept nerfing. I'll admit that having an F1 and Berserk Mode with different F1s is definitely +warrior, but nothing out of Berserk Mode when we cannot manually exit it? That is an extremely harsh tradeoff. On top of that you levy a 300 toughness penalty when in Berserk Mode. That just does not work on this class. You want to know why? Warrior as one of the fewest amounts of active defenses in the game. We don't have high protection uptime, mass evades that also do extra things, mass invulns, mass blocks, mass blinds, etc. We have to take the damage and heal it back up. So, that -300 toughness? It is also an extremely harsh tradeoff for warrior. It's no wonder that the e-spec is more or less dead in competitive play.

Spellbreaker: This one is actually a good tradeoff. We lose T2 and T3 bursts for a F2. This is an example of a true tradeoff that does not unduly hamper the spec, and this is why Spellbreaker is the spec you see played in competitive most often. Does the traitline need work? True. Do you need to also return damage to CCs for the spec to be on par with other profession's epecs? Also true. But the tradeoff is appropriate.

Bladesworn: *sigh* 

1.  You changed how adrenaline worked and what gave 'Flow' versus what gave 'Positive Flow.' This in and of itself could have been the tradeoff.
2.  You increased the cap from 30 to 100. This also could have been enough of a tradeoff.
3.  You took away all the F1s. Also more than enough of a tradeoff...
4. Then you make us double charge resources to even use our burst mechanic... ALSO more than enough of a tradeoff...
5.  You then took away weapon swap... You took away 5 skills, because you gave 10 more (net gain of 5). What was the Firebrand's tradeoff again? It did receive 15 new skills in place of 3, 5 of which recharge instantly upon killing something when traited... On top of +450 extra stats when it had the specific boon that it can fart out like a warrior vomits might. Not really a fair implementation of tradeoffs don't you think?

Listen, the only thing propping up Bladesworn anywhere is Tactical Reload and Unyielding Dragon. We all know that as soon as you nerf those in any game mode then BSW dies in  that game mode. There are just too many tradeoffs to it. Seriously, please just scratch off two of them at least.

So, what can we do about this?

Let me make a suggestion, and please do listen to it. This is a great one. Do what you did for Rev. Add a F2 to core warrior, then take that F2 away with the especs and undo some of the harsh tradeoffs you placed on Berserker and Bladesworn.

Here, let me make it easy for you. Add an F2 which is the burst of the OH weapons, or a secondary burst for 2H weapons. These should fill in the gaps that these weapons have and bolster them for core.

Lets begin, here are some suggestions for each of the core weapons. All splits are based on Adrenaline spent. I will not split the damages between Competitive and PvE as these are more about their function than their damage, and any damage suggestion is considered a minimum for Competitive play.

Greatsword F2: "Leviathan's Sweep" swipe around you pulling foes inward. (150/300/450 range pull, 5 targets). Obviously a hard CC so in Competitive it will do little damage, but in PvE it should be on par with the third strike of the AA chain in power. 1/2s cast.

Hammer F2: "Uprising" swing you hammer upwards striking all foes around you. Base damage is roughly 1.2 times that of a base Fierce Blow, but increases by 10% based on adrenaline level. 3/4s cast.

Rifle: "Lung Shot" Pierce your target's lungs. Pierces up to 5 targets PvE damage is the T1 Kill Shot value. Stun Duration is base 1s and increases by 1s per adrenaline level. 3/4s cast. 1500 range.

Longbow: "Rain of Fire" barrage the target area with fire arrows. 5/6/7 pulses of damage, each of which is on par with 1 strike from Barrage, and inflicts 1 stack of burning for 5s per strike. 3/4s channel, 5 targets 1200 range, 600 range AoE.

Harpoon: "Poisoned Tips" fire a flurry of shots at your target inflicting poison on each strike. 5/6/7 strikes with 1 stack of poison each. Each strike is about the same as one hit from Volley. 1s channel time. 1200 range.

Spear: "Tidal Pierce" pierce your foe and leave them vulnerable. Single target, deals increasing damage based on adrenaline level. Base damage is the same as the third strike of the spear AA chain and increases by 10% each tier. Inflicts 10 vulnerability for 5s. 1/2s cast.

Sword: "Galrath Slash" strike your foe and knock them down (2s). Foes that are crippled or immobilized take 9/10/11 stacks of torment for 10s. Base damage in PvE is the same as Savage Leap, naturally it is CC levels in Competitive. 1/2s cast. Cleaves.

Axe: "Axe Twist" cruelly slash your foe weakening and slowing them. Low damage on par with the first hit of the AA chain, but inflicts 3/4/5s of weakness and slow on the target. 1/2s cast. Single target.

Mace: "Auspicious Blow" deal heavy damage to your target, deal even more if they are vulnerable. Deal Crushing Blow's level of damage on the target, double if they are suffering from Vulnerability.  grants 500 barrier based on adrenaline level spent. 1/2s cast. Single target.

Warhorn: "Call to War" grant allies in the area alacrity, quickness, protection, resolution, and regeneration for 3/4/5 seconds based on adrenaline spent. 3/4s cast. 600 range and 5 targets.

Shield: "Blinding Smash" Slam your target. Deals damage on par with Hammer's first AA chain strike, +10% damage based on adrenaline level. Blind the target for 2s.

 

Do all that, and then you get to take it all away from the epecs as a tradeoff! Then the tradeoffs become:

Berserker: Lose access to OH bursts. Gain Berserk Mode. This is the old Berserker. Also do away with the -300 toughness unless you plan on adding aegis or evade frames to each rage skill...

Spellbreaker: As is. Like I said, its the perfect tradeoff. F2 for and F2.

Bladesworn: Gain Dragon Trigger on F2. Gain Gunsaber on F1. Treat all Gunsaber skills (excluding the AA chain) as bursts for trait purposes. Give back weapon swap. Remove the DT bullet charges and let us use Dragon Slash based on our current flow amounts. DT can then grant positive flow when in the stance (As an aside, rework Tactical Reload to only work on weapon skills)
 

There. I fixed the warrior tradeoff problem for you while also introducing a deeper level of gameplay for core warrior that also enforces certain trait synergies (because I know you love those).

[eXruina.4956]

yeah.. that entire "trade off" thing was a blatant lie, one of their many blatant lies over the years. if they truly implemented it, we'd have a more balanced landscape, but they didn't implement it, they were bias with the design and numbers.

[draxynnic.3719]

Not sure I agree with the full preamble, but it is an interesting idea. Warrior is certainly suffering enough in all game modes that a rework that serves as a net buff would be warranted.

One thing that does concern me, though, is that core warrior in particular feels like a 'spend so much time building up to do something cool that you might not get to do the cool thing' mechanic. So I worry that having another option to compete for your adrenaline feels like it might not help all that much since you still only have one pool of adrenaline and you still expend all of it in one burst. Spellbreaker is a big exception here because it IS able to start using bursts early in the fight and keep using them.

So maybe the answer is to be more like spellbreaker? Core warrior and berserker both get spellbreaker F1s that consume one level of adrenaline for a level 1 burst. Berserkers get berserk mode as their F2, and they probably still want to berserk, but if for some reason they want to hold off on berserk, they can still have an option to use some adrenaline. Core warriors, on the other hand, get their current burst on F2 to commit two or three bars of adrenaline for a single burst. So core warriors would have the choice to use a level 1 burst and conserve remaining adrenaline, or to commit as much as they can to one big burst.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

3 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Not sure I agree with the full preamble, but it is an interesting idea. Warrior is certainly suffering enough in all game modes that a rework that serves as a net buff would be warranted.

One thing that does concern me, though, is that core warrior in particular feels like a 'spend so much time building up to do something cool that you might not get to do the cool thing' mechanic. So I worry that having another option to compete for your adrenaline feels like it might not help all that much since you still only have one pool of adrenaline and you still expend all of it in one burst. Spellbreaker is a big exception here because it IS able to start using bursts early in the fight and keep using them.

So maybe the answer is to be more like spellbreaker? Core warrior and berserker both get spellbreaker F1s that consume one level of adrenaline for a level 1 burst. Berserkers get berserk mode as their F2, and they probably still want to berserk, but if for some reason they want to hold off on berserk, they can still have an option to use some adrenaline. Core warriors, on the other hand, get their current burst on F2 to commit two or three bars of adrenaline for a single burst. So core warriors would have the choice to use a level 1 burst and conserve remaining adrenaline, or to commit as much as they can to one big burst.

You're right about the adrenaline issue, but if you parse through the F2's I suggested on the weapons they are on you'll see that they are either multi hit attacks or hard CCs that cleave/are AoE. This means that two already existing traits could be leveraged with them to very easily use F1 and F2s back to back and be used to set each other up. The only one I did not really do that for is Axe, because it is a high hit rate weapon and Axe Mastery is very good at over capping adrenaline.

I actually had these trait synergies in mind while putting them together.

For instance take "Rain of Fire." Its a pulsing AoE. If you are running Longbow, you are probably running Furious, so you're getting up to 5 strikes of extra adrenaline per pulse. Even a T1 will give enough Adrenaline to also fire of Combustive Shot. Pin Down to lock at least one target in place, or swap to Hammer (see combo below) for even more action.

Now Rifle. That "Lung Shot" that is a piercing stun? Guess what Merciless Hammer will do. Give you 10 adrenaline per stunned target, who are now stunned for at least 1s and you now have a fully charged Kill Shot ready to go.

Hammer is the same thing but in reverse. Earthshaker sets up Uprising in the same way.

Greatsword, with Leviathan's Sweep? Yep its a hard CC and thus can be traited to give 10 adrenaline per target. Even then with Burst Mastery you'd have 1 tier of adrenaline left from a T3 Leviathan's Sweep and Arcing Slice is just as good at T1 as it is at T3.

 

[Telgum.6071]

I would tag CMC but I have several permanent strikes on this forum so I shall not... yet.

Always a pleasure to read you and your analysis Lan. You are the only active warrior forum user that doesn't make me cringe.

[Fueki.4753]

At this point, playing Warrior is a trade-off already. Junksworn's junk is no more than fetid topping on an expired cake.

The easiest that Arenanet could do is Give Warrior a 30% damage buff and leave everything else. If Warrior has nothing to bring to groups, at least Arenanet could let them have nice DPS.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[cryorion.9532]

Trade-offs in this game are a bad joke. Professions like ranger or guardian can freely run around without any special modes, without any special bars, without having to wait for something to fill or whatever. Then there are other specializations that automatically have their bars filled out of combat and ready when they get into combat right away. And then there is warrior, getting trade offs from left and right just to please brainless individuals that buffing warrior is not going to powercreep the game... classic double standard 🤡net.

Also, imagine thinking that tagging a dev here will make them read it and actually do something about it. You tagged CMC quite often in the past few months (maybe even years...), not sure if that helped as we didn't get any major fixes/changes. Unless you spam tagged him with request to nerf WoD in WvW 😐

Edited May 20, 2022 by cryorion.9532

[Fueki.4753]

10 minutes ago, cryorion.9532 said:

Also, imagine thinking that tagging a dev here will make them read it and actually do something about it. You tagged CMC quite often in the past few months (maybe even years...), not sure if that helped as we didn't get any major fixes/changes.

At least some of the developers are reading the Warrior forums.

I very much doubt that the improvements to Willbender just happened to align with proposed ideas from the Warrior Omnibus thread.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[ugrakarma.9416]

yeah this history of "tradeoff", make me feels fear about banner changes.

[iKeostuKen.2738]

Trade offs in general is a good idea. The problem though is that anet only gave it to a few classes. Not every class and not even equally. 

I was happy to see them moving to the sort of balance but its half done and if that's going to be the case it's better to just reverse it. Sucks to do a full power burst build only to have supports laugh in your face and return doing just as much damage with a bunch of conditions added ontop.

[eXruina.4956]

To be honest, I was sold to everything they pitched at the time, and of course none if it was going to happen overnight, I was willing to wait, now 2+ years down the line as I watched things unfold, well, I have only disappointment.

 

Like some here who've seen how they handle balance and changes over the past 7-9 years for warrior, in my opinion, looking at warrior today, they not only did they not improve it, they set it back, maybe I'll go as far as to say they broke it.

 

They're just.. disappointing.

 

Forgive me if I've been negative in my comments in this post and some others in the forums, "but if the shoe fits."

 

Some of us, we really do care about the state of warrior. We didn't switch to rev like Rytlock did.

 

Yet we have people coming in here making extravagant claims, with no definitive proof or real statistics, that "warrior is fine" and that we members of the sub forums are deluded. stupid, unskilled and cannot comprehend. That the "majority of gw2 players", the "streamers", the "top pvp-ers" say so. and that warrior is designed only for the most skilled of warrior players.

 

I'd like to ask, these majority "gw2 players, streamers, top pvp-ers." that say "warrior is fine", how many of them actually play warrior almost exclusively. Like some of the members of this forum. and aren't we all curious here who these overachieved warriors are?

Edited May 20, 2022 by eXruina.4956

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

2 hours ago, Telgum.6071 said:

I would tag CMC but I have several permanent strikes on this forum so I shall not... yet.

Always a pleasure to read you and your analysis Lan. You are the only active warrior forum user that doesn't make me cringe.

Awe, thanks mate. I try to be helpful, both with other players and in providing commentary back to Anet. There are users on the forums that make me cringe as well, but even the ones you see me argue with have good points that they raise from time to time.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

1 hour ago, Fueki.4753 said:

At this point, playing Warrior is a trade-off already. Junksworn's junk is no more than fetid topping on an expired cake.

The easiest that Arenanet could do is Give Warrior a 30% damage buff and leave everything else. If Warrior has nothing to bring to groups, at least Arenanet could let them have nice DPS.

All true, but lets be more constructive for this thread please.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

1 hour ago, cryorion.9532 said:

Trade-offs in this game are a bad joke. Professions like ranger or guardian can freely run around without any special modes, without any special bars, without having to wait for something to fill or whatever. Then there are other specializations that automatically have their bars filled out of combat and ready when they get into combat right away. And then there is warrior, getting trade offs from left and right just to please brainless individuals that buffing warrior is not going to powercreep the game... classic double standard 🤡net.

Also, imagine thinking that tagging a dev here will make them read it and actually do something about it. You tagged CMC quite often in the past few months (maybe even years...), not sure if that helped as we didn't get any major fixes/changes. Unless you spam tagged him with request to nerf WoD in WvW 😐

I actually got a warning from the mods to stop @'ing the devs during that weekly mini change request series that I was doing. So, yes I got that dev's attention, but not in a good way.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

9 minutes ago, eXruina.4956 said:

To be honest, I was sold to everything they pitched at the time, and of course none if it was going to happen overnight, I was willing to wait, now 2+ years down the line as I watched things unfold, well, I have only disappointment.

I was too. Its easy to swallow the nerf tradeoff if you are promised that more are imminent on the other professions. But then it never happened, or lame excuses were offered up. The only other tradeoff that is even remotely on par with what they've levied on warrior is the mechanist.

9 minutes ago, eXruina.4956 said:

Like some here who've seen how they handle balance and changes over the past 7-9 years for warrior, in my opinion, looking at warrior today, they not only did they not improve it, they set it back, maybe I'll go as far as to say they broke it.

I think a particular dev is upset about losing to warriors in the past, but that is just my opinion.

9 minutes ago, eXruina.4956 said:

They're just.. disappointing.

 

Forgive me if I've been negative in my comments in this post and some others in the forums, "but if the shoe fits."

I'll overlook it once.

9 minutes ago, eXruina.4956 said:

Some of us, we really do care about the state of warrior. We didn't switch to rev like Rytlock did.

 

Yet we have people coming in here making extravagant claims, with no definitive proof or real statistics, that "warrior is fine" and that we members of the sub forums are deluded. stupid, unskilled and cannot comprehend. That the "majority of gw2 players", the "streamers", the "top pvp-ers" say so. and that warrior is designed only for the most skilled of warrior players.

The problem is that warrior is "fine" but everything else left it behind, so "fine" is no longer fine at all.

 

[eXruina.4956]

12 hours ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

I think a particular dev is upset about losing to warriors in the past, but that is just my opinion.

 

I seriously told *bleep to stop pickin' on em devs, but the man's an animal. 🤣

[artharon.9276]

On 5/20/2022 at 3:09 AM, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

Hey, Anet, relax CMC I'm not going to @ you this time (somebody @ him... I got in trouble for doing it too much). Listen, the tradeoff system you started to implement ended up extremely lopsided. You started out strong with Berserker, and then you realized you went to far and stopped giving proper tradeoffs, until Bladesworn that is...

Look, it's pretty apparent which specs are overperforming in any given game mode, and its those that didn't really get "tradeoffs" or in some cases got straight upgrades with a cast time or CD increase. I'm not going to point fingers specifically (okay I do in one case), but I want to dive into the three warrior especs and their tradeoffs.

Berserker:  Initially I overlooked the tradeoff because of that sweet, sweet damage, but you nerfed that, and then kept nerfing. I'll admit that having an F1 and Berserk Mode with different F1s is definitely +warrior, but nothing out of Berserk Mode when we cannot manually exit it? That is an extremely harsh tradeoff. On top of that you levy a 300 toughness penalty when in Berserk Mode. That just does not work on this class. You want to know why? Warrior as one of the fewest amounts of active defenses in the game. We don't have high protection uptime, mass evades that also do extra things, mass invulns, mass blocks, mass blinds, etc. We have to take the damage and heal it back up. So, that -300 toughness? It is also an extremely harsh tradeoff for warrior. It's no wonder that the e-spec is more or less dead in competitive play.

Spellbreaker: This one is actually a good tradeoff. We lose T2 and T3 bursts for a F2. This is an example of a true tradeoff that does not unduly hamper the spec, and this is why Spellbreaker is the spec you see played in competitive most often. Does the traitline need work? True. Do you need to also return damage to CCs for the spec to be on par with other profession's epecs? Also true. But the tradeoff is appropriate.

Bladesworn: *sigh* 

1.  You changed how adrenaline worked and what gave 'Flow' versus what gave 'Positive Flow.' This in and of itself could have been the tradeoff.
2.  You increased the cap from 30 to 100. This also could have been enough of a tradeoff.
3.  You took away all the F1s. Also more than enough of a tradeoff...
4. Then you make us double charge resources to even use our burst mechanic... ALSO more than enough of a tradeoff...
5.  You then took away weapon swap... You took away 5 skills, because you gave 10 more (net gain of 5). What was the Firebrand's tradeoff again? It did receive 15 new skills in place of 3, 5 of which recharge instantly upon killing something when traited... On top of +450 extra stats when it had the specific boon that it can fart out like a warrior vomits might. Not really a fair implementation of tradeoffs don't you think?

Listen, the only thing propping up Bladesworn anywhere is Tactical Reload and Unyielding Dragon. We all know that as soon as you nerf those in any game mode then BSW dies in  that game mode. There are just too many tradeoffs to it. Seriously, please just scratch off two of them at least.

So, what can we do about this?

Let me make a suggestion, and please do listen to it. This is a great one. Do what you did for Rev. Add a F2 to core warrior, then take that F2 away with the especs and undo some of the harsh tradeoffs you placed on Berserker and Bladesworn.

Here, let me make it easy for you. Add an F2 which is the burst of the OH weapons, or a secondary burst for 2H weapons. These should fill in the gaps that these weapons have and bolster them for core.

Lets begin, here are some suggestions for each of the core weapons. All splits are based on Adrenaline spent. I will not split the damages between Competitive and PvE as these are more about their function than their damage, and any damage suggestion is considered a minimum for Competitive play.

Greatsword F2: "Leviathan's Sweep" swipe around you pulling foes inward. (150/300/450 range pull, 5 targets). Obviously a hard CC so in Competitive it will do little damage, but in PvE it should be on par with the third strike of the AA chain in power. 1/2s cast.

Hammer F2: "Uprising" swing you hammer upwards striking all foes around you. Base damage is roughly 1.2 times that of a base Fierce Blow, but increases by 10% based on adrenaline level. 3/4s cast.

Rifle: "Lung Shot" Pierce your target's lungs. Pierces up to 5 targets PvE damage is the T1 Kill Shot value. Stun Duration is base 1s and increases by 1s per adrenaline level. 3/4s cast. 1500 range.

Longbow: "Rain of Fire" barrage the target area with fire arrows. 5/6/7 pulses of damage, each of which is on par with 1 strike from Barrage, and inflicts 1 stack of burning for 5s per strike. 3/4s channel, 5 targets 1200 range, 600 range AoE.

Harpoon: "Poisoned Tips" fire a flurry of shots at your target inflicting poison on each strike. 5/6/7 strikes with 1 stack of poison each. Each strike is about the same as one hit from Volley. 1s channel time. 1200 range.

Spear: "Tidal Pierce" pierce your foe and leave them vulnerable. Single target, deals increasing damage based on adrenaline level. Base damage is the same as the third strike of the spear AA chain and increases by 10% each tier. Inflicts 10 vulnerability for 5s. 1/2s cast.

Sword: "Galrath Slash" strike your foe and knock them down (2s). Foes that are crippled or immobilized take 9/10/11 stacks of torment for 10s. Base damage in PvE is the same as Savage Leap, naturally it is CC levels in Competitive. 1/2s cast. Cleaves.

Axe: "Axe Twist" cruelly slash your foe weakening and slowing them. Low damage on par with the first hit of the AA chain, but inflicts 3/4/5s of weakness and slow on the target. 1/2s cast. Single target.

Mace: "Auspicious Blow" deal heavy damage to your target, deal even more if they are vulnerable. Deal Crushing Blow's level of damage on the target, double if they are suffering from Vulnerability.  grants 500 barrier based on adrenaline level spent. 1/2s cast. Single target.

Warhorn: "Call to War" grant allies in the area alacrity, quickness, protection, resolution, and regeneration for 3/4/5 seconds based on adrenaline spent. 3/4s cast. 600 range and 5 targets.

Shield: "Blinding Smash" Slam your target. Deals damage on par with Hammer's first AA chain strike, +10% damage based on adrenaline level. Blind the target for 2s.

 

Do all that, and then you get to take it all away from the epecs as a tradeoff! Then the tradeoffs become:

Berserker: Lose access to OH bursts. Gain Berserk Mode. This is the old Berserker. Also do away with the -300 toughness unless you plan on adding aegis or evade frames to each rage skill...

Spellbreaker: As is. Like I said, its the perfect tradeoff. F2 for and F2.

Bladesworn: Gain Dragon Trigger on F2. Gain Gunsaber on F1. Treat all Gunsaber skills (excluding the AA chain) as bursts for trait purposes. Give back weapon swap. Remove the DT bullet charges and let us use Dragon Slash based on our current flow amounts. DT can then grant positive flow when in the stance (As an aside, rework Tactical Reload to only work on weapon skills)
 

There. I fixed the warrior tradeoff problem for you while also introducing a deeper level of gameplay for core warrior that also enforces certain trait synergies (because I know you love those).

 

 

Making warrior bursts "ambidextrous" idea is spot on, in fact I thought it was missing while I was leveling first my warrior during the gw2 release. So yeah, it make sense. Especially GS F2. In a similar situation, there are occasions I prefer core revenant still when I'd like to increase uptime of the protective solace thanks to the skill "ancient echo" anet gave to core revs years after the hot release. Warrior needs a touch like that and I don't care how many animations they reuse to make it happen. 

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

2 hours ago, artharon.9276 said:

 

 

Making warrior bursts "ambidextrous" idea is spot on, in fact I thought it was missing while I was leveling first my warrior during the gw2 release. So yeah, it make sense. Especially GS F2. In a similar situation, there are occasions I prefer core revenant still when I'd like to increase uptime of the protective solace thanks to the skill "ancient echo" anet gave to core revs years after the hot release. Warrior needs a touch like that and I don't care how many animations they reuse to make it happen. 

I agree, but they'd still have to repurpose some rather than reuse otherwise people wouldn't know what to dodge.

[artharon.9276]

31 minutes ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

I agree, but they'd still have to repurpose some rather than reuse otherwise people wouldn't know what to dodge.

 

 I mean using other classes' visuals not ours, like your GS F2 to be copied from vindi's GS5 which is also a reused animation itself though I can't remember which class had that spin effect first, maybe guards?

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

6 minutes ago, artharon.9276 said:

 

 I mean using other classes' visuals not ours, like your GS F2 to be copied from vindi's GS5 which is also a reused animation itself though I can't remember which class had that spin effect first, maybe guards?

Technically it would be guard as the GS F1 was completely redone after release. At least some vacuum like effect on the pull though would be cool.

[Peacekid.1463]

gudluck if they listen

[RiyazGuerra.9203]

Second burst is a great idea and at a minimum, be implemented in GW3.  

 

Even with the good idea of recycling animations, the chances of this getting implemented are slim. 

 

We might be better off asking for such a mechanic for the next expansion.  Recommending trait or skill changes might be the best we can get in the interim. 

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

37 minutes ago, RiyazGuerra.9203 said:

Second burst is a great idea and at a minimum, be implemented in GW3.  

 

Even with the good idea of recycling animations, the chances of this getting implemented are slim. 

I know, sadly. But it should be said, and hey, it may come to pass.

37 minutes ago, RiyazGuerra.9203 said:

We might be better off asking for such a mechanic for the next expansion.  Recommending trait or skill changes might be the best we can get in the interim. 

It's the mechanic I put into my espec ideas for the most part already.

[RiyazGuerra.9203]

With respect to tradeoffs, I imagine Anet balances around the perception that warrior health pool and heavy armor are assets which must be factored into limiting whatever tools the class is given.  Throw in the simplicity of warrior's tools and its ability to punish bad players in competitive and it lends itself to look better than it actually is.  

 

If this is the case I would advise Anet to deemphasize theoretical assumptions like the above and focus on the performance benchmarks as promoted by the community in the respective gamemode.  When it comes to competitive, class participation and win rate need to be the standard.  It's not a perfect solution but I can't see another way.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

13 hours ago, RiyazGuerra.9203 said:

With respect to tradeoffs, I imagine Anet balances around the perception that warrior health pool and heavy armor are assets which must be factored into limiting whatever tools the class is given.  Throw in the simplicity of warrior's tools and its ability to punish bad players in competitive and it lends itself to look better than it actually is.  

 

If this is the case I would advise Anet to deemphasize theoretical assumptions like the above and focus on the performance benchmarks as promoted by the community in the respective gamemode.  When it comes to competitive, class participation and win rate need to be the standard.  It's not a perfect solution but I can't see another way.

I believe it has been calculated what the extra damage reduction from the higher base armor is, and it really is not that much extra defense. A toughness gear set matters more than the armor class.

 

Vitality matters for sure, but the other high hp class gets 50% damage reduction on a secondary HP bar 50% of the time for something out of the box more durable.

 

Besides, they nuked Berserker armor to light armor level without giving the same amount of extra active defenses those classes have. 

 

They should be looking to current playtime statistics to see where work needs to be done.