Anet u want Bladesworn to be played?

[Obtena.7952]

55 minutes ago, nderim.7463 said:

dont get me wrong, I've never said it's weak because it isn't, like u mentioned the cleave potential is huge(Dragon Trigger Slash mostly) + using the Action Cam, but once again, who enjoys this playstyle in all seriousness? It was fun, I played it a lot, but the MAJORITY doesnt and thats what ANET should really focus on. 

So HOLD ON ... the MAJORITY? based on what? A data that represents a SLIVER of PVE content in the game?

Exaggeration and speaking in absolutes is not the compelling argument for change you think it is. Just don't. 

The part that is important is bolded. SOME people are going to find this spec fun (despite the sky is falling and we are all doomed rhetoric most people use) and YES it has value as a different want to play warrior as well (which is always a primary goal of an espec). Don't fall into the trap that there is some MASSIVE problem here because BsW isn't used by "the majority" for team content. 

I'm not against changes here but it has to be for the RIGHT and SENSIBLE reasons. For example ... we don't want to be bannerslaves .. OK, then we get THREE different skills we NEED to use to get team quickness. That's some HOT GARBAGE actually ... but it's a solution to what people said was the problem when it wasn't. 

TLDR: be honest about what you are saying and asking for. Anet IS listening. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

4 hours ago, Kayberz.5346 said:

The OPPOSITE is true

Bladesworn is actually MORE engaging to play in high end content because you cant just mindlessly press buttons and dodge mid rotation like you can on most builds.

You actually have to THINK and plan out how you are going to position yourself so that you can optimize pulling off as many dragon slashes as possible while still doing mechanics and not feeding.

Between the stability/aegis and flickerstep you have access to along with situationaly using dragon trigger 2 or 3 instead of 1 there is  LOT you can do to deal with mechanics while optimizing your dps at the same time, but its not as braindead as something like berserker where you literally just spam a rotation with little care whether you're moving or staying still.

Bladesworns limitations make it MORE engaging to play in high end pve content than any other warrior build thats ever existed,  and if you honestly dont think that is the case, maybe its just too hard for you and what you view as "broken" design is actually just you not being able to adapt to a different playstyle built on true risk/reward gameplay.

 

If you're having fun in pve that's great and all, but I don't want to have to take bladesworn, struggle against mechanics tailored for raiding, compensate for those mechanics with shout healing, and play an overall more boring rotation just to compete (in pvp/wvw), or have its presence be used as a substitute for balancing the other 75% of the class/ used as a cudgel to silence people who have been asking for QoL for Warrior for years. 

 

I'm no stranger to "limitations make the class fun" but yknow.. maybe let's not bite that bullet too hard this time.  

17 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That's some HOT GARBAGE actually ... but it's a solution

No. Reject thinking game devs can't be wrong. If a friend/chef/etc asks you "what would you like to eat" and you say "Idk but I sure don't want the bannerslave combo again", there are a bunch of underlying implications about them delivering hot garbage that make it several things, but none of them are solutions. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Azure The Heartless.3261

[Obtena.7952]

29 minutes ago, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

No. Reject thinking game devs can't be wrong. If a friend/chef/etc asks you "what would you like to eat" and you say "Idk but I sure don't want the bannerslave combo again", there are a bunch of underlying implications about them delivering hot garbage that make it several things, but none of them are solutions. 

Hold on ... I didn't say they weren't wrong. I said that spreading quickness team over more than just banners IS a solution to players complaining about being bannerslaves, even if it's a bad one. I mean, just because it's implemented badly doesn't mean it's not a solution to that problem. I can imagine a situation where having three skills all giving team quickness is a WONDERFUL solution. In this case it's not because the design isn't flawed, the implementation is. 

But sure, miss my point, which is important, just to argue wordsmithing with me. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[DKRathalos.9625]

@nderim.7463You are quite bold to assume anet wants warrior to be played 😆

 

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

14 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Hold on ... I didn't say they weren't wrong. I said that spreading quickness team over more than just banners IS a solution to players complaining about being bannerslaves, even if it's a bad one. I mean, just because it's implemented badly doesn't mean it's not a solution to that problem. I can imagine a situation where having three skills all giving team quickness is a WONDERFUL solution. In this case it's not because the design isn't flawed, the implementation is. 

But sure, miss my point, which is important, just to argue wordsmithing with me. 

 

I'm not missing your point at all. A bad implementation that makes a problem worse is not a solution. You are correct in that there are instances in which quickness application can be a viable alternative to bannerslaving, but you yourself admit that you need to "imagine a situation" for that, and it is that dissonance I am pointing to particularly. 

[Obtena.7952]

Just now, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

 

I'm not missing your point at all. A bad implementation that makes a problem worse is not a solution. You are correct in that there are instances in which quickness application can be a viable alternative to bannerslaving, but you yourself admit that you need to "imagine a situation" for that, and it is that dissonance I am pointing to particularly. 

Sure it is ... it's just a bad one. I don't have a problem saying that because that solution with a different implementation could be amazing. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[anbujackson.9564]

51 minutes ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

The golem benchmark does that because its obviously trying to squeeze out as much DPS as possible. You similarly obviously don't do this on any actual fight that will pressure your positioning, all it's costing you is 1 stack of FAF and even then not entirely because you do end up using it (and getting the stack) eventually.

 

Which is why I resent the new rotation this patch is pushing with Tactics traitline and Dragonspike Mine - it's constantly displacing you and you have to recover the distance somehow which is incredibly janky and annoying. 

Yeah.. next to a lot of rooting you also have forced movement on your pistol and dragonspike mine. So much movement restriction is just not for me. I like to be mobile. 

I dont know if anyone of you guys played Nioh but there was an early boss "the red oni" who had a similar move to DT1 except that he could hold his attack and dash to his oppenent before attacking and instantly killing you in the process (if you are low on vigor). Now that would be op. Essentially boost but just better.

Just make it either impossible to cancel DT with movement or give it 66% less speed. My point still stands and the effect would be the same. 

 

Anyway besides that I wonder how they are going to adress potential quickness stacking since the meta build runs tactics anyway and you can take any grandmaster you want. They cant keep it like that because it would be a slap in the face to eles even if bladesworns isnt nearly as op as catalyst was. 

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

1 minute ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Sure it is ... it's just a bad one. 

See now we get down to the core of it. We fundamentally disagree on balance approach, that's all~ 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Azure The Heartless.3261

[Obtena.7952]

22 minutes ago, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

 

See now we get down to the core of it. We fundamentally disagree on balance approach. 

That's fair. I mean, I don't know what your balance approach is based on ... I'm trying to base mine on what is real and how Anet does things. I think that's very important to do that way if you want your voice to have merit with Anet. But that's a digression. 

I'm sure Anet wants BsW to be played. The question is where and how it's played and if that's enough. I don't think that by default, anyone should assume BsW was designed to be adopted by warriors in any situation and still be high performance in any of them; that's just not how especs have ever worked. We clearly know it's not optimal in situations where targets move. It's weird from a practical view that's the design implementation because ... lots of targets move, but it's not so weird if you consider Anet's attempt to preserve the theme or make the spec that way for whatever reason. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[nderim.7463]

6 hours ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

The golem benchmark does that because its obviously trying to squeeze out as much DPS as possible. You similarly obviously don't do this on any actual fight that will pressure your positioning, all it's costing you is 1 stack of FAF and even then not entirely because you do end up using it (and getting the stack) eventually.

 

Which is why I resent the new rotation this patch is pushing with Tactics traitline and Dragonspike Mine - it's constantly displacing you and you have to recover the distance somehow which is incredibly janky and annoying. 

exactly this

[nderim.7463]

5 hours ago, DKRathalos.9625 said:

@nderim.7463You are quite bold to assume anet wants warrior to be played 😆

 

🤡🤷‍♀️ what should I say, warrior or nothing

[Vancho.8750]

16 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That's fair. I mean, I don't know what your balance approach is based on ... I'm trying to base mine on what is real and how Anet does things. I think that's very important to do that way if you want your voice to have merit with Anet. But that's a digression. 

I'm sure Anet wants BsW to be played. The question is where and how it's played and if that's enough. I don't think that by default, anyone should assume BsW was designed to be adopted by warriors in any situation and still be high performance in any of them; that's just not how especs have ever worked. We clearly know it's not optimal in situations where targets move. It's weird from a practical view that's the design implementation because ... lots of targets move, but it's not so weird if you consider Anet's attempt to preserve the theme or make the spec that way for whatever reason. 

Ah here we see the dissonance, you believe that Anet devs have some kind of vision for warrior, while @Azure The Heartless.3261and everyone else kind of scrolled through some leaked discord messages and after the release of BS and the banner rework it is kind of obvious that there isn't some grand plan or even will to work on the class and make it function, there is no, it should work in this situation kind of deal, they copied the final fantasy samurai cause it looked cool, there is no purpose outside of that . They simple do not care and the only reason they will do some pretend work now is cause there was a shitstorm. 

[wondermuffin.9680]

I'm just gonna leave this right here...

 

https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/popularity

[Puck.3697]

If we were looking at this movement it'd likely be a better result if reworked. 

As it couldn't hit near what it does if they allowed this effectively, which would then knock on the fact the rest of its kit isn't strong enough to do enough dps without its numbers. 

For dragon trigger to change, alot of follow up would be needed, not to state that it shouldn't happen. Just rather asking for this as a alone change may prove rather dire if it doesn't have follow up changes around the kit to rebalance it. 

 

[nderim.7463]

2 hours ago, wondermuffin.9680 said:

I'm just gonna leave this right here...

 

https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/popularity

wow, since I looked at it the last time yesterday Bladesworns popularity went from 0,92% to a full 1% for raids, shall we celebrate it ? 🤡

 

19 hours ago, anbujackson.9564 said:

Yeah.. next to a lot of rooting you also have forced movement on your pistol and dragonspike mine. So much movement restriction is just not for me. I like to be mobile. 

I dont know if anyone of you guys played Nioh but there was an early boss "the red oni" who had a similar move to DT1 except that he could hold his attack and dash to his oppenent before attacking and instantly killing you in the process (if you are low on vigor). Now that would be op. Essentially boost but just better.

Just make it either impossible to cancel DT with movement or give it 66% less speed. My point still stands and the effect would be the same. 

 

Anyway besides that I wonder how they are going to adress potential quickness stacking since the meta build runs tactics anyway and you can take any grandmaster you want. They cant keep it like that because it would be a slap in the face to eles even if bladesworns isnt nearly as op as catalyst was. 

nice post I agree especially with the 66% speed part, this is what I'd like to see aswell, and along with that I would love to  see movement being Endurance draining, which would give Endurance a right to exist in general, and wouldnt let move us 24/7 so we still gotta manage some Flickersteps in it. As it is right now, the Dragonspike Mine distance drawback along with Pistol 5 AND the self-root every 7s is just unfun to play imo.
 

[Obtena.7952]

4 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

Ah here we see the dissonance, you believe that Anet devs have some kind of vision for warrior, while @Azure The Heartless.3261and everyone else kind of scrolled through some leaked discord messages and after the release of BS and the banner rework it is kind of obvious that there isn't some grand plan or even will to work on the class and make it function, there is no, it should work in this situation kind of deal, they copied the final fantasy samurai cause it looked cool, there is no purpose outside of that . They simple do not care and the only reason they will do some pretend work now is cause there was a shitstorm. 

Actaully, what is see is, on average, Anet has decent ideas ... and bad implementation. The fact is that this idea of 'roles' is a massive shift for them and the turmoil they bring on themselves just wasn't worth it, on top of the fact that they just aren't capable of balancing the game for performance equity over classes in the first place. 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Nephalem.8921]

22 hours ago, Kayberz.5346 said:

I full cleared wings 1-4 in different pugs last week playing only power bladesworn.

I was top dps in every single fight

Two of the groups had other bladesworns in it. Only one of them was neck and neck with me on dps, we were both #1/2 for the fights until he switched to engi to fill support after someone left. The other 2 bladesworns i encountered last week were doing less than half the damage i was on boss fights because they clearly couldn't figure out how to weave dragonslashes in while avoiding mechanics.

The only things getting anywhere close to competing on dps with me and that other good bladesworn player were mechanists and condi virtuosos

 

People keep parroting the stupid "only good at hitting golems" line every time someone brings up bladesworn being the top power dps but that line comes from a place of ignorance and pessimism 

If you actually learn how to utilize bladesworns kit you can pump those numbers in actual encounters and maintain good dps uptime. (WITHOUT eating unnecessary damage as well)

The dps you lose by sometimes using dragontrigger 2 or 3 instead of 1 is minimal comparatively to other classes because in the situations you do that other classes sometimes lose even more dps in those same situations because they dont have the ability to gapclose/range hit cleave  for 100k+ damage per target in an instant.

For example, on the keinang overlook strike mission during the golem/sniper phase you can use dragontrigger 2 while inside the hitbox of either the golem or sniper while switching targets to the other one and hit both of them for over 100k damage while simultaneously repositioning instead of just doing slightly more damage on just 1 of them 

Cleave potential with 2 and 3 is huge if you get creative with it

You were top dps on ko as bladesworn? that tells me more about your pugs than bladesworn tbh. virtuoso hits both or all 3 during the other phase at the same time. nothing can compete with that. 3 needs to hit 3 targets to be worth more than single target Dt 1.

it is strong but there are multiple bosses where its luck based. get fixated on sloth? rip dps. virtuoso and slb can still do their rotation. its suicide on ca without a very good static. how much dps did you have on matthias? because mech can do 30k. multiple wingman logs are bugged. maybe your arc version was bugged too?

[Kayberz.5346]

3 minutes ago, Nephalem.8921 said:

You were top dps on ko as bladesworn? that tells me more about your pugs than bladesworn tbh. virtuoso hits both or all 3 during the other phase at the same time. nothing can compete with that. 3 needs to hit 3 targets to be worth more than single target Dt 1.

it is strong but there are multiple bosses where its luck based. get fixated on sloth? rip dps. virtuoso and slb can still do their rotation. its suicide on ca without a very good static. how much dps did you have on matthias? because mech can do 30k. multiple wingman logs are bugged. maybe your arc version was bugged too?

Cope

[Vancho.8750]

11 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Actaully, what is see is, on average, Anet has decent ideas ... and bad implementation. The fact is that this idea of 'roles' is a massive shift for them and the turmoil they bring on themselves just wasn't worth it, on top of the fact that they just aren't capable of balancing the game for performance equity over classes in the first place. 

How ever you spin it BS as an elite was not needed in any content that the game has, the samurai thing is not even super unique idea, it could have been implemented well but even if it was it would have been yet another DPS spec for warrior, the fact they pushed harder on it means that cool concept means more to the devs designing warrior than practicality, and everything else is moving in the practicality direction. Also BS is way too niche on top of being on currently niche profession.

It is not even about balancing on warrior, it doesn't have purpose to exist except dps and that is 3 elite specs in. Spellbreaker was already pushing it since warrior plays differently between its weapons on core and berserker and yet another way to deal damage was not necessary.

[Obtena.7952]

23 minutes ago, Vancho.8750 said:

How ever you spin it BS as an elite was not needed in any content that the game has, the samurai thing is not even super unique idea, it could have been implemented well but even if it was it would have been yet another DPS spec for warrior, the fact they pushed harder on it means that cool concept means more to the devs designing warrior than practicality, and everything else is moving in the practicality direction. Also BS is way too niche on top of being on currently niche profession.

It is not even about balancing on warrior, it doesn't have purpose to exist except dps and that is 3 elite specs in. Spellbreaker was already pushing it since warrior plays differently between its weapons on core and berserker and yet another way to deal damage was not necessary.

Well, until we had official roles, no espec was actually needed in any content the game or designed to fill some purpose. It was just all about some cool idea ... like a gun totting samurai . Fill a prupose was never what especs were intended for in the first place. I mean, not every espec will fill a role anyways ... or if they eventually will, it will take years for those changes to occur. 

I mean, I don't know what the future will be, but I do know that if an espec doesn't have 'purpose', we shouldn't be too alarmed by that. If we continue to get more especs, they will likely exceed the number of 'purposes' that exist anyways, so their will be overlap or especs that sort of 'hang out because they look cool and do nothing else'. 

So let's look at this from a different perspective ... would warrior be worse or better off if Anet didn't release defined team roles? The answer is obvious because their implementation of defined roles is so BAD ... that the balancing around roles puts warrior (and some other especs/classes) in a MUCH worse position for teaming than the balancing prior to the release of established roles EVER did. TIt's worse for people playing BsW because it's hard to play AND it doesn't fill quickness or DPS role any better than other warrior especs. 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[anbujackson.9564]

52 minutes ago, Nephalem.8921 said:

multiple wingman logs are bugged. maybe your arc version was bugged too?

Thanks for the dry humor.

Anyway out of all the bosses in w1-4, bladesworn can only really shine on vg, gorse, kc, maybe xera (but not really), mo and deimos. Everywhere else its suboptimal or straight up bad.

Sabetha? Na, you want to flank. I guess its a good way to skip cannon duty though.

W2 as a whole? Just no. Besides fixation, you also want cc on sloth. But hey if you want to waste your dragonslash on breakbars go ahead or get carried by your team. Matthias? Really? What are the other players doing if you are top dps there? Boss keeps moving, flanking sucks and pretty much the mechanics.

Cairn? No. Samarog? Sane as sloth. Its a cc heavy fight. Stop being deadweight and play berserker.

 

So yeah if you like doing just dps and leave all mechanics to your team, then yes play bladesworn.

Edited July 12, 2022 by anbujackson.9564

[Vancho.8750]

1 minute ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, until we had official roles, no espec was actually needed in any content the game or designed to fill some purpose. It was just all about some cool idea ... like a gun totting samurai . Fill a prupose was never what especs were intended for in the first place. I mean, not every espec will fill a role anyways ... or if they eventually will, it will take years for those changes to occur. 

I mean, I don't know what the future will be, but I do know that if an espec doesn't have 'purpose', we shouldn't be too alarmed by that. If we continue to get more especs, they will likely exceed the number of 'purposes' that exist anyways, so their will be overlap or especs that sort of 'hang out because they look cool and do nothing else'. 

The specs have clear purpose since HoT, to focus on some aspect of the profession one would even say specialize.
Also warrior specs already "hang out because they look cool and do nothing else" since they do the same thing, if they had purpose it would not have been like that. 
If there is no goal with the spec, there is no reason to make it, throwing random kitten at the wall and expecting the players to figure out something for the devs is not a valid way to design a game.

[Obtena.7952]

28 minutes ago, Vancho.8750 said:

The specs have clear purpose since HoT, to focus on some aspect of the profession one would even say specialize.
Also warrior specs already "hang out because they look cool and do nothing else" since they do the same thing, if they had purpose it would not have been like that. 
If there is no goal with the spec, there is no reason to make it, throwing random kitten at the wall and expecting the players to figure out something for the devs is not a valid way to design a game.

Um, maybe to players defined by players. Until roles were announced by Anet a few months ago, Anet certainly did not define especs by a 'purpose to fill' or explicitly say to us what those purpose those especs are. For some specs, that's still the case so ... it's a weird way to think this is a problem that needs to be addressed. I don't actually think having multiple specs that are 'DPS' is a problem to begin with. I doubt Anet does either. Again, the number of specs can exceed the number of purposes ... so there will be overlap and redundancy. 

I mean, let's flip this back: What are the 'purposes' you think exist and how are they being filled by specs in the game? How is BsW an exception to having purpose?

Edited July 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Vancho.8750]

5 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Um, maybe to players defined by players. 

It is not that kind of game, if was classless ok, but the game is based on restrictions to create variety of gameplay loops which have to be created by the devs.

To circle back to my main point since you are Obtenaing me, Arenanet for some reason do not understand their own game or more precisely do not care to understand their game, it is probably considered non profitable or some kitten till it spirals out, something like when Blizzard cut their QA and community manager positions and after some time the quality of the product deteriorated.

The people that had some kind of intentions with the gameplay system are long gone and we are left with people that do not intent to use one of the bigger selling points of the game over other competitors on the market 

[Obtena.7952]

2 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

It is not that kind of game, if was classless ok, but the game is based on restrictions to create variety of gameplay loops which have to be created by the devs.

To circle back to my main point since you are Obtenaing me, Arenanet for some reason do not understand their own game or more precisely do not care to understand their game, it is probably considered non profitable or some kitten till it spirals out, something like when Blizzard cut their QA and community manager positions and after some time the quality of the product deteriorated.

The people that had some kind of intentions with the gameplay system are long gone and we are left with people that do not intent to use one of the bigger selling points of the game over other competitors on the market 

Just because the game has classes doesn't mean that by default, especs must have roles. The general espec purpose is simply gameplay flavour; that's all. Whether a class has a way to fill a role or not is a completely different and recent development. Maybe at some point, there is a more formal assignment of roles to more parts of the class structure. At that point, the argument that an espec doesn't have a role might be relevant. 

In otherwords, don't mix the purpose for why especs exist and the roles Anet intends for a class to fill in a team. It's entirely possible an espec doesn't fill a role, but it will always have purpose. I mean, some roles on a class aren't even linked to the espec. The role is baked right into the core; any spec can fill it. It's not as straight forward as Espec = Role. 

Think about the flip ... we have especs that are in roles ... and they aren't played either. So not being in a role isn't the problem with BsW. 

Again, the ideas here aren't bad but the implementation is not good. I mean, it appears there are some fundamental design rules missing. For instance, ARE roles linked to especs? Well, not for Warrior or Ranger. The general class design just lacks consistency. That makes implementation of ideas into actual designs inconsistent as well. That's part of the reason we have such class performance differences IMO. 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952