August 23 Balance Update Preview

[Brodix.5214]

8 hours ago, ZolracAtrox.2908 said:

I'm ok with  most of PvE changes but:

PVE

I see some problems; nerfing core skills in order to nerf a spec is always a bad idea.

For example:

Mech is strong 'cause MECH; nerfing core engi support skills gonna kill Scrapper more than Mech. Nerf the spec, not all the specs. 

PVP

Please; fix PvP. Almost all EoD need a nerf; don't let us with another month with this broken meta, please.

     SPECS that need huge nerfs:

*Power Bladesworn

*Pow Catalyst:

*Rifle Mechanist:

*Condi Druid/Soulbeast/Untamed

     SPECS that need some nerfs:

*Power Untamed:

Power *Willbender

*Condi Specter:

*Condi Harbinger: 

*Grenade Holosmith:

*Core Support Guard/Tempest Support

     SPECS that need buffs:

Firebrand (Not support)

Scourge

Scrapper 

Renegade

Dragon Hunter

Almost all core classes (Rev, Ranger, Engi, Mesmer, Necro, Ele)

in real fight power catalyst suck a little, every knockback, movment on boss make dps lower a lot, because u can't keep EE at 10 stack, thats mean EE should be easier to keep? like 8 stack ?

Edited August 19, 2022 by Brodix.5214

[kidbuu.4071]

I like the direction your going. I'd be interested to see what takes place in future updates towards additional support roles/builds. I know this was something that was discussed earlier in another update. I'm hoping to see specter get some additional love in the area of a true healing support build that's sufficient for larger engagements like strikes and raids. If we could see some additional stability for group content and enhancing either the protection that we're able to provide or a way to provide reliable aegis, I think we could become a suitable contender. Again, this is just my opinion. 

[soul.9651]

1 hour ago, Hesione.9412 said:

Not pretending. I went into the aerodrome and tested on the golem. I gave two sets of stats, one was the best possible scenario and one was a more realistic scenario. But both had a stationary golem with no defiance bar, no knock-backs, etc, and is unrealistic for open world.

Or are you accusing me of lying?

If u are lying or not only the combat logs can say, plus like i said, if you dont get the numbers what other people are getting rn just check your build, gear(stat infusions aswell) and options. Plus i have a feeling that u just didnt set the mech skills to auto-cast mode and now you are saying "well videos of people afk benching those 28k+ are just false". Also do you even play high end content? I couldnt care less about the open world stuff, its the instanced content where all the hate from people is coming from...and its not about that 28k afk bench do you realise???? The 28k is the floor of this degen build and with a few extra buttons this build becomes 36k +, 37k+ after patch, while beeing fully ranged and  LOW INTENSITY dps at the same time , one of the reasons why its so op in the eod strike cms aswell, AND they have that cleave damage too so its literally the best in slot build for any situation and you cant get punished in any way while playing it.

+show me any other build in this game which can do the same while not pressing ANYTHING..

This build is the reason why every single piece of end game content is on "easy mode" rn if you stack this, and the only people who are happy with this are the same people who are just too lazy to improve.. 

Edited August 19, 2022 by soul.9651

[Obtena.7952]

People still selling the idea that mech stacking in endgame PVE is power rifle ay? I wonder how they figure that one out ... I guess they forgot there are other versions of mech people play that ARE actually benefiting from stacking unlike the power rifle version. I also guess they didn't take the hint when the power rifle version ISN'T getting nerfed this patch while the other versions are. 

I guess the level of desperation is getting pretty big to be perpetuating these 'alternate facts'. 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[MyNameIsLuke.6547]

Very nice changes and I love the direction.

 

A suggestion for herald: I have been playing support herald, so quickness/protection and healing and since I have to go Glint I always have the choice of going either centaur for the healing or dwarf for the stability.  But neither feel satisfying. If i play centaur I am annoyed that I cannot give any stability and feel useless sometimes and when I play dwarf I feel great giving stability but cannot offer much healing. I understand that there needs to be a tradeoff and I do not disagree but currently it can be frustrating so I would argue the following:

 

Give shield 4 aegis instead of protection. You only play shield when you want to go support/heal/tank anyway so it would only buff this underutilized build. Furthermore, if you play support than you have more than enough access to protection so it does not really feel like a useful skill at the moment. However, with aegis it would feel great to choose between centaur and dwarf.

 

I need more healing for a fight: Great, I will use centaur and have to use my shield for in a smart way to deny the knockdowns of the boss.

 

I need tons of stability for a fight: Great, I will use dwarf and will use shield 4 on the hardest hitting ability the boss has so there is not a problem with me having not that much healing.

 

Either way, it is in my opinion a great way to give herald value in group contet and make it a skill expressive build. You might need to make the aegis shortlived or increase the cooldown of shield 4 however to make it not an aegis spamming build.

[yumi.5170]

@Josh Davis.7865good communication and nice to see that you are listening to the players. Maybe sometimes we can talk about those horrible loadouts and I will be willing to spend my money into this game again!

[Kolzi.5928]

14 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community. As we communicated in several posts over the last month and a half, we’re using this an opportunity to take a hard look at our internal processes and revise the Guild Wars 2 balance philosophy. We also added some new leaders into the team to help facilitate that effort. That work is still ongoing, and we look forward to sharing our updated balance philosophy with you as soon as we can.

As we’ve been reading through your feedback on the August 23 preview, it became clear to us that one aspect of the previous balance approach was especially problematic. Specifically, making balance adjustments to PvE builds based on their potential under unrealistic, ideal conditions – conditions that are unlikely to be met unless you’re testing against a golem, or the player is extremely skilled. While these builds can definitely be an issue in a skilled player’s hands, often times the changes have an outsized impact to unrelated builds and average players. With that in mind, we’ll be reverting the changes to mirage in the August 23 update.

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

For reference, these are the mirage changes that are being removed from the August 23 update:

Axe:

·         Lingering Thoughts: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

·         Imaginary Axes: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

Staff:

·         Chaos Vortex (Staff Ambush) (PvE only) Might stack count reduced from 8 to 5, Might duration reduced from 15s to 10s. Torment, Bleeding, and Confusion duration reduced from 8s to 7s.

Thanks,

Josh

I can't describe how glad I am to hear this. What is actually happening in the game people play is so much more important than youtube benchmarks of golems. There's plenty of data out there about what's actually going on in the game world and that should be the focus. Not to say that what top end players can do should be completely discounted, but it shouldn't come at the expense of everyone else's gameplay. I didn't make a big deal out of the mirage changes, but they did feel very much out of left field compared to almost every other change on the list. I still think adding some condi to the phantasmal warlock, even if you remove some condi elsewhere to balance it out, would make a nice change to the staff mirage's playstyle.

 

With this changed approach in mind, I hope that one of the things you'll be revisiting is the staff for elementalist. Many people want a powerful long ranged weapon for ele and that is the only option right now - and personally I always found it a satisfying weapon to try eke the best out of despite not being one of those mythical best players in the world.

 

Either way, I think this when combined with the other changes gives me a positive outlook for how you will be approaching this stuff going forward.

Edited August 19, 2022 by Kolzi.5928

[LKEY.9567]

14 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community. As we communicated in several posts over the last month and a half, we’re using this an opportunity to take a hard look at our internal processes and revise the Guild Wars 2 balance philosophy. We also added some new leaders into the team to help facilitate that effort. That work is still ongoing, and we look forward to sharing our updated balance philosophy with you as soon as we can.

As we’ve been reading through your feedback on the August 23 preview, it became clear to us that one aspect of the previous balance approach was especially problematic. Specifically, making balance adjustments to PvE builds based on their potential under unrealistic, ideal conditions – conditions that are unlikely to be met unless you’re testing against a golem, or the player is extremely skilled. While these builds can definitely be an issue in a skilled player’s hands, often times the changes have an outsized impact to unrelated builds and average players. With that in mind, we’ll be reverting the changes to mirage in the August 23 update.

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

For reference, these are the mirage changes that are being removed from the August 23 update:

Axe:

·         Lingering Thoughts: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

·         Imaginary Axes: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

Staff:

·         Chaos Vortex (Staff Ambush) (PvE only) Might stack count reduced from 8 to 5, Might duration reduced from 15s to 10s. Torment, Bleeding, and Confusion duration reduced from 8s to 7s.

Thanks,

Josh

I love you Josh.

[Sou.9601]

i really see that these changes for base weapons will do their job and its a great idea. Good job anet!

especially for ele its really good, seeing weaver gets touched too, feels even better.

BUT:
You kittened up with the -10% dmg buff on cata. You made every other use of weapons beside hammer useless on cata.

Restore the use of other weapons. Make ELE as a class with these 3 specs viable and playable again. 

Cata needs the playability for the not 0,005% best players in the world. So the majority of ele players.

Every spec and the core revamp is mandatory. I really mean it because otherwise you will get stucked in changing one coefficent with another.

[Black para goner.7612]

14 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community. As we communicated in several posts over the last month and a half, we’re using this an opportunity to take a hard look at our internal processes and revise the Guild Wars 2 balance philosophy. We also added some new leaders into the team to help facilitate that effort. That work is still ongoing, and we look forward to sharing our updated balance philosophy with you as soon as we can.

As we’ve been reading through your feedback on the August 23 preview, it became clear to us that one aspect of the previous balance approach was especially problematic. Specifically, making balance adjustments to PvE builds based on their potential under unrealistic, ideal conditions – conditions that are unlikely to be met unless you’re testing against a golem, or the player is extremely skilled. While these builds can definitely be an issue in a skilled player’s hands, often times the changes have an outsized impact to unrelated builds and average players. With that in mind, we’ll be reverting the changes to mirage in the August 23 update.

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

For reference, these are the mirage changes that are being removed from the August 23 update:

Axe:

·         Lingering Thoughts: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

·         Imaginary Axes: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

Staff:

·         Chaos Vortex (Staff Ambush) (PvE only) Might stack count reduced from 8 to 5, Might duration reduced from 15s to 10s. Torment, Bleeding, and Confusion duration reduced from 8s to 7s.

Thanks,

Josh

Good to see Anet looking at user feedback. One thing I'd like to shine light on, is not every Profession needs access to everything. Sometimes being more restrictive will benefit the game overall. Looking at some of the philosophy used in GW1 towards balance maybe affective.

[Subli.8217]

Reaper again getting short end of the stick 😕 Those buffs are not enough to make it a comparable power spec.

[Sporks.4395]

16 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community. As we communicated in several posts over the last month and a half, we’re using this an opportunity to take a hard look at our internal processes and revise the Guild Wars 2 balance philosophy. We also added some new leaders into the team to help facilitate that effort. That work is still ongoing, and we look forward to sharing our updated balance philosophy with you as soon as we can.

As we’ve been reading through your feedback on the August 23 preview, it became clear to us that one aspect of the previous balance approach was especially problematic. Specifically, making balance adjustments to PvE builds based on their potential under unrealistic, ideal conditions – conditions that are unlikely to be met unless you’re testing against a golem, or the player is extremely skilled. While these builds can definitely be an issue in a skilled player’s hands, often times the changes have an outsized impact to unrelated builds and average players. With that in mind, we’ll be reverting the changes to mirage in the August 23 update.

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

For reference, these are the mirage changes that are being removed from the August 23 update:

Axe:

·         Lingering Thoughts: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

·         Imaginary Axes: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

Staff:

·         Chaos Vortex (Staff Ambush) (PvE only) Might stack count reduced from 8 to 5, Might duration reduced from 15s to 10s. Torment, Bleeding, and Confusion duration reduced from 8s to 7s.

Thanks,

Josh

Ele main coping post.

[Voyant.1327]

17 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community. As we communicated in several posts over the last month and a half, we’re using this an opportunity to take a hard look at our internal processes and revise the Guild Wars 2 balance philosophy. We also added some new leaders into the team to help facilitate that effort. That work is still ongoing, and we look forward to sharing our updated balance philosophy with you as soon as we can.

As we’ve been reading through your feedback on the August 23 preview, it became clear to us that one aspect of the previous balance approach was especially problematic. Specifically, making balance adjustments to PvE builds based on their potential under unrealistic, ideal conditions – conditions that are unlikely to be met unless you’re testing against a golem, or the player is extremely skilled. While these builds can definitely be an issue in a skilled player’s hands, often times the changes have an outsized impact to unrelated builds and average players. With that in mind, we’ll be reverting the changes to mirage in the August 23 update.

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

For reference, these are the mirage changes that are being removed from the August 23 update:

Axe:

·         Lingering Thoughts: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

·         Imaginary Axes: (PvE only) Torment duration reduced from 4s to 3s.

Staff:

·         Chaos Vortex (Staff Ambush) (PvE only) Might stack count reduced from 8 to 5, Might duration reduced from 15s to 10s. Torment, Bleeding, and Confusion duration reduced from 8s to 7s.

Thanks,

Josh

When you ask the devs to do something common sense and they do it. 

Name another MMO game developer that does this.

This is all awesome news & glad to hear. Will still be critical and analytical to future balance updates but these sorts of steps rebuild confidence. Definitely glad to hear! 

[brianmk.8495]

I see some steps in the right direction but mechanist needs big nerf in all game modes.

[Voyant.1327]

5 minutes ago, brianmk.8495 said:

I see some steps in the right direction but mechanist needs big nerf in all game modes.

I think a large percentage would like to see AA only do less damage and actually reward players for getting good with their class. The philosophy skill shouldn't overrule pressing 1 button has been rejected by a lot of us pretty much from its discovery. 

But yes just tone down the automatic rifle so its in the same range as others. 

[Tails.9372]

On 8/17/2022 at 6:02 PM, Mike.7983 said:

give us a toggle to hide there army of minions in pve

And this right here, an option to "hide" other players pets / minions, is the actual solution to the "mech problem" the devs should be implementing.

[Tenal.1546]

I'm glad the devs "reversed" the Staff Mirage devastation today. I might actually go ahead and make that Gen 3 Staff. Rejoice!

Edited August 19, 2022 by Tenal.1546

[khawki.4205]

7 hours ago, Gorem.8104 said:

...

.... 

I can't tell if you are serious. Have you even see the Warrior Forums for the past what, seven years? Core was the only True time Warrior was a fun and good class to play. 

Now I can't tell if you're serious. What forums have to do with fun? Do you base your enjoyment on what others say?

I consider warrior fun to play based on fun I get from playing it. I do think there are some things to change, that's why I mentioned cutting CD on trait and I will continue to suggest more changes in small steps.

[Overedge.2435]

18 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Ive often decried game design cetered around winning by turning your foe into a target dummy. This is why I like the idea of a window of CC immunity after an instance of hard CC.

I actually made a post last week on this subject, and I suggested that after using a stunbreak, you have an effect (similar to how you are revealed for a couple seconds after breaking stealth) that makes you immune to CC for a couple seconds. That way your stunbreak isn't wasted because you used it after the first CC of the ten-CC-chain instead of the last one.

[Karagee.6830]

19 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

This change in approach raises questions about previous changes that were made with a build’s ‘potential’ in mind, rather than the realistic output. We’ll be evaluating those prior changes on a case-by-case basis in future releases. This isn’t to say that we won’t address overperforming builds in the future, but we will focus more on builds that are dominating the meta, rather than builds that could theoretically dominate.

Took you guys long enough to realise this, but it's a welcome change of mind on your part.

Now we will eagerly await some very substantial nerfs to the most toxic specialisation in the game: Mechanist. 

Thank you.

[Batalix.2873]

Wow the response in this thread is incredible. I am very proud to be a part of this community, keep up the good work devs.

 

If I may add one more observation that I hope will be considered over the next few months of changes. Overall, espec design is in a good place, and just needs balancing and refinement. But one profession that has overall suffered for years is elementalist, and let me break down why.

 

The problem with elementalist, why few people main it and why it is always getting nerfed:

As long as Ele builds continue to indiscriminately give access to all four elements, they will be overbroad and undertuned. By that I mean, as long as any build has access to twice as many abilities (spanning a greater range of utility) without a substantial limitation or tradeoff, it will tend to be tuned toward everything being half as effective. And this is a problem that plagues elementalist more than other professions because it is a *core* feature* that has defined every espec so far, instead of merely a broken espec feature like FB/Mech.  In that respect, I think after Tempest and Weaver, Catalyst took design in the wrong direction.

On Intraprofessional Gameplay Diversity:

We have been ten years in need of an ele "Spellbreaker/Druid/Scourge/Specter" concept that substantially shakes up a pretty homogenous Ele formula, something ele is desperately in need of more than the other professions because of how over-utility/undertuned the base profession is *at all times*, something that bleeds over into every espec that doesn't place heavier limitations on attunements.

Put another way, every other profession has at least one espec that almost completely overhauls their core profession mechanic (clones to daggers, life force to barrier, adrenaline to counter, etc.), and forces tradeoffs that craft job fantasies that are extremely distinct from the other core profs or especs. Ele has a core profession mechanic that has never actually been sacrificed or traded off for anything... It's just had superficial things tacked on to the same core four-attunement system: overload double tap, double attune quicktime, jade sphere F5. Weaver is the only espec that feels halfway to a substantial shakeup, but only in a way that actually doubles down on Ele's spastic "allthingsallthetime" nature. And frankly I think after Weaver achieving "ultimate core ele mode", no other especs should be aiming to try to top it.

But it has been ten years and there is not a single Ele build across core and three especs that is not a slave to the undertuning of a jack-of-all trades four-attunement system. No other profession is as homogenous as Ele, and it hurts Ele more than other professions because it does not have the option not to carry around the dead weight of attunements it does not want or need for a particular build. Because as long as more than two-weaponskills-worth of DPS/utility is a single F-press away, it is too easy to break and will trend to downtuning. 

Using the frame all of the normal, two-weapon professions, playing Ele in most cases is like carefully, lovingly choosing your axe/torch + staff and traitlines for the niches you want to fill, and then having the game thrust a scepter, sword, and two daggers into your arms and say "we literally won't let you play the class without these, too, oh and also we had to nerf your staff to compensate, your torch heals even though you're a DPS spec, and you'll always be too busy cycling through impotent scepter and unflashy dagger movesets to really enjoy your axe abilities." There is no real player choice and customization in attunements the same way that there is player choice in weapons on other professions...they all are forced on you, all the time.

It does not matter what your build is, you are always carrying around half a bag of holding of dead weight. All of the other professions deal with this by just, by design, cutting out the dead weight on specs that want to have different niches, but Ele refuses to do this, and the *closest* it comes to is having a gentle nudge in Tempest that you might want to keep that attunement a while longer. Using Tempest as an example, any other profession would have done more than that, they would have just cut out the attunements that a particular Tempest build doesn't want to use anyway, and made sure the two attunements it *is* using have competitive damage/utility--for anyone who still wants four attunements, they have Weaver and Core Ele to play with.

 

On Catalyst:

Catalyst should have been heavily incentivized to stay in only one or two elements and maybe even remove access to non-traited attunements. I do not think the idea of constant attunement swapping fits the concept of a hammer Ele, nor the "geomancer" concept it is riffing on. The only reason it really exists in this form is a lack of thinking outside of the "core ele" box that everyone presumes Ele has to play like all the time.

Imo, the hammer 3 orb ability is fine as a pewpew concept, but should be an ammo charge all in the same element. Collecting different elements is just such a narrow gimmick and really muddies the distinction between Catalyst and Weaver. Whereas summoning several orbs of the same element actually would feel more like "augmentation" or "channeling". You can still have hammer combos and combo fields, the design would just feel a lot more focused.

I truly think Catalyst is the worst designed espec in the game so far because it didn't make nearly the number of tradeoffs that other especs do to the profession's core mechanic, and as a result only *looks* like a geomancer if you squint, but doesn't really *feel* like one. It doesn't feel like other EoD specs feel like a Samurai, Psionic, Alchemist, Machinist, Assassin ... The core gameplay of Catalyst just feels like "Ele with a hammer". I say this to illustrate how Catalyst is a symptom of the prevailing Ele design philosophy outlined above.

At this point, I would even be for putting attunement restrictions on core ele just to better distinguish and balance especs:

* Core ele: Only have attunements to traited elements
* Tempest: Have access to all, can swap but on long CDs (so the same, but could maybe use even more off-attunement decentives and on-attunement utility/buffs)
* Weaver: Have access to all four attunements regardless of traiting (so the same)
* Catalyst: Only have attunements traited to like core ele, but augmented

That way at least the especs would all feel like they do something substantially different from core ele, and at least core ele could provide players more focused and higher-tuned build options if they want them.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I still think hardcore Ele players deserve especs that encourage complicated four-attunement balancing and rotations. I do not believe diversifying Ele design would or should deprive them of those options, I just think Ele's big failure is not exploring design space outside of "four attunements all the time" that would create a healthier spread of build options.

Edited August 20, 2022 by CourtJester.5908

[taara.3217]

20 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

Hi all,

The June 28 update highlighted that our approach to balancing professions and combat in Guild Wars 2 has not been fully aligned with the needs and expectations of our community...

 

Thanks,

Josh

Well, recognition of own mistakes is worth respect.
My hats off to ANet team!

Thanks,
Alex

Edited August 19, 2022 by taara.3217

[ArjukKagrim.6049]

And pmech still not touched even though changes are obviously possible and is allowed to reign supreme? ok..

Edited August 19, 2022 by ArjukKagrim.6049

[Karagee.6830]

35 minutes ago, ArjukKagrim.6049 said:

And pmech still not touched even though changes are obviously possible and is allowed to reign supreme? ok..

My guess is that for whatever reason (don't ask me why, I think they are far off the mark on this) they hope that some of the changes coming on Tuesday will make some other build competitive against power mechanist in the pug meta. i.e. they hope some other afk or semi-afk, possibly ranged build will emerge to contend. Unfortunately that does not seem likely at all, because dps mechanist is way way overtuned and simply fiddling with the weapon coefficients isn't going to get you there. Because the source of problems with Mech are not the actual weapons...otherwise all engi builds would be in a great place or at least viable.

[dreamin.5102]

@Josh Davis.7865
 

Thank you, 

It makes me very happy to see that finally, someone from anet notices this problem ! 

I would like to propose a small rework concerning the corruption skills 

Especially the blood of power skill, 

if we look at one of the highest specs at the moment of the necro the harbringer, on a golem his bench is high indeed, but in group he suffers from an *anti-group* gameplay

I explain myself,
permanently, you go to make you purify the alteration that you self-inflict has the half-second even or you have press on blood of power 

that you are a pro does not change anything there when you have 4 has 20 condi clear has the second which come from competence ally or zone of combo ect without speaking about the class which in their rota dps put of the condi clear like the firebrand condi 

So, either you voluntarily leave the pack, or DeLay the rota to be sure not to be condi clean ...  or you hammer your keyboard as fast as possible at the right time to hope to transfer the conditions before you get them clean 😞

I specify that the scrg does not suffer from this problem because the transfer is done with the f5 which is instantaneous there is no delay between two like the other speciale condi of the nec

So I propose, maybe to make that the self inflicted confi of the necro can't be purified by the allies ?  

Or replace the self-inflicted condition of the necro by various debuff of stats or other (as the despair of the harbringer)  

I would also like to propose a little something for the reaper 

what would you think of removing the additional damage of the trait : soul eater to pass it only on an increase of care of 7 - 10 % 

and modify on the same column the trait :decimate defense, you could modify the trait so that it makes + 0.5 % of damage and chance of critical blow according to the vulnerability, 
That would allow to play a scholar rune, that would be according to me a good increase of its dps in ways coherent and without that it is a benchmark too high or aberrant, 

That would make it possible not to have a feature which has at the same time increases the dps and the heal what I find not coherent personally (the opinions of each one) 

Thx to read me ! 

Edited August 19, 2022 by dreamin.5102