Reaper Changes Feedback - 29 November balance preview

[Raizel.8175]

On 12/3/2022 at 9:20 AM, AlopiasGW.1932 said:

Reaper is a much better now. In my opinion the last important change they need to do is changing the shoud mechanic. Give it the harbinger treatment. No damage negation only damage buff. Much easier to balance.

This. Reaper is more or less trash in PvE due to how Reaper Shroud works. If Reaper Shroud would work like Harbinger Shroud or some kind of other usable resource, apart from some other things (2nd weapon set is putrid, no decent ranged weapon, mobility-problems outside of Reaper Shroud), Reaper would mostly be fine. Reaper Shroud gets decimated far too easily in actual PvE due to incoming damage. As it is, Reaper is far too situational - especially in content with continuous incoming damage or unexpected incoming burst damage like Ankkas bullet-hail or stuff like that.

[Arianth Moonlight.6453]

leave Reaper's Shroud alone ಠ_ಠ

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

6 hours ago, Raizel.8175 said:

This. Reaper is more or less trash in PvE due to how Reaper Shroud works. If Reaper Shroud would work like Harbinger Shroud or some kind of other usable resource, apart from some other things (2nd weapon set is putrid, no decent ranged weapon, mobility-problems outside of Reaper Shroud), Reaper would mostly be fine. Reaper Shroud gets decimated far too easily in actual PvE due to incoming damage. As it is, Reaper is far too situational - especially in content with continuous incoming damage or unexpected incoming burst damage like Ankkas bullet-hail or stuff like that.

This is completely unneccesary. All they need to do is make it so that you can enter/exit Reaper Shroud at will (not be kicked out of it), and make the damage reduction relative to the amount of life force you have.

 

This way you can still do damage but become glassier the less life force you have, which allows Reaper to fulfill its role of a hard-hitting bruiser, like it was originally intended.

[Asum.4960]

10 hours ago, Raizel.8175 said:

This. Reaper is more or less trash in PvE due to how Reaper Shroud works. If Reaper Shroud would work like Harbinger Shroud or some kind of other usable resource, apart from some other things (2nd weapon set is putrid, no decent ranged weapon, mobility-problems outside of Reaper Shroud), Reaper would mostly be fine. Reaper Shroud gets decimated far too easily in actual PvE due to incoming damage. As it is, Reaper is far too situational - especially in content with continuous incoming damage or unexpected incoming burst damage like Ankkas bullet-hail or stuff like that.

Maybe a controversial opinion, but post buffs I'd actually rate Reaper higher than Harbinger. It's far from trash now. 

I actually found Spectral Armor (over Signet of Spite) to be a pretty good damage increase for real fights, as it can counter the LF issues somewhat in fairly high pressure fights. Something like Boneskinner's damage Aura obliterating Shroud in <5 seconds comes to mind. Spectral Armor + Infusing Terror actually allows you to do your rotation still. 

That said, I do think Reaper, despite the questionable Utility of Shroud survivability, still needs about ~3k DPS added to it's Benchmark to compensate for it's really poor DPS-Uptime due to being locked to melee and being utterly screwed against mobile targets due to Nightfall and Wells, as well as it's losing damage due to incoming damage - making it's Benchmark quite the fantasy. 

Reaper is imo the only Necro Spec where the Shroud mechanic actually fits and makes sense though. It's weaknesses and downsides just need to be properly compensated for - and it's getting pretty close to that now. 

 

As for why I actually think Reaper is better than Harbinger now - it actually has it's uses. 

Any fight where you want condi damage or need range/high DPS-uptime, Scourge is just the universally far better, more adaptable and better designed pick. 

Any encounter that favours power, burst and cleave, Reaper is actually the best option for Necromancer now, and certainly viable at that. 

The only thing Harbinger has going for it is Quickness share, and that is so utterly lacking in Utility compared to the likes of Herald, Scrapper and Firebrand, that playing it over those is borderline griefing. 

 

I think the next steps for Anet should be to rework Death's Embrace and Siphoned Power in Spite to be actually useful Traits, giving Reaper the last little damage bump it needs in the process (add a proper Auto Attack for Staff to that), and then shifting their attention over to Harbinger - although I strongly doubt it will ever get the comprehensive rework it imo genuinely needs. 

 

That and the eternal hope of comprehensive core reworks of Death-, Blood Magic, Core Shroud, Core Weapons and a Utility skill pass.

 

Anyway, while I think you are technically right on all points of critique, I don't think all of that still makes Reaper trash. It has it's useable niche in instanced content and is actually quite the beast for solo play now. Not Scourge level ofc, but certainly beats out Harbinger - which's only use seems to be a decent looking Benchmark on SC at this point tbh.

Edited December 8, 2022 by Asum.4960

[Raizel.8175]

On 12/8/2022 at 5:22 AM, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

This is completely unneccesary. All they need to do is make it so that you can enter/exit Reaper Shroud at will (not be kicked out of it), and make the damage reduction relative to the amount of life force you have.

 

This way you can still do damage but become glassier the less life force you have, which allows Reaper to fulfill its role of a hard-hitting bruiser, like it was originally intended.

1. How is "damage reduction relative to the amount of life force you have" supposed to work? I can't really see how that should be reasonable.

2. Again: How is "enter/exit Reaper Shroud at will" supposed to work. I nean, bad Reaper-players kinda neglect Soul Barbs uptime - at least it was like that in the past since it should be quite difficult to neglect that nowadays due to the prolonged duration. Shouldn't there be some skill checks involved? You also lose DPS uptime if you constantly enter and exit Shroud - at least in PvE encounters where you then have to enter/exit constantly if you don't want your Shroud getting obliterated.

On 12/8/2022 at 9:41 AM, Asum.4960 said:

Maybe a controversial opinion, but post buffs I'd actually rate Reaper higher than Harbinger. It's far from trash now. 

I actually found Spectral Armor (over Signet of Spite) to be a pretty good damage increase for real fights, as it can counter the LF issues somewhat in fairly high pressure fights. Something like Boneskinner's damage Aura obliterating Shroud in <5 seconds comes to mind. Spectral Armor + Infusing Terror actually allows you to do your rotation still. 

That said, I do think Reaper, despite the questionable Utility of Shroud survivability, still needs about ~3k DPS added to it's Benchmark to compensate for it's really poor DPS-Uptime due to being locked to melee and being utterly screwed against mobile targets due to Nightfall and Wells, as well as it's losing damage due to incoming damage - making it's Benchmark quite the fantasy. 

Reaper is imo the only Necro Spec where the Shroud mechanic actually fits and makes sense though. It's weaknesses and downsides just need to be properly compensated for - and it's getting pretty close to that now. 

 

As for why I actually think Reaper is better than Harbinger now - it actually has it's uses. 

Any fight where you want condi damage or need range/high DPS-uptime, Scourge is just the universally far better, more adaptable and better designed pick. 

Any encounter that favours power, burst and cleave, Reaper is actually the best option for Necromancer now, and certainly viable at that. 

The only thing Harbinger has going for it is Quickness share, and that is so utterly lacking in Utility compared to the likes of Herald, Scrapper and Firebrand, that playing it over those is borderline griefing. 

 

I think the next steps for Anet should be to rework Death's Embrace and Siphoned Power in Spite to be actually useful Traits, giving Reaper the last little damage bump it needs in the process (add a proper Auto Attack for Staff to that), and then shifting their attention over to Harbinger - although I strongly doubt it will ever get the comprehensive rework it imo genuinely needs. 

 

That and the eternal hope of comprehensive core reworks of Death-, Blood Magic, Core Shroud, Core Weapons and a Utility skill pass.

 

Anyway, while I think you are technically right on all points of critique, I don't think all of that still makes Reaper trash. It has it's useable niche in instanced content and is actually quite the beast for solo play now. Not Scourge level ofc, but certainly beats out Harbinger - which's only use seems to be a decent looking Benchmark on SC at this point tbh.

I can agree with the argument, that Reaper may be better or at least tied now with Harbinger - Harbinger is - due to how it works - rather situational anyway. I do disagree though with Reaper not being trash anymore. Gameplay-wise, Reaper is almost a carbon copy of Holosmith. Holosmith is easily superior to Reaper and one reason why that's the case is that Holosmith actually encourages you to use your "resource" (Heat meter) for damage. Reaper is ultimately being held back in that regard by how Reaper Shroud works which is one of the reasons why several people already suggested to adjust the functionality of Reaper Shroud by traits. If you want an offensive build, have a trait that allows Shroud to be a consumable resource. If you want a defensive build, let Shroud work the same as it does now: something akin to a second health bar.

[Asum.4960]

1 hour ago, Raizel.8175 said:

I can agree with the argument, that Reaper may be better or at least tied now with Harbinger - Harbinger is - due to how it works - rather situational anyway. I do disagree though with Reaper not being trash anymore. Gameplay-wise, Reaper is almost a carbon copy of Holosmith. Holosmith is easily superior to Reaper and one reason why that's the case is that Holosmith actually encourages you to use your "resource" (Heat meter) for damage. Reaper is ultimately being held back in that regard by how Reaper Shroud works which is one of the reasons why several people already suggested to adjust the functionality of Reaper Shroud by traits. If you want an offensive build, have a trait that allows Shroud to be a consumable resource. If you want a defensive build, let Shroud work the same as it does now: something akin to a second health bar.

I feel that's far too harsh, but I suppose that's highly subjective. Personally I think there is, and always will be, quite the space between absolutely meta and trash tier. Just because something isn't meta doesn't mean it's trash to me. 

 

That said, and as earlier, I do agree with you. I've suggested changes like a Trait decoupling Reaper Shroud as a damage mode from the Shroud health pool since years. I'm not saying it's good design now or that I like where it is now still, but it is okay. And for Anet that may very well be good enough - and that's already a higher balancing standard than what we had the last few years. 

 

The thing is, from a PvE point of view especially, Necromancer as a whole is full of objectively bad design.

I could write an essay about how a professions' both almost entire defensive and offensive capabilities being tied to a single cooldown and resource is awful. How allies cleansing harmful conditions off a class at the wrong time is reducing it's DPS is bad and directly antithetical to the games core design tenants. How a profession sacrificing almost all mechanical strength, depth and utility (such as mobility, blocks, boon support, invulns, stealth, clones, etc.) for a single mechanic, Corrupts - which is then almost useless in the primarily supported gamemode of the game is a baffling design decision (and where it isn't useless, other professions with those tools can do boon removal better still anyway). And so on.

 

But Anet doesn't do much mechanical reworks as they are a lot more work intensive than just number tweaking. So most of these things likely will never change. 

And while FB and Holo for example got some interesting changes this patch which could indicate some changes in that regard - Reaper was part of that same initiative of changes, and didn't get functionality changes (beyond LF management). 

So as much as I uphold that these mechanics are bad, after a decade of suggesting and pleading and hoping, I'm not anticipating them to change anymore.

 

Fixing up the two Minors in Spite would already be huge for them - and push Reaper indeed beyond even "good enough". 

And that's good enough for me at this point.

 

Just because something isn't trash (anymore), doesn't mean it couldn't still use changes to be good in a better designed way. Harbinger is the poster child for that - which despite sporting one of the highest DPS Benchmarks in the game is an utterly awful designed Specialisation which I'd like to see reworked almost from the ground up.

Edited December 9, 2022 by Asum.4960

[Raizel.8175]

2 hours ago, Asum.4960 said:

The thing is, from a PvE point of view especially, Necromancer as a whole is full of objectively bad design.

Agreed.

2 hours ago, Asum.4960 said:

I feel that's far too harsh, but I suppose that's highly subjective. Personally I think there is, and always will be, quite the space between absolutely meta and trash tier. Just because something isn't meta doesn't mean it's trash to me.

Well... We have Low Intensity Rifle Mechanist as some kind of benchmark now...

[DeceiverX.8361]

On 11/29/2022 at 5:13 AM, Dadnir.5038 said:

Obtena is just realist and tend to oppose idealist points of view by looking at the overall balance history. That's all.

The devs can buff reaper's dps, they've done that for 7 years already. Prior to the balance splits based on gamemode, it led to the reaper having devastating result against less experienced players (especially in WvW) while it wasn't even enough to be sought out in PvE end game.

You said it yourself, reaper is selfish. What you fail to consider is that reaper isn't only selfish it is also self sufficient. And it's that self sufficience that break the camel's back. The patch that led to reaper losing so much damage removed from the game most of the few things that it couldn't get by himself.

Yes the large amount of health point of the reaper's meta dps build is an issue, but it also true for it's ability to sustain himself, get quickness by himself, it's ability to ignore the need for precision and it's ability to build it's own might alone. All of this self-sufficience make it so that it doesn't benefit from being in a group as much as other professions/specs. While, at the same time, it's own selfishness make it an unattractive addition for a group.

So, the main fault of the "dps reaper" is that it's to self-sufficient. Looking at things in a vacuum and focusing exclusively on making "power" reaper a thing, you can:

- Target the self might packed into spite's minor by replacing might by either raw stats or damage modifiers. Note that by doing this you kick blighter's boon in the nuts making it totally useless in it's current form (which is why I said "looking at things in a vaccum").

- Target the self quickness of reaper's onslaught by simply removing the boon in favor of a different bonus that doesn't compete with any boon provided by allies. Note that RS AA without Quickness isn't a satisfying experience, thanksfully quickness can be gained from spite's Dread now.

- Target the self sustain by making decimate defense a lot more attractive than Soul eater so that players end up being tempted using a pure dps trait over a hybrid sustain/dps trait (atm, even in the best case, valkyrie gear, decimate defense don't offer more damage output than soul eater)

With this 3 things done, it would make sense for reaper to have a build with competitive damage output in an organized group and thus the pleas for an increase of reaper's damage output would be justified. But at the moment reaper meta dps build is nothing more than a self sufficient selfish bruiser build whose survivability can be arguable. And, I don't think such a build need to have competitive damage output in an organized group.

You're right in the points leading to your conclusion but really the problem isn't that the Reaper should so much be bad as it is that self-sufficiency is quite literally a liability in group PvE.  Ranger and thief have historically had the same issues for large swaths of time on its selfish builds.

Which is a direct contradiction to how GW2 was launched and marketed as; self-sufficiency was all you were supposed to really need.  For a lot of existing players, and those who are still being sold that marketing, it's a huge turn-off.

It also completely reinforces the point I've been arguing for years:  You can't balance boons in group content.  It always creates massive disparities in what is good versus bad at various types of content; self-sufficiency is amazing in the PvP modes and horrendous in PvE because in PvE there are no forces to directly counter boon builds and mechanically demand self-sufficiency.  It's all just one big DPS check in the end, as it was before raids and "competitive PvE."

Unique buffs are the only thing you can inherently tune to work on both an individual profession and its nearby allies, and are from a design perspective, a blatantly superior choice in terms of regulating profession performance.

But what we have is the opposite occurring; it's always easier to optimize towards exclusivity the more normalized everything is.  If a profession can't keep up with boons or damage of another based on cumulative damage impact relative to selfish damage, the class is worthless across the board.

Which is why these discussions exist; it's frankly less about realism and more about the criticism that ANet's methods are deeply flawed.  How that manifests is entirely different.  Though I will say there are a LOT of very poorly-informed and very biased necromancer players the objectively worse ideas than ANet, just as any other profession has.

Edited December 9, 2022 by DeceiverX.8361

[Obtena.7952]

55 minutes ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

You're right in the points leading to your conclusion but really the problem isn't that the Reaper should so much be bad as it is that self-sufficiency is quite literally a liability in group PvE.  Ranger and thief have historically had the same issues for large swaths of time on its selfish builds.

Which is a direct contradiction to how GW2 was launched and marketed as; self-sufficiency was all you were supposed to really need.  For a lot of existing players, and those who are still being sold that marketing, it's a huge turn-off.

It also completely reinforces the point I've been arguing for years:  You can't balance boons in group content.  It always creates massive disparities in what is good versus bad at various types of content; self-sufficiency is amazing in the PvP modes and horrendous in PvE because in PvE there are no forces to directly counter boon builds and mechanically demand self-sufficiency.  It's all just one big DPS check in the end, as it was before raids and "competitive PvE."

Unique buffs are the only thing you can inherently tune to work on both an individual profession and its nearby allies, and are from a design perspective, a blatantly superior choice in terms of regulating profession performance.

But what we have is the opposite occurring; it's always easier to optimize towards exclusivity the more normalized everything is.  If a profession can't keep up with boons or damage of another based on cumulative damage impact relative to selfish damage, the class is worthless across the board.

Which is why these discussions exist; it's frankly less about realism and more about the criticism that ANet's methods are deeply flawed.  How that manifests is entirely different.  Though I will say there are a LOT of very poorly-informed and very biased necromancer players the objectively worse ideas than ANet, just as any other profession has.

So people need to take the next step here because all this assumes Reaper should be 'good' in PVE. Objectively, that needs to be questioned. Where does that assumption come from? This Reaper should be good in PVE is certainly not necessary and it's certainly not exceptional that it's not either. 

Is it a good assumption? Well, ideally, Reaper is good in PVE sure. But based on the history of the game and how it's designed to work, that assumption is questionable. 

Edited December 10, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

9 hours ago, Raizel.8175 said:

1. How is "damage reduction relative to the amount of life force you have" supposed to work? I can't really see how that should be reasonable.

2. Again: How is "enter/exit Reaper Shroud at will" supposed to work. I nean, bad Reaper-players kinda neglect Soul Barbs uptime - at least it was like that in the past since it should be quite difficult to neglect that nowadays due to the prolonged duration. Shouldn't there be some skill checks involved? You also lose DPS uptime if you constantly enter and exit Shroud - at least in PvE encounters where you then have to enter/exit constantly if you don't want your Shroud getting obliterated.

I can agree with the argument, that Reaper may be better or at least tied now with Harbinger - Harbinger is - due to how it works - rather situational anyway. I do disagree though with Reaper not being trash anymore. Gameplay-wise, Reaper is almost a carbon copy of Holosmith. Holosmith is easily superior to Reaper and one reason why that's the case is that Holosmith actually encourages you to use your "resource" (Heat meter) for damage. Reaper is ultimately being held back in that regard by how Reaper Shroud works which is one of the reasons why several people already suggested to adjust the functionality of Reaper Shroud by traits. If you want an offensive build, have a trait that allows Shroud to be a consumable resource. If you want a defensive build, let Shroud work the same as it does now: something akin to a second health bar.

Shroud isn't a new mechanic, it exists in many games and is better known as a "mana shield". Some games implement it the same way this one does--a limited amount of health that absorbs damage and is eventually depleted, resulting in the loss of the shield. This implementation is problematic in this game though because you also have your skills and your damage traits tied to it, so instead of just losing a shield, you practically lose your weapon as well.

 

A better but less common implementation is for the shield to be always on, (well, turned on and off by the player as they chose), this way you don't lose access to your skills and traits. The shield would absorb 100% of the damage you take at full life force, and 0% of the damage you take at empty life force, while slowly regenerating when you're not taking damage. This is commonly seen on starships in space combat games.

 

Its also already the premise behind the most common Reaper LI build using Signet of Undeath regeneration, but being able to be completely knocked out of Shroud means it isn't completely effective.

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by Mariyuuna.6508

[DeceiverX.8361]

23 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

So people need to take the next step here because all this assumes Reaper should be 'good' in PVE. Objectively, that needs to be questioned. Where does that assumption come from? This Reaper should be good in PVE is certainly not necessary and it's certainly not exceptional that it's not either. 

Is it a good assumption? Well, ideally, Reaper is good in PVE sure. But based on the history of the game and how it's designed to work, that assumption is questionable. 

We can say that about any class taking any sample of time, though.  Ranger, engineer, necromancer, and mesmer were memes at "PvE" for nearly half of the game's history, and for a stretch of a few years so were thief and warrior.  We might as well just rename the game to "Guardian Wars 2" if we're going to look at overall class viability as the sole metric we use as to whether or not a class *should* exist in a content sphere, and it's blatantly apparent and was confirmed with the leaks ANet has also historically ignored everything *except* PvE.  And because by this logic, I could reasonably claim thief and mesmer should get double damage when fighting alone across all formats as to be completely and totally the undisputed kings of dueling, because for most of the game's history, they were the best-equipped to handle 1v1 and 1vX in the PvP modes.  Because ANet historically seemed to encourage these classes existing primarily in a niche of smallscale competitive play, and not every build needs to be good at smallscale PvP.  But we all know that such a suggestion is absurd.  Diversity is good for games' health as a business; if people can't engage with the game in ways they want to, or are shunned for not engaging in a specific way, then they won't want to stick around and spend money on the product.

And them being shunned or unwanted is a problem ANet is responsible for by enabling stuff like DPS meters and third party extensions.  The community - and people in general - will always be rude and exclusionary if allowed to be.  Period.  Facts of human behavior.  So if ANet wants to run their company well, they need to make their baseline level of play - the core of interaction with their game in their classes - similar across the board in performance and viability.  The onus is on them to their shareholders to either tear down the structures which enable competition rather than collaboration in full, or make everything good.  Considering the emphasis in recent years of pushing people into raids and structured/exclusionary PvE roles, I'm going to have to say the latter is more realistic of a goal.

And truth is, "Good in PvE" is pretty vague.  If encounters in PvE suddenly reflected boon dependency and mechanics like sPvP or WvW with high need for self-sufficiency and resilience to being ganked and bursted down or run over by huge numbers of targets that capped AoE's and damage for most skills, then that would command Reapers being much better than virtually every other profession at dealing damage, which runs entirely counter to the narrative you previously established.  Because that's a design-level-decision of an encounter, rather than some nebulous concept of what PvE is or is supposed to be as a core ideal.

Because as soon as people are talking about what an entire game is "supposed to be" - as opposed to providing a good return for shareholders - that's all idealist BS.  Consider one level deeper:  GW2 doesn't need any classes/professions/elite specs/skill diversity at all and can be easily made into Guardian Wars 2.  Why doesn't ANet do that?  It has nothing to do with a fictitious vision of what a fantasy MMO is.  Classes/Professions exist because diverse mechanisms to partake in the content and the mechanics and/or aesthetics they provide are foundational to the success of a modern multiplayer MMO.

I've worked on a now-defunct MMO and watched and learned these lessons the hard way.  If people can't play the way they want, they just leave and stop paying and find something else, and the company dies over time.  We saw the crash with WvW already from isolating out a style of play from a subset of players using a subset of builds, and we can observe this in tons of games from Wildstar to Runescape 3 to BDO to R:BF which I worked on.

That's realism.  Whether or not a class is good at specifically doing a specific thing is irrelevant, but that "next step" question you posit is absolute nonsense; what matters in the end for everyone actually on production of the product is getting people motivated to clock hours and throw cash at pixels.  And that's achieved by making people feel like their invested time is worth it and that they can feel like they can do what they want in their downtime.

[Obtena.7952]

4 hours ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

That's realism.  Whether or not a class is good at specifically doing a specific thing is irrelevant, but that "next step" question you posit is absolute nonsense; what matters in the end for everyone actually on production of the product is getting people motivated to clock hours and throw cash at pixels.  And that's achieved by making people feel like their invested time is worth it and that they can feel like they can do what they want in their downtime.

Well, it's not absolute nonsense because if you look at the game holistically, it seems to me there are LOTS more reasons for people motivated to clock hours and throw cash at pixels than not ... or the game wouldn't exist. THAT is realism. 

So if what matters in the end is for the population of players to spend on the game (which is obviously happening), then explain to me why it's such a big problem for Reaper, as non-optimal PVE performer exception, to continues on as such? I don't see it. 

Sure, it feels bad if you like it, you count its beans and want to compare with other beancounters, but it's a PROBLEM when that fraction of beancounting Reapers have fewer beans than everyone else? I would hardly go that far. Game history simply doesn't support that idea and it's unrealistic to think any option's beans should be equal in any activity they are used in the first place. 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[DeceiverX.8361]

16 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, it's not absolute nonsense because if you look at the game holistically, it seems to me there are LOTS more reasons for people motivated to clock hours and throw cash at pixels than not ... or the game wouldn't exist. THAT is realism. 

So if what matters in the end is for the population of players to spend on the game (which is obviously happening), then explain to me why it's such a big problem for Reaper, as non-optimal PVE performer exception, to continues on as such? I don't see it. 

Sure, it feels bad if you like it, you count its beans and want to compare with other beancounters, but it's a PROBLEM when that fraction of beancounting Reapers have fewer beans than everyone else? I would hardly go that far. Game history simply doesn't support that idea and it's unrealistic to think any option's beans should be equal in any activity they are used in the first place. 

That bean-counting verbiage is a fine-tooth comb for defining and examining optimal solutions, in which nowhere did I say reaper should be even remotely at the top end of DPS.  Most people here are arguing reaper should be, and I quote, "Good" at selfish DPS; a role and identity ANet has been pushing on the Reaper for years with repeated nerfs to its sustain and repeated buffs to its outgoing damage; if you wish to argue in favor of the vision that the Reaper should not be a DPS class because ANet would otherwise make its DPS numbers better, you contradict quite literally almost every single patch affecting Reaper's skills, traits, and RShroud since it launched; it has less than half the durability and uptime it used to as an offtank, and its damage has been quite literally almost doubled since then.  How can you justify ANet's intentions by blatantly ignoring the changes to the class?

Because as it stands, currently, the reaper is nearly getting out-damaged by group support roles.  It's not that the reaper is "Not the best," which I agree it shouldn't be due to RShroud's defensive capabilities; such raw damage should be reserved to specs without raw tanking ability.  The issue is that Reaper is objectively bad at the role ANet has historically forced the class into by downright removing a lot of the mechanics which let it sustain itself as a self-sufficient bruiser/offtank in favor of pushing more selfish DPS, and in the end it's still bad at DPS and a downright unusable offtank wit how heavy-handed the nerfs to its sustain have been over the years.

That's the problem.  The profession has no place in the scheme ANet has explicitly pushed the class into. 

Edited December 11, 2022 by DeceiverX.8361

[Obtena.7952]

5 hours ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

 How can you justify ANet's intentions by blatantly ignoring the changes to the class?

Well, I'm not justifying any intent, which is the point of my questioning why people have come to certain conclusions about the intent for Reaper in PVE is in the first place. Even if there is intent, Anet hasn't told us what it is. But to answer your question: I can use Reaper to play how I want and be successful in teams doing that and that's the goal in PVE; to complete content to get loot. That's literally the intention behind every endgame encounter and choosing any spec to do that. Nothing about how the Reaper does or doesn't work prevents me from doing that ... or any other player. 

So below you talk about the 'problem' being solved here. OK, let's look at that. 

5 hours ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

 The issue is that Reaper is objectively bad at the role ANet has historically forced the class into by downright removing a lot of the mechanics which let it sustain itself as a self-sufficient bruiser/offtank in favor of pushing more selfish DPS, and in the end it's still bad at DPS and a downright unusable offtank wit how heavy-handed the nerfs to its sustain have been over the years.

That's the problem.  The profession has no place in the scheme ANet has explicitly pushed the class into. 

Until Anet explicitly gives Reaper a role or describe what they think the spec should be (which I haven't seen happen), no player is in a position to qualify if Reaper is 'in place' for whatever scheme you claim Anet is pushing it into for PVE.

If you want to infer Anet is pushing Reaper into SOME role ... then it looks like the start of a long, cold winter because people have been making this inferences about this SOME Reaper role for years and Reaper is still not there yet.  

Maybe, just MAYBE ... what people THINK Reaper should be isn't what Anet thinks it should ... and that's why it's NOT what people want it to be. JUST MAYBE. ... or ... just keep thinking you know everything about what Anet wants and wonder why it doesn't work that way. 

Edited December 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[captrowdy.9561]

After a year and half I think I’ve found necro as my favorite class. I play mostly wvw/pvp and open world pve. Reaper is just so much fun. Ya it could be a little better for roaming but it’s a fun challenge. When I do instanced pve I do harb or scrouge. Just because reaper isn’t meta in a certain game mode doesn’t mean it’s bad. 

[draxynnic.3719]

4 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, I'm not justifying any intent, which is the point of my questioning why people have come to certain conclusions about the intent for Reaper in PVE is in the first place. Even if there is intent, Anet hasn't told us what it is. But to answer your question: I can use Reaper to play how I want and be successful in teams doing that and that's the goal in PVE; to complete content to get loot. That's literally the intention behind every endgame encounter and choosing any spec to do that. Nothing about how the Reaper does or doesn't work prevents me from doing that ... or any other player. 

So below you talk about the 'problem' being solved here. OK, let's look at that. 

Until Anet explicitly gives Reaper a role or describe what they think the spec should be (which I haven't seen happen), no player is in a position to qualify if Reaper is 'in place' for whatever scheme you claim Anet is pushing it into for PVE.

If you want to infer Anet is pushing Reaper into SOME role ... then it looks like the start of a long, cold winter because people have been making this inferences about this SOME Reaper role for years and Reaper is still not there yet.  

Maybe, just MAYBE ... what people THINK Reaper should be isn't what Anet thinks it should ... and that's why it's NOT what people want it to be. JUST MAYBE. ... or ... just keep thinking you know everything about what Anet wants and wonder why it doesn't work that way. 

Or maybe... just maybe, and I know this is out there... we had a biased balance team for years who got publically exposed for only caring about their favourites, and the new team is playing catchup for years of neglect?

Current Reaper is around 35-36k. That's respectable. The trick for them now is to bring it up a couple of thousand more without it making open world even more ridiculous. The answer is probably to buff the traits that aren't the ones that generate the massive amounts of self-sufficiency, and then lightly nerf the self-sufficiency traits.

[Obtena.7952]

39 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Or maybe... just maybe, and I know this is out there... we had a biased balance team for years who got publically exposed for only caring about their favourites, and the new team is playing catchup for years of neglect?

Yeah maybe ... but that STILL shouldn't make ANYONE believe they know what Anet's intention is for Reaper or not question if it's reasonable that we have options like Reaper that aren't optimal in PVE content in the ways that people imagine they want them to be optimal.

I mean, whether there is a new balance team or not, is irrelevant to how people have convinced themselves some big DPS team role is in the future for Reaper. Unless I missed something, I saw NOTHING from this new team that says that's the direction they want Reaper to go or even than they even have an issue with Reaper's current PVE status to begin with. 

 

Edited December 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[captrowdy.9561]

I still don’t get it. All this fuss about reaper because it’s not in the top dps charts in one game mode? It just got a nice buff. The players that try hard in instance pve make a up a small population. I see tons of reapers in other game mods. It’s like if I show up to raid night for my wvw guild on a harb. I need to play scrouge or reaper because that what works in groups in wvw. 

[draxynnic.3719]

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Yeah maybe ... but that STILL shouldn't make ANYONE believe they know what Anet's intention is for Reaper or not question if it's reasonable that we have options like Reaper that aren't optimal in PVE content in the ways that people imagine they want them to be optimal.

I mean, whether there is a new balance team or not, is irrelevant to how people have convinced themselves some big DPS team role is in the future for Reaper. Unless I missed something, I saw NOTHING from this new team that says that's the direction they want Reaper to go or even than they even have an issue with Reaper's current PVE status to begin with. 

 

Yep, buffing the DPS by about 8k while showing no signs of adjusting reaper to fit a boon support or healer is certainly not at all circumstantial evidence that the current balance team considers reaper to fit into a DPS role while acknowledging that what it had before was too low. Couldn't possibly be.

Actions speak louder than words, and the actions taken here speak volumes. The feedback given with the preview was that the buffs weren't enough to place them into the range of a competitive DPS build, and the result was that they slipped in a few more so that it would at least hit the lower end of that range.

Arguments along the range of 'then why didn't they do anything years before' fall down on two points. Point one, we know why: the previous balance team didn't care about reaper. Point two, the current balance team just did something big.

[Obtena.7952]

9 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Actions speak louder than words, and the actions taken here speak volumes. The feedback given with the preview was that the buffs weren't enough to place them into the range of a competitive DPS build, and the result was that they slipped in a few more so that it would at least hit the lower end of that range.

Sure, and to take Anet's current actions to buff Reaper DPS as an indication that they want Reaper to be a competitive DPS role in PVE is a very assuming position to take considering Anet has ALSO buffed Reaper DPS in the past as well and it DIDN'T result in Reaper being competitive DPS in PVE. Also, Anet buffs DPS on all sorts of things that AREN'T DPS roles so a DPS buff is a really weak assumption to make to conclude Anet wants it to be in a competitive DPS role in teams. 

But somehow, you regard the most recent DPS buff as EXCEPTIONAL because 'new balance team'. OK. I don't get that view because as far as I'm concerned, a DPS change is a regular kind of change to any spec, regardless of it's role. I want Anet to tell us what they intend, like they have for all the other specs that have roles. If there is any exception here, it's that we haven't been told what Anet wants Reaper to be, even though it's getting changes to it that can be interpreted as a pure DPS role direction. 

Frankly, the only thing I really expect is Anet simply buffs the DPS, not say what role it's in and allow players to make their choices based on what it is, not what Anet says it should be. I'm OK with that because that's how the game should work anyways (these role assignments are just a thin veneer of balance trickery as far as I'm concerned). I'm simply not OK with the nonsensical statements from players about how Reaper should work because of what they are assuming about how Anet regards the spec. For example, the endless calls for flat DPS buffs of dozens of percent because "Anet wants Reaper to be DPS role in PVE" ... that's just absurd.

If Reaper becomes a competitive DPS choice because of how Anet changes it, ok then ... but no one should be pounding the desk for a specific change because they know what Anet wants or intends for the spec until they tell us. 

Edited December 12, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Dr Meta.3158]

6 hours ago, The Boz.2038 said:

Please don't speak to mud, guys. You are falling for troll bait.
And it wasn't even good troll bait, lol.

Honestly, I don't think its trolling. I looks more akin to autism the more I read it over with the main four consistent themes being reading comprehension struggles, repetitive statements, being stuck in the same logic loops, and lack of social cues. I'd keep that in mind so you don't get frustrated and pulled into a positive feedback loop.

[Hindenburg.3415]

I remember people were crying that balance update is not going change anything.

Meanwhile reaper gained 5k dps and even listed as "viable" build on SC.

This tells you everything you need to know about forum balance experts.

[Dadnir.5038]

30 minutes ago, Hindenburg.3415 said:

I remember people were crying that balance update is not going change anything.

Meanwhile reaper gained 5k dps and even listed as "viable" build on SC.

This tells you everything you need to know about forum balance experts.

A build being viable doesn't mean that it is meta nor does it mean that it's a popular pick in any group. Reaper indeed gained 5k but nothing really changed for reaper when it come to group content.

[Arianth Moonlight.6453]

5 hours ago, Hindenburg.3415 said:

Meanwhile reaper gained 5k dps and even listed as "viable" build on SC.

Reaper needed 50% damage boost, not 5% but yeah, I'm back at the top in the DPS meter, at least for open content where no one really try to pull their best DPS...

[draxynnic.3719]

7 hours ago, Hindenburg.3415 said:

I remember people were crying that balance update is not going change anything.

Meanwhile reaper gained 5k dps and even listed as "viable" build on SC.

This tells you everything you need to know about forum balance experts.

Because they added more than was in the original preview. This wasn't the feedback being wrong, this was the balance team listening to the feedback.