Mechanist - What is the point of the leash?

[Alcatraznc.3869]

1 minute ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

I tried mech barrier build for the first time in forever and I literally have 100% uptime on alacrity doing absolutely nothing... with p/p on a condi build and 20% boon duration. In WvW. 

I dont even want to know how it was because alacrity was nerfed then.

 

It isnt exactly hard to have personnal perma alacrity with Mechanist even with low boon duration. I used to run rune of the sanctuary and never had any issue with personnal alacrity. Key word here is personnal.

 

If you tell me you can give perma alacrity to your group with 20% duration using a P/P condi build then I'll ask for a proof because it smells bs

[Alcatraznc.3869]

11 minutes ago, The Boz.2038 said:

Don't engage with trolls that don't play the spec. Nothing fruitful can come of it.

Right but I still wanted to say it anyway for the potential reader who would believe that

[The Boz.2038]

4 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

I tried mech barrier build for the first time in forever and I literally have 100% uptime on alacrity doing absolutely nothing... with p/p on a condi build and 20% boon duration. In WvW. 

I dont even want to know how it was before alacrity was nerfed then.

With a p/p? In WvW? 20%?
See, now I know you full of it.

...and then there's other reasons why it isn't a popular build, lol.

Edited June 30, 2023 by The Boz.2038

[ThunderX.6591]

Really curious to know the build of this wvw condi full time alac, i mean, i did some test months ago about it, when mecha wasn't "nerfed underground", and could get personal alac up against the "TEST Golem" thx to mace barrier 1 + all the others alac skill provider, but now? Now is hard to get near 100% alac with full concentration gear with barrier provider skill............. not to mention, you loose the self quickness if you want to provide alac now cause you need mandatory the 3 secs barrier robot aoe for help.

And mechanical Genius is istant on/off now, and your robot go around random out of the range of it leaving you powerless to control it (ex. target an enemy in front of me, set the robot to attack it with me running at it, robot randomly go right or left leaving the range of Genius and istant loose it before attacking the enemy getting the skill malus........... and i clicked the enemy IN FRONT with the mecha meele skill..............)

[Endaris.1452]

1 hour ago, Alcatraznc.3869 said:

 

For a spec that forces you to give up an entire branch just to your buff your mech, remove about 20-30 skills and punishes you for not sticking to him like glue, the mech is way way far from being busted.

 

 

You can run beastmastery for 3 rangers at once it's still unlikely their pets are going to win a 3v1 against a mech, even though they used an entire traitline too.

[The Boz.2038]

Just now, Endaris.1452 said:

You can run beastmastery for 3 rangers at once it's still unlikely their pets are going to win a 3v1 against a mech, even though they used an entire traitline too.

Why would you compare a lone pet to a lone mech? This has been explained to you with simple mathematics: Mech is greater percentage of Mechanist's total power than pet is of Ranger's. Taken together, in their entirety, they add up to about the same.
"hurr durr necromancer bone fiend can't win against ranger pets, even though they used an entire traitline"
Honestly...

[Endaris.1452]

22 hours ago, The Boz.2038 said:

It's just that the ranger/pet is 90/10, while mechanist/mech is 70/30.

Not sure how your math works but you made it sound like 3 pets even without beastmastery would stand a chance.

 

[The Boz.2038]

19 minutes ago, Endaris.1452 said:

Not sure how your math works but you made it sound like 3 pets even without beastmastery would stand a chance.

 

Three boon-less lynxes have ~3k DPS each. I'd put money down that a boon-less jade mech dies to that, yes.

The math works out in such a way that a fully kitted out DPS ranger with their fully kitted out DPS pet in their DPS rotation has the player pump out 90% of the damage, and the pet ~10% (obviously, outside merged soulbeast). For a similarly built mechanist, the pet is ~30-35% of the total damage output. It is entirely irrelevant, though, because the elements are non-fungible, and you can't combo the ranger with the mech anyway (to reach the 125% omg!).

Edited June 30, 2023 by The Boz.2038

[ZetsuZack.9217]

I second the idea that mechanist out of range is extremely too harsh, 50% CD increase is INSANE and the the 360 radius punishment is so unforgiving. I can play a full round of mechanic dps on boneskinner and SPAMMING the follow everytime I move, and I still will get penalty because the dam range is so short, thats how bad this is right now. It's pretty much a mandatory nerf as in, no matter what I do, I WILL get my CD's skyrocketed into the dam air. It's not a nerf of gameplay it's literally impractical. IN PRACTICE its actually garbage to maintain, it's just bad technique design, this is not the way to make penalty VISUAL. There's so many creative ways to make visual penalty's rather than gutting a class into an impractical mess of a technique.

I guess as a suggestion for critique's sake: increase the range by a far margine, like actually 900. actually. Or maybe a visual screen indicator like the corner or your screen pulses blue like your health is low. Using the words visual penalty, and not using  artistic creativity where it's due is just down right lazy, I love mech as a class and DEVs should too.

Edited June 30, 2023 by ZetsuZack.9217

[Kuma.1503]

3 hours ago, Endaris.1452 said:

You can run beastmastery for 3 rangers at once it's still unlikely their pets are going to win a 3v1 against a mech, even though they used an entire traitline too.

If we're talking PvP, Those ranger pets hit like trucks. 

Thankfully the 10k River Drake  tail swipes are a thing of the past, but smokescale is still a pocket herald following you around with very reliable damage, stickiness, crowd control, good durability thanks to its smoke field, and it gives GS rangers access to stealth. 

Gazelle still hits hard and has multiple annoying CCs that cause the player to burn dodges or risk getting comboed. 

Jacaranda can be used to chain immobilizes on your foes which some builds struggle to dealth with (especially those whose weapons can't hit those buggy roots. Looking at you Scepter/Staff Necro). 

Bristleback is often overlooked, but it's a ranged pet with deceptively high pressure. I've seen many a bunker ranger use it to good effect. 

Ranger pets are very competetive in PvP. If a ranger ignores their pet assuming they're useless. That's a bad ranger. 

 

Also I fail to see the part where Ranger's utility skills become half as powerful because they took Beastmastery. Reminder that Mechs lose toolbelts in exchange for Mech skills. These include our cleanses, stunbreaks, stealth, ect. We get skills that make our Mech stronger in exchange. 

The equivalent for ranger would be if they took Beastmastery AND took a trait that nerfed every utility skill on their bar by ~40-50%, but gave them 3 extra pet skills of equal power in exchange. 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Kuma.1503

[Sobx.1758]

Probably for the mech to be something more than a better, yet still uninteractive turret?

[The Boz.2038]

4 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Probably for the mech to be something more than a better, yet still uninteractive turret?

How do you figure that?

[Sobx.1758]

1 minute ago, The Boz.2038 said:

How do you figure that?

...how do you not? Were you not playing the game after the mech release and before the range passive change?

Edited June 30, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[The Boz.2038]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

...how do you not? Were you not playing the game after the mech release and before the range passive change?

...How does that relate to "turrets, but more interactive" at all?

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, The Boz.2038 said:

...How does that relate to "turrets, but more interactive" at all?

Again, did you not see how it was played after release? How do you think it was played? It was a stronger self-repositioning turret. Now you have to reposition it or it loses part of the power. What are you even asking about here?

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, The Boz.2038 said:

Exotic take.

As opposed to the take in your post which apparently is: none. So what was the point of asking any question in the first place when you're avoiding the answers anyways? 🙄

[Passerbye.6291]

  

On 6/29/2023 at 10:56 AM, The Boz.2038 said:

I don't want to get into the details of how the leash punishes non-compliance; cooldowns, stat loss, whatever.

Why is it there in the first place?

If the devs are bothered by "you shouldn't get to affect your team/the enemy without being close to them simply because your pet is", why is that a problem with mechanist, but not ranger? Why is that a problem at all? 

 

6 hours ago, The Boz.2038 said:

Why would you compare a lone pet to a lone mech? This has been explained to you with simple mathematics: Mech is greater percentage of Mechanist's total power than pet is of Ranger's. Taken together, in their entirety, they add up to about the same.
"hurr durr necromancer bone fiend can't win against ranger pets, even though they used an entire traitline"
Honestly...

I really don't know why this is so hard to grasp but, the reason why people compare pets is because you literally did it in your original post. You are the one who started this whole comparing apples to pears thing. I'm pretty sure anyone who has played both those classes for more than 10 minutes has realized that the mech comprises a bigger percentage of what the class has to offer than a ranger's pet does for the ranger. What people are pointing out isn't that a ranger's pet and a mechanist's mech are the same thing, it is in fact the exact opposite, they are vastly different in their capabilities, hence why it was a problem with mechanist and not for ranger. 

Now, to clarify it further, because I have a feeling you'll try to retort to facts, as you previously pointed out yourself, the mech comprises a significantly bigger percentage of damage and most of the boon support of the mechanist than a ranger's pet, what this means is that, if you have nothing that hinders the mech's output, (I don't even know why I have to say this again, sigh) you get to leave it on a boss to deal significant portion of your total damage while it is a clear downtime for other classes during mechanics. Similarly, you get to leave the mech on the boss and continue to grant almost all your boons while you yourself are away, doing certain mechanics. They wanted to put a leash on this capability (see what I did there? no laughs? fine, tough crowd today.) so, instead of removing it entirely, they decided to leave it in the game to keep its unique feature, but limit it so that it wouldn't be overpowered.

Now, if you do the same on ranger, relatively speaking, the ranger pet is already capable of much less, so leaving it on the boss for insignificant damage barely results in any advantage gained, so it was not deemed necessary.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Passerbye.6291

[The Boz.2038]

1 minute ago, Passerbye.6291 said:

I really don't know why this is so hard to grasp but, the reason why people compare pets is because you literally did it in your original post. You are the one who started this whole comparing apples to pears thing.

The comparison was to ranger, not pet to pet... because spirits are (or, until the most very recently, were) capable of feeding a team with boons while the ranger was away. Could have also mentioned warrior (due to banners) in the same vein. Made no mention of the pet in this capacity in the OP, which can be easily noticed by reading it and comprehending the meaning and context of the words contained therein.

[The Boz.2038]

4 minutes ago, Passerbye.6291 said:

Similarly, you get to leave the mech on the boss and continue to grant almost all your boons while you yourself are away, doing certain mechanics. They wanted to put a leash on this capability (see what I did there? no laughs? fine, tough crowd today.) so, instead of removing it entirely, they decided to leave it in the game to keep its unique feature, but limit it so that it wasn't overpowered.

OK.

Good.

Now.

Meaningless drivel aside, and pointless filler text out of the way... Seems we are on the same page here.
ANet doesn't like it when mech does X, but Mechanist isn't literally there riding it.
...so why did ANet design it that way? And why is the leash punishing, instead of restricting (in the sense of "if bot > 600 away = instantly rubberband the bot back, lol wtf were you thinking, you're some kind of not literally just the engineer?")?

[Passerbye.6291]

1 minute ago, The Boz.2038 said:

The comparison was to ranger, not pet to pet... because spirits are (or, until the most very recently, were) capable of feeding a team with boons while the ranger was away. Could have also mentioned warrior (due to banners) in the same vein. Made no mention of the pet in this capacity in the OP, which can be easily noticed by reading it and comprehending the meaning and context of the words contained therein.

You had to walk into the group to apply alacrity with the spirits still, forcing you to join the group back regardless, they only continually provided their basic boons, so some might, fury, prot etc. Btw, spirits were immobile, not constantly tracking a target, and they would continually degrade, taking percentage damage, forcing you to babysit them, so there was a clear downside or a trade off. What you are arguing against is akin to saying old druid spirits should have followed the target, did some damage, and also applied alacrity by themselves.

[Passerbye.6291]

Just now, The Boz.2038 said:

Meaningless drivel aside, and pointless filler text out of the way... Seems we are on the same page here.
ANet doesn't like it when mech does X, but Mechanist isn't literally there riding it.
...so why did ANet design it that way? And why is the leash punishing, instead of restricting (in the sense of "if bot > 600 away = instantly rubberband the bot back, lol wtf were you thinking, you're some kind of not literally just the engineer?")?

I literally explained why, because they want it in the game, just at a REDUCED LEVEL. Do I still have you? I feel like you are having attention span issues here mate.

[The Boz.2038]

1 minute ago, Passerbye.6291 said:

because they want it in the game

They obviously don't want it in the game, lol. Any attempt to use it results in penalties that prevent you from doing your basic job.

[Passerbye.6291]

1 minute ago, The Boz.2038 said:

They obviously don't want it in the game, lol. Any attempt to use it results in penalties that prevent you from doing your basic job.

ıf they didn't want it in the game, it wouldn't be. Tuning numbers and disabling a certain interaction are two separate things to which they have access as the balance team. They simply wanted it to do less than what it did. Are you familiar with what balancing is?

[The Boz.2038]

Just now, Passerbye.6291 said:

ıf they didn't want it in the game, it wouldn't be.

I think you just revolutionized coding.
All bugs are suddenly logick'd out of existence!

[Passerbye.6291]

2 minutes ago, The Boz.2038 said:

I think you just revolutionized coding.
All bugs are suddenly logick'd out of existence!

Are you trying to argue that a change that was literally in patch notes as an intended addition to the classes balance was a bug? Like, I get that you argued yourself into a corner and feel like there is no way out mate, but it is okay to take the L and just call it quits. This is getting embarrassing at this point.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Passerbye.6291