Mechanist - What is the point of the leash?

[Sobx.1758]

10 hours ago, Sindust.7059 said:

This is not a rhetorical question. In a world where there are classes doing 40k while doing boon support that can go to 1500 range if they need to (rifle deadeye)

"that world" doesn't matter because that performance clearly isn't intended and we already know it will be nerfed. Not sure why you're somehow trying to use that as a valid frame for judging any dps value. 

Also when you're talking about "value it has/should be", I find it rather misguided that you're still talking about a dps golem scenario instead of an actually realistic one.

7 hours ago, Noxin.9276 said:

Adding back a very short grace period is a reasonable QOL improvement while not countering the direction they are going with it (reduction in power) which is clearly still needed despite the historic reductions. This would alleviate the unavoidable pet AI glitches or boss movement situations that are not caused by mechanists intending to sit in the back with a rifle avoiding mechanics.

(...)

As for the personal remark, I don't hate the class, its by far my favorite - having been an engineer main for many years. I just believe it should be balanced based on "what you put in" is "what you get out". Signets and a rifle shouldn't be competitive with complicated rotations (classic condi/holo/weaver) that take practice and proper execution to learn. I fully support LI builds for someone otherwise unable (or unwilling) to move beyond them but they shouldn't be so strong (24-28k is enough to handle most raid content) that they convince the bulk of the player base to forsake anything else like we see here. This is bad for the game (challenge and variety matters for game longevity)  in general and that is why I am against seeing anet's countermeasure removed entirely or made unnoticeable - a very short grace would be fine to address things outside of the player control.

Agreed, well said.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Batalix.2873]

27 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

"that world" doesn't matter because that performance clearly isn't intended and we already know it will be nerfed. Not sure why you're somehow trying to use that as a valid frame for judging any dps value. 

Also when you're talking about "value it has/should be", I find it rather misguided that you're still talking about a dps golem scenario instead of an actually realistic one.

Agreed, well said.

Funny how all of these clearly, face-value things are "not intended" and "going to be nerfed". Moreover, that many power crept aspects have been kept in the game for years.

It either signals at intentionally bad design philosophy, or otherwise obliviously under considered design philosophy.

I haven't played many MMOs, but of those I have played GW2 combat/class design is easily the least consistent, the least polished, and the least sure of itself. At least, post-PoF GW2.

[Gendalfs.7521]

I dont think there is any design philosophy at all. Maybe there was at start, but now I think they just sporadically changing things without even knowing what they do. When leash was first introduced, I was like WTF, what is that? Why cant you just tweak numbers, why invent something new. And now with new boon system its obvious, they want to give everyone boons, but have no idea of how to do it without breaking gameplay.

[Sindust.7059]

39 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

"that world" doesn't matter because that performance clearly isn't intended and we already know it will be nerfed. Not sure why you're somehow trying to use that as a valid frame for judging any dps value. 

Also when you're talking about "value it has/should be", I find it rather misguided that you're still talking about a dps golem scenario instead of an actually realistic one.

What you say doesn't matter either, because that's not the only support dps that does more damage than greed power mech. Just open the snowcrows benchmark page and count the support dps that are over 31k. And then come back and tell me what you think is fair to have for greed power mech without the MG debuff.

Also stop making excuses. Just give us a number. The fact that you're dodging the question says everything.

[Sobx.1758]

40 minutes ago, Batalix.2873 said:

Funny how all of these clearly, face-value things are "not intended" and "going to be nerfed". Moreover, that many power crept aspects have been kept in the game for years.

You must have missed this thread:

ctrl+f "deadeye" and let me know if you still think what I wrote is somehow supposed to not be true, when I'm basing that directly on what anet told us in that thread.

29 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

What you say doesn't matter either, because that's not the only support dps that does more damage than greed power mech. Just open the snowcrows benchmark page and count the support dps that are over 31k. And then come back and tell me what you think is fair to have for greed power mech without the MG debuff.

Also stop making excuses. Just give us a number. The fact that you're dodging the question says everything.

As I said: also when you're talking about "value it has/should be", I find it rather misguided that you're still talking about a dps golem scenario instead of an actually realistic one.

Judging builds in isolation by snowcrows benchmark doesn't make much sense. It is something, but it's easly not everything. We already had this talk before and I asked you about actual boss encounters values you'd think would be reasonable, which as far as I remember remained unanswered. But the li power mech is fine, it's easly viable and not somehow "just barely".

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Sindust.7059]

26 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

actual boss encounters

Mursaat Overseer. Go. My answer is the same as benchmark. Your turn.

No, you'll still dodge the question again, and there will be some new excuse.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sindust.7059

[Sobx.1758]

10 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Mursaat Overseer. Go. My answer is the same as benchmark. Your turn.

No, you'll still dodge the question again, and there will be some new excuse.

I said outside of dps golem scenarios.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Sindust.7059]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I said outside of dps golem scenarios.

So an actual raid boss isn't an "actual boss encounter" now.

Dude, you're really grasping at straws here. Benchmarks exist for a reason, because they are a consistent performance measurement. When a boss requires performing mechanics, all builds lose DPS. And unless some specific mechanic is involved that uniquely benefits a specific build, all builds lose DPS. For example how about Q2 pylons? Power mech is like the 4th choice there after power deadeye, condi virtuoso, condi scourge. And he's doing 15k less dps than the top pick there. Does that count, or will there be some more excuses? Can you name any boss at all where power mech would be the top pick at all? Because I cannot.

[Sobx.1758]

10 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

So an actual raid boss isn't an "actual boss encounter" now.

Ok, I suppose you actually forgot the question, so I went back and grabbed it for you. Here it is:

Yes, it is about viable dps, yes it is "what you think it should be" (and if your answer really is "benchmark value" here then there's a rather substantial misunderstnading about what this game is balanced around) and yes, it is -just like it was last time I asked you about it- about actual encounters outside of dps golem ones. Nothing changed about that, but I understand that you might have forgotten what was being asked.

10 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Dude, you're really grasping at straws here. Benchmarks exist for a reason, because they are a consistent performance measurement.

Consistent performance measurement in a hugely controlled by the player environment. That's exactly why it shouldn't be -and as far as we know isn't- somehow the be-all-end-all factor for the balancing. I think it was even explained by the players benching those.

10 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Can you name any boss at all where power mech would be the top pick at all? Because I cannot.

Why would it suddenly need to be a top pick? Where did THAT even come from? It's about viability and performance relative to the gameplay pattern presented by the build. Mech is easly viable and still an easy, safe low intensity build.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Sindust.7059]

17 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ok, I supposed you actually forgot the question, so I went back and grabbed it for you. Here it is:

Yes, it is about viable dps, yes it is "what you think it should be" (and if your answer really is "benchmark value" here then there's a rather substantial misunderstnading about what this game is balanced around) and yes, it is -just like it was last time I asked you about it- about actual encounters outside of dps golem ones. Nothing changed about that, but I understand that you might have forgotten what was being asked.

Funny how selective your reading comprehension is. Q2 iisn't good enough for you either? Or let's look at Q1, can't argue that that's a benchmark scenario:

https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/q1

Bottom third, with 80% of the builds below it being support dps and healer builds... Oh my, it's almost as if benchmarks do represent real world performance after all, just scaled by a factor that is nearly identical for all DPS builds...

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sindust.7059

[Sobx.1758]

10 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Funny how selective your reading comprehension is. Q2 iisn't good enough for you either?

Selective? But what are you showing with Q2? Is power mech somehow not valid there? I didn't somehow selectively avoid that because it's some hard proof against anything I said, I simply don't see what it's supposed to be proving that goes against what I'm saying. It's doing 15k dps less than some of the other builds? So what? It still easly does enough for how easy -both in skill use and intensity- it plays. What was I supposed to be saying there? What exactly is the issue with mech on Q2 (or now Q1, w/e, same point), because I don't really see it?

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Sindust.7059]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

Selective? But what are you showing with Q2? Is power mech somehow not valid there? I didn't somehow selectively avoid that because it's some hard proof against anything I said, I simply don't see what it's supposed to be proving that goes against what I'm saying. It's doing 15k dps less than some of the other builds? So what? It still easly does enough for how easy -both in skill use and intensity- it plays. What was I supposed to be saying there? What exactly is the issue with mech on Q2, because I don't really see it?

What you're not understanding is that it's far from being competitive, yet you are still defending mechanics that are annoying because of some misconception of balance. If you're playing power mech, you're basically griefing your group already, regardless of whether you can stay close to your mech, so making it annoying to play on top of being just a kitten choice is not "balance", it's just adding insult to injury.

[Sobx.1758]

5 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

What you're not understanding is that it's far from being competitive, yet you are still defending mechanics that are annoying because of some misconception of balance.

Rifle power mech is an easy to play, safe LI build, in what world is this supposed to be somehow "competitive" (which means you're apparently still aiming for top performance for some reason?) and why?

I am defending those mechanics for the same reason I was defending them in the past: because it makes the mech interaction more meaningful other than just slapping mech on auto-evcerything and forgetting about it because it will just passively chase the boss to deal damage. Can it be buggy? It can. Is it constantly buggy? No, it's not and I play it often/long enough to have a solid opinion about that. Should the mech movement "jerkiness" be fixed even if it's not happening all the time? Sure. Should it somehow compete for top dps spots? Absolutely not. It might be one of the -if not THE- laziest pick I play. And it's fine, but so is its performance for how it's played.

5 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

If you're playing power mech, you're basically griefing your group already, regardless of whether you can stay close to your mech, so making it annoying to play on top of being just a kitten choice is not "balance", it's just adding insult to injury.

That's just not true, but I guess like you've presented in your last few posts (at least from what I undestood about what you wrote there?), for some reason you're taking one of the easiest builds and expect it to "compete" for the top spots. But it shouldn't.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Sindust.7059]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

it makes the mech interaction more meaningful

In what world is babysitting the mech a "meaningful interaction"? Getting it to apply buffs while you're doing mechanics is a meaningful interaction, and maybe recalling it to do extra CC in Aetherblade Hideout strike is meaningful interaction, but just chasing your mech as it goes after random mobs is not meaningful in any way. It's like chasing a toddler with ADHD. And one of these things is being killed by this stupid mechanic that you're defending.

4 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Should it somehow compete for top dps spots? Aboslutely not.

And it wouldn't regardless of the MG debuff!! It's like you refuse to read what people write. 31k DPS is not anywhere close to top DPS, it's below many support DPS. And "real encounters" aren't much different in this regard either as evidenced by the wingman numbers.

[Sobx.1758]

3 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

In what world is babysitting the mech a "meaningful interaction"?

Commending mech to move or attack isn't somehow "babysitting it", but I guess this phrase could mean whatever anyone wants? How is it a "meaningful interaction"? As I wrote in the post you've just quoted, it is clearly meaningful gameplay pattern when compared to what it was (direct quote from the previous post here): "(...)other than just slapping mech on auto-evcerything and forgetting about it because it will just passively chase the boss to deal damage". I'm not sure how relatively consistently giving commands to the mech is supposed to not be a meaningful interaction when compared to it just orbitting you (or rather... just chasing the boss) and attacking it by itself no matter what to the point it might as well have no ingame model.

8 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Getting it to apply buffs while you're doing mechanics is a meaningful interaction, and maybe recalling it to do extra CC in Aetherblade Hideout strike is meaningful interaction

That too, but the ones you listed are way less frequent, recalling it for cc is done basically between the phases. Buffs are mostly automated until on occasion you need to keepaegis/stab for a specific mechanic. These are not even close to being anywhere near frequent interactions with the mech.

12 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

but just chasing your mech as it goes after random mobs is not meaningful in any way

I'm not chasing it and nothing I said above relates in any way to chasing it. If you need to keep chasing it, you're doing it wrong.

[Alcatraznc.3869]

14 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Commending mech to move or attack isn't somehow "babysitting it"

 

But sticking to the Mech like glue because you get punished otherwise IS babysitting the mech.

[Sindust.7059]

16 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Commending mech to move or attack isn't somehow "babysitting it", but I guess this phrase could mean whatever anyone wants? How is it a "meaningful interaction"? As I wrote in the post you've just quoted, it is clearly meaningful gameplay pattern when compared to what it was (direct quote from the previous post here): "(...)other than just slapping mech on auto-evcerything and forgetting about it because it will just passively chase the boss to deal damage". I'm not sure how relatively consistently giving commands to the mech is supposed to not be a meaningful interaction when compared to it just orbitting you (or rather... just chasing the boss) and attacking it by itself no matter what to the point it might as well have no ingame model.

That too, but the ones you listed are way less frequent, recalling it for cc is done basically between the phases. Buffs are mostly automated until on occasion you need to keepaegis/stab for a specific mechanic. These are not even close to being anywhere near frequent interactions with the mech.

I'm not chasing it and nothing I said above relates in any way to chasing it. If you need to keep chasing it, you're doing it wrong.

There is nothing "meaningful" about what you describe. It's just adding micromanagement of things that are automatic for every other pet spec. As you said, the meaningful things I described are situational, but they are meaningful because they are impactful and reliable. Being able to leave the group to do mechanics while continuing to provide buffs is adding much more to the group than 2k DPS. Micromanaging the position of the mech is neither. Nobody cares if you do 29 or 31k dps (the difference between being within and outside of the range of MG), either way you're already the weakest link of your group.

[Ashantara.8731]

On 6/29/2023 at 10:23 AM, Tails.9372 said:

The official explanation is to "reward good positioning" (to my knowledge they never bothered to elaborate any further).

Ah. Is that why my perfectly centered mech now always runs around like a maniac in the Whisper of Jormag strike instead of staying at the boss' location, where I put it? 😂

I wonder what ANet thinks "good positioning" looks like when you can't properly position it at all now except with luck?
 

Edited July 8, 2023 by Ashantara.8731

[Sobx.1758]

50 minutes ago, Alcatraznc.3869 said:

But sticking to the Mech like glue because you get punished otherwise IS babysitting the mech.

In the post at the top of this page I said I agreed with Noxin, who amongst other things said: "Adding back a very short grace period is a reasonable QOL improvement while not countering the direction they are going with it (reduction in power) which is clearly still needed despite the historic reductions. This would alleviate the unavoidable pet AI glitches or boss movement situations that are not caused by mechanists intending to sit in the back with a rifle avoiding mechanics."

You don't need to babysit mech, you need to give it commands to follow you as you're moving. I'm ok with a short graceperiod so the player isn't instantly punished. Not sure if your wording is coincidental or not, but as I see it, there's a difference between "you sticking to the mech" and "commanding the mech to perform its actions near you". Seeing how above there was an attempt to tell me the player somehow needs to keep chasing after the mech(??), I thought it's worth to clear that out for your post too, if the wording you used was deliberate.

49 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

There is nothing "meaningful" about what you describe. It's just adding micromanagement of things that are automatic for every other pet spec. As you said, the meaningful things I described are situational, but they are meaningful because they are impactful and reliable. Being able to leave the group to do mechanics while continuing to provide buffs is adding much more to the group than 2k DPS. Micromanaging the position of the mech is neither.

It is a meaningful and consistent change to the gameplay pattern with the use of mech. What you're talking is nothing more than just wanting all the benefits and nothing more.

49 minutes ago, Sindust.7059 said:

Nobody cares if you do 29 or 31k dps (the difference between being within and outside of the range of MG), either way you're already the weakest link of your group.

What support dps are you playing? Are you hitting benchmark values or remotely -as you called it- "competitive" dps values? Why do you keep attempting to compare safe and easy LI build with top performing builds and players? What you said about being a "weakest link" is also simply not true, you can play in pugs, be top or around the top of dps values and still finish the encounters without any problem. If you aim at top performance, play builds that require sufficient player input to justify that performance.

23 minutes ago, Ashantara.8731 said:

I wonder what ANet thinks "good positioning" looks like when you can't properly position it at all now except with luck?

Sorry to say that from my experience this is not true, outside of fairly rare occasions where mech indeed overshoots its movement (but yes, that's still happening).

Edited July 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758