what's the point of bleeding?

[BestiA.4319]

I mean, every other condition shines at something, if it isn't damage, then it does something else, like poison mess with your healing and torment forces movement and punishes you for getting immovilized, that is something at the very least,  but bleeding can be compared to burning, since they both only do damage, but bleeding damage is worst, so what's the point of it?  how do we compensate it? with nothing, there is nothing special about bleeding 

there is a chance that I might be stupid and don't see the benefits of bleeding over burning, and if that's the case please tell me, the only thing that I can think of is that bleeding seems easier to stack than burning, but the lower damage compared to burning makes no difference

could Anet do something for bleeding? like idk every # stacks of bleeding remove a boon or something idk

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by BestiA.4319

[Linken.6345]

3 minutes ago, BestiA.4319 said:

I mean, every other condition shines at something, if it isn't damage, then it does something else, like poison mess with your healing and torment forces movement and punishes you for getting immovilized, that is something at the very least,  but bleeding can be compared to burning, since they both only do damage, but bleeding damage is worst, so what's the point of it?  how do we compensate it? with nothing, there is nothing special about bleeding 

there is a chance that I might be stupid and don't see the benefits of bleeding over burning, and if that's the case please tell me, the only thing that I can think of is that bleeding seems easier to stack than burning, but the lower damage compared to burning makes no difference

could Anet do something for bleeding? like idk every # stacks of bleeding remove a boon or something idk

 

Well there is also this thing that condi clense skills only remove so many stacks of conditions so having more on the person is good since they might not clense your high ticking burn stack.

[Teknomancer.4895]

Bleeding stacks intensity, I have a couple builds (Mesmer, Necro) where it's either my top dmg source, or second highest.

[azorean.1850]

to see if u can feel?

[ZephidelGRS.9520]

Back when the game was still in dark age, where stacking by intensity wasn't implemented yet, Bleeding was distinctive to Burning in that it was small damage over long duration, as opposed to Burning with high damage but short duration. 

Granted with the change to intensity stacking they're not very different anymore, but I just wanna throw that out to explain why they exist.

[MedievalThings.5417]

1 hour ago, BestiA.4319 said:

I mean, every other condition shines at something, if it isn't damage, then it does something else, like poison mess with your healing and torment forces movement and punishes you for getting immovilized, that is something at the very least,  but bleeding can be compared to burning, since they both only do damage, but bleeding damage is worst, so what's the point of it?  how do we compensate it? with nothing, there is nothing special about bleeding 

there is a chance that I might be stupid and don't see the benefits of bleeding over burning, and if that's the case please tell me, the only thing that I can think of is that bleeding seems easier to stack than burning, but the lower damage compared to burning makes no difference

could Anet do something for bleeding? like idk every # stacks of bleeding remove a boon or something idk

 

It's just a condition damage.  I'd rather Anet NOT look at doing anything to it.  The build I play most often in open world, when not healing things, does 15-20k per second just on the bleed stacks alone.  If they made any changes to it they would have to nerf the bleed into complete uselessness, and I'd rather they didn't.

[Sobx.1758]

It stacks so it can deal high dps. Just look at it as a thematic dot. 🤷‍♂️

[Randulf.7614]

If it bleeds, it dies 

[Sobx.1758]

...unless it uses condi removal!

[Randulf.7614]

5 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

...unless it uses condi removal!

Hmm.. must be the directors cut 

[Randulf.7614]

Oh I did a pun!

[Darklord Roy.2514]

2 hours ago, BestiA.4319 said:

bleeding can be compared to burning, since they both only do damage, but bleeding damage is worst, so what's the point of it?

Individual bleeding stacks do less damage than individual burning stacks, but it's also significantly easier to ramp up much higher stacks of bleeding than burning so they end up realistically not being all that different. Condi virtuoso, for instance, has been one of the highest damaging PvE specs since EoD's release and 90% of its damage comes from bleeding and it pumps out TONS of bleeding stacks. Flip that over to something like willbender or firebrand, which are primarily focused on burning, and they actually have a *lower* benchmark than condi virtuoso despite burning doing more damage per stack than bleeding.

The rule of thumb was always that burning has higher burst damage, while bleeding slowly ramps up to more damage over time. The actual differences between them have lessened since Anet changed how conditions stack all those years ago, and even though they both *somewhat* still have their own place, I think it would be neat for them to be more unique in function. Just not really sure what they could add to it without further bloating the total number of buffs/debuffs in this game.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Darklord Roy.2514

[ShadowKatt.6740]

53 minutes ago, azorean.1850 said:

to see if u can feel?

[from the back of the room]

I get it!

[Stalima.5490]

3 hours ago, BestiA.4319 said:

I mean, every other condition shines at something, if it isn't damage, then it does something else, like poison mess with your healing and torment forces movement and punishes you for getting immovilized, that is something at the very least,  but bleeding can be compared to burning, since they both only do damage, but bleeding damage is worst, so what's the point of it?  how do we compensate it? with nothing, there is nothing special about bleeding 

there is a chance that I might be stupid and don't see the benefits of bleeding over burning, and if that's the case please tell me, the only thing that I can think of is that bleeding seems easier to stack than burning, but the lower damage compared to burning makes no difference

could Anet do something for bleeding? like idk every # stacks of bleeding remove a boon or something idk

 

 

well if it makes you happier, they could always make it do more damage to low health enemies.

[Nabbut.7480]

If you had gotten out of PvP you may have noticed some burning immune enemies.

[Ashen.2907]

It lets the evil vapors out, allowing the patient to heal. Of course if he dies even after a good bleeding he must have been in league with evil forces.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Ashen.2907

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

every class has access to a bleeding damage build, but not every class has access to a burning damage build. its more of a niche for specific classes (berserker, firebrand, tempest, etc.) , and is designed to give huge burst in the pvp game modes where conditions are easily cleansed and long-duration condition like bleeding are much less useful. on the other hand, in pve, it has an important role in fights that have phases (like in fractals) as again, it burst way faster than bleeding does.

 

most successful condition builds make use of both when possible for a combined burst and sustain.

Edited December 2, 2023 by SoftFootpaws.9134

[Ashantara.8731]

13 hours ago, BestiA.4319 said:

what's the point of bleeding?

Losing blood. 😁

(Sorry about that.)

[Westenev.5289]

TBF, I'd actually like Burning and Bleeding to have "conditions" attatched to them BEYOND DOT damage. Similar to how I'd like to see "Cripple" get something that makes it more than a worse "Chilled".

[Zebulous.2934]

From an pve perspective:

Fire elementals and destroyers are immune to the burning condition.  They are quite happy to be on fire.  

The burning condition does not work under water.

There are very few sources of torment that work under water.

I believe the point of bleeding is so that condition builds can deal with fireproof enemies.

[Shuzuru.3651]

13 hours ago, ZephidelGRS.9520 said:

Back when the game was still in dark age, where stacking by intensity wasn't implemented yet, Bleeding was distinctive to Burning in that it was small damage over long duration, as opposed to Burning with high damage but short duration. 

Granted with the change to intensity stacking they're not very different anymore, but I just wanna throw that out to explain why they exist.

Small correction, bleeding has always stacked in intensity, as well as vuln, confusion, torment (not there at the beginning of the game, thought) and might. 

But burning and poison were stacking in duration. 

[Teknomancer.4895]

The fun comes from inflicting it upon things that shouldn't even be able to bleed, like golems, machinery, skeletons, animated weapons, ghosts... 😏

[SeTect.5918]

2 hours ago, Zebulous.2934 said:

 

The burning condition does not work under water.

There are very few sources of torment that work under water.

I believe the point of bleeding is so that condition builds can deal with fireproof enemies.

Burning does work underwater.

The sources of torment that work underwater depend on the class. Revenant is a profession that does most of its condi dmg by torment and thats also the case underwater. Most condi builds lack damage underwater because underwater combat in gw2 hasnt been updated since 1980 or something. In fact engi only has 1 underwater weapon and its almost pure power based. Mechanist doesn't even work underwater.

I also dont think bleeding is for fireproof enemies. There are actually classes that deal like 90% burn dmg, 3% bleeding and like 7% strike damage (talking about something like firebrand). Theres actually a Champion destroyer in desert Highlands thats fully immune to burning. Did you ever try that one with firebrand compared to lets say...harbinger...soulbeast or any other build that has its main damage not focused on burning? Firebrand probably needs like 6 minutes while other non-burning based builds need like not even a Minute.

The fact that destroyers are immune to burning is so dumb. They could simply give them a 50% dmg reduction instead of making whole classes useless on them when you play condi. 

I think bleeding is a condition just like burning. Changing all bleeding to burning or something like that would be far too op because that would give too much burst. Bleeding is burning but without the burst, but it deals just as much damage in pve if it has enough sources to do so.

Bleeding is actually stronger than confusion atm. Could bleeding get a small bonus? Maybe yeah. But it shouldn't be too strong because of pvp/wvw balancing reasons. 

Edited December 2, 2023 by SeTect.5918

[Nabbut.7480]

8 minutes ago, Teknomancer.4895 said:

The fun comes from inflicting it upon things that shouldn't even be able to bleed, like golems, machinery, skeletons, animated weapons, ghosts... 😏

All these have essence that can bleed out.

[Teknomancer.4895]

Another thing to consider is that in GW1 condition use was more strategic, instead of the indiscriminate spamming mode we have now.

Several condis started off as being "hexes" and you would cast your primary/elite hex first, then stack a couple of fast-cd "cover hexes" on top of it. Cleanses were processed in order of reverse seniority IIRC, newer ones got removed first. Bleeding was a common cover because it was trivial to apply and re-apply.

At least some of that conceptual framework carried over from GW1 into the current game. It's completely invalid now, of course.