CC bars in pve in the current state goes against the philosophy "bring the player not the class" and power budget

[tiagotatico.6304]

16 hours ago, bq pd.2148 said:

it was not released but a beta.
now compare your cweaver power budget to power deadeye the difference is much greater than to cvirt.

power deadeye has more damage and cc than cweaver, i dont really understand what you mean by that, also you can take basilisk for huge cc, you can play ranged, it has a better armor rate, deadeye is the best spec for some niche roles when dealing with damage on range, such as q2 pylon kite and q1 kite, im not saying it does not have problem but so do ele

[Obtena.7952]

So just doing some research here. From Jan 30th patch notes:

The changes to hammer in November pushed condition builds for tempest and weaver a bit higher than we like to see, so we're making a few tweaks to bring those builds back in line.

• Singeing Strike: Reduced the burning duration from 3 seconds to 1.5 seconds in PvE only.
• Surging Flames: Reduced the burning duration from 9 seconds to 3 seconds in PvE only.
• Ground Pound: Reduced the bleeding duration from 10 seconds to 6 seconds in PvE only.

So explain again how Anet should conclude that cweaver isn't hitting its power budget and that somehow 'the numbers' suggest it's a have not spec? Seems to me "the numbers" suggest the OPPOSITE based on the change Anet put in on Jan 30th. So either Anet isn't interpreting their own philosophy and numbers correct ... OR ...  someone else isn't. 

Tell us that story about how balancing is about fair and equal and not about the game working how Anet wants again. It's a good one. 

Edited February 7 by Obtena.7952

[tiagotatico.6304]

10 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

So just doing some research here. From Jan 30th patch notes:

The changes to hammer in November pushed condition builds for tempest and weaver a bit higher than we like to see, so we're making a few tweaks to bring those builds back in line.

• Singeing Strike: Reduced the burning duration from 3 seconds to 1.5 seconds in PvE only.
• Surging Flames: Reduced the burning duration from 9 seconds to 3 seconds in PvE only.
• Ground Pound: Reduced the bleeding duration from 10 seconds to 6 seconds in PvE only.

So explain again how Anet should conclude that cweaver isn't hitting its power budget and that somehow 'the numbers' suggest it's a have not spec? Seems to me "the numbers" suggest the OPPOSITE based on the change Anet put in on Jan 30th. So either Anet isn't interpreting their own philosophy and numbers correct ... OR ...  someone else isn't. 

Tell us that story about how balancing is about fair and equal and not about the game working how Anet wants again. It's a good one. 

at this point i think you are baiting me, this is just them balancing solely in golem benchmark, the lazy balance that i mentioned, also they nerfed hammer, not cweaver itself, before this they have buffed hammer, but it seems like that the buff was too much, or not what they wanted (because they aimed at the power catalyst hammer build), which tells that they actually dont know what they are doing that well

[Obtena.7952]

31 minutes ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

 this is just them balancing solely in golem benchmark, the lazy balance that i mentioned, also they nerfed hammer, not cweaver itself, before this they have buffed hammer, but it seems like that the buff was too much, or not what they wanted (because they aimed at the power catalyst hammer build), which tells that they actually dont know what they are doing that well

Bad assumptions ... you don't know how they arrived at that decision to make that nerf. Again, you don't know what is happening behind the scenes there; none of us do. You are saying things you have NO idea about. 

And yes, they did nerf cweaver with the hammer nerf ... clearly because it was cweavers using hammer that alerted them to the high DPS they didn't want to see. 

Again, just because Anet's version of balance doesn't match your ideas should not lead you to the conclusion they just don't know what they are doing. That's just nonsense. It's actually irrelevant if they do or don't know because in either case, they certainly aren't going to ask players how they should be doing it. They are going to do it the way they want to do it, regardless if they know or not. 

This isn't about Anet knowing or not and you stepping in to 'help' them out. This is about you acknowledging how game changes work. 

Edited February 7 by Obtena.7952

[tiagotatico.6304]

16 hours ago, bq pd.2148 said:

it was not released but a beta.
now compare your cweaver power budget to power deadeye the difference is much greater than to cvirt.

i mean, they did released soto scourge 50k (and stayed there for a month and half), cata 52k , and i would think that stuff on beta is suppose to be working or barely working, i guess we didnt even had the skill image for the new weapons

[tiagotatico.6304]

3 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Bad assumptions ... you don't know how they arrived at that decision to make that nerf. And yes, they did nerf cweaver with the hammer nerf ... clearly because it was cweavers using hammer that alerted them to the high DPS they didn't want to see. 

Again, just because Anet's version of balance doesn't match your ideas should not lead you to the conclusion they just don't know what they are doing. It's irrelevant if they do or don't know ... because they are going to do it the way they want to do it. 

man, what is that i just read "you dont know how they arrived at the decision" "And yes, they did nerf cweaver with the hammer nerf ... cleary because it was cweavers using hammer that alerted them to the high DPS they didn't want to see." dont you see how you you contradicted yourself, also tempest had more damage with hammer.

My version of balance is a fair balance, i think its very fair to assume that, but look, im not asking to be perfect, its just that CC on condi elementalist builds are bad, on fights that you need cc you barely see one, and when you see he is doing barely any cc, and i dont think this is intended, its just happened that condi ele builds prefer earth and and fire, while the cc is usually on air and water, this is mostly for pvp and wvw reasons, however its perhaps time to rethink that concept, maybe alocating the cc to earth and air, instead of air and water, will help a lot, also maybe put unravel on f5, so you no longer have to plan you cc far ahead, since its usually on the offhand, adding a layer of complexity to an already complexity build, this is not much of an issue on power builds, because they happened to prefer air and fire, i honestly think that they simple dont care enough to solve it, because its only a problem on pve for condi builds, and its mostly for cweaver because of the global cd on elemental swap, tempest does not have this issue at this same level (its still an issue), and will prob be a mess on other game modes if they tried to solve it unless they did balance around for those modes, basically giving them work, its hard to do that, however i would like to see my favorite build to get fixed on my favorite mode (pve).

Again, this is just what i think, it may not be the case, but the fact is cweaver has really low cc, has a hard time reaching that cc, and not a lot to show for, again, you dont have to believe me, see the popularity on fights where everyone needs to cc, you can see this problem on some of those fights, that is a very clear problem here, whether or not you or they want to believe it does not exist, or they think it should be consider on the balance. But whenever some says "ele popularity is due to complexity" kitten, ele has much more problems besides that, soulbeast is a popular build, in my opinion is  a harder build than cweaver, even with weave self, you need to be carefull about cancelling animatins, you need to count AA chains, but its still popular, and that is the case for many others, ele problems goes much beyond complexity, but those are problems that are being ignored, while the blame goes solely on complexity, its not even the worst offender, you can play a tempest build that camps on fire, its extremely easy and it has high damage, no one plays it tho, the low amount of cc being one of the main reasons 

[Obtena.7952]

14 minutes ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

My version of balance is a fair balance,  ....

Again, this is just what i think ,....

Again, your going to come here, tell Anet they don't know what they doing and they should change the game, based on what you believe is a 'your fair' version of balance. I guess taking a hint about how Anet is going to react to that from the more recent balance patch where Anet is nerfing cweavers with hammers just doesn't hit with you ay? 

Cweaver has low CC? OK, again, that's not a problem nor is it some departure from the balance philosophy. Classes/specs are intended to have gaps like that. 

Again, you simply aren't going to justify class changes based on the premise that you think you know better than Anet about how to implement their own balance philosophy, made even more evident by the fact that while you complain it's a have not spec in all it's numbers, Anet just handed out a fresh nerf for it. 

 

Edited February 7 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

17 hours ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

at this point i think you are just stupid, or pretending to be one, first the hammer nerf has nothing to do with cweaver

That doesn't make sense. Anet TOLD us the hammer nerf was due to cweaver and ctempest builds being too high in DPS ... so yes it does have SOMETHING to do with it. 

17 hours ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

Second since the start im questioning why some classes have gaps and other dont have based on balance and power budget,

Again, why discrepancies in class/spec gap? Probably because balancing isn't just about the numbers and it IS more complex than you want to admit. There are things to consider that AREN'T just about numbers. 

The worst part about this thread is that if you want CC, you just make different choices to get it. Apparently that's too much to ask, even given all the choice we have on the classes. 

Edited February 8 by Obtena.7952

[Leo G.4501]

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Bad assumptions ... you don't know how they arrived at that decision to make that nerf. Again, you don't know what is happening behind the scenes there; none of us do. You are saying things you have NO idea about. 

And yes, they did nerf cweaver with the hammer nerf ... clearly because it was cweavers using hammer that alerted them to the high DPS they didn't want to see. 

Again, just because Anet's version of balance doesn't match your ideas should not lead you to the conclusion they just don't know what they are doing. That's just nonsense. It's actually irrelevant if they do or don't know because in either case, they certainly aren't going to ask players how they should be doing it. They are going to do it the way they want to do it, regardless if they know or not. 

This isn't about Anet knowing or not and you stepping in to 'help' them out. This is about you acknowledging how game changes work. 

Time to throw my 2 cents in:

I find this post hilarious. I see what you're getting at but you try to get it across in such underhanded ways, flippant deflection and childish dismissal...it basically amounts to "you're not allowed to have an opinion". I mean, bringing up current number changes while slyly leaving out it was in response to an overcorrection just shows lack of forethought and potential malice/bad faith.

Then there's the notion that whatever the devs do is just automatically right...technically true, but if they admit fault (which they have done plenty of times in the past) then this assumption is an outright lie. I'm all for reigning in overzealous and hostile messages directed to the devs but I'm not playing defense for their bat crazy decisions... I'd advise just giving up on that talking point and focus more on the actual suggested changes the OP is asking for.

2 hours ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

My version of balance is a fair balance, i think its very fair to assume that, but look, im not asking to be perfect, its just that CC on condi elementalist builds are bad, on fights that you need cc you barely see one, and when you see he is doing barely any cc, and i dont think this is intended, its just happened that condi ele builds prefer earth and and fire, while the cc is usually on air and water, this is mostly for pvp and wvw reasons, however its perhaps time to rethink that concept, maybe alocating the cc to earth and air, instead of air and water, will help a lot, also maybe put unravel on f5, so you no longer have to plan you cc far ahead, since its usually on the offhand, adding a layer of complexity to an already complexity build, this is not much of an issue on power builds, because they happened to prefer air and fire, i honestly think that they simple dont care enough to solve it, because its only a problem on pve for condi builds, and its mostly for cweaver because of the global cd on elemental swap, tempest does not have this issue at this same level (its still an issue), and will prob be a mess on other game modes if they tried to solve it unless they did balance around for those modes, basically giving them work, its hard to do that, however i would like to see my favorite build to get fixed on my favorite mode (pve).

Again, this is just what i think, it may not be the case, but the fact is cweaver has really low cc, has a hard time reaching that cc, and not a lot to show for, again, you dont have to believe me, see the popularity on fights where everyone needs to cc, you can see this problem on some of those fights, that is a very clear problem here, whether or not you or they want to believe it does not exist, or they think it should be consider on the balance. But whenever some says "ele popularity is due to complexity" kitten, ele has much more problems besides that, soulbeast is a popular build, in my opinion is  a harder build than cweaver, even with weave self, you need to be carefull about cancelling animatins, you need to count AA chains, but its still popular, and that is the case for many others, ele problems goes much beyond complexity, but those are problems that are being ignored, while the blame goes solely on complexity, its not even the worst offender, you can play a tempest build that camps on fire, its extremely easy and it has high damage, no one plays it tho, the low amount of cc being one of the main reasons 

It's been a hot minute since I played ele primarily because of weaver, so pardon my ignorance...if CC is a fault of a particular build, wouldn't you need to prove it's absent or a noticeable deficit for the SPEC and not the build? Because a build can be fluid, changing weapons or rotations or utilities on a need-to basis. It's going to be a tangent bringing up another completely other profession in trying to prove that you need a specific change. For all intents and purposes, bringing up virtuoso could just mean virtuoso is overperforming. Balancing relative like that is a recipe for disaster.

But in and of itself, lacking (and not missing) CC is more of a 1st world problem, don't you think?

1 hour ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

Second since the start im questioning why some classes have gaps and other dont have based on balance and power budget, and you are here doing some hard mental mental gymnastics to say "but look, you dont know how to they balance" when they also stated on the kittening power budget:

Holes in Roles

This is an idea similar to purity of purpose, but applied to builds or professions. As we touched on when discussing identity, we want every profession to have distinct strengths and weaknesses. Professions should have things that they excel at, things that they are less effective at than other professions, and some things that they simply cannot do. If one profession does everything and has no holes, there's no reason for players to play anything else.

Power Budget

For a given skill or trait, there is a "power budget" that can be spent on individual elements. A skill that only deals damage can deal X damage, but if that skill also applies conditions or provides other value, then it needs to deal less damage to stay within budget. In the context of a weapon, the budget is considered across the entire kit, so some skills may be weaker than average in order to allocate more power to a particular skill. Budget can also vary depending on a skill's cooldown; skills with longer cooldowns are generally more powerful.

Trait budgets are to be considered on a per-tier basis; adept traits should have less power than grandmaster traits.

 

Some builds have no holes, some professions does not have weakness, some professions does not have things that they excel at, while others have it. "If one profession does everything and has no holes, there's no reason for players to play anything else" look here and go see the popularity of cvirt

Now, with the definition of power budget by the balance team itself, can we agree that they are balancing on numbers, on value, when comparing cvirt and cweaver, the power budget is way too much in favor of cvirt, by definition

Frankly, I have no idea where @Obtena.7952 came off with the notion of balancing but not on numbers. Or maybe I misread their posts and they just meant not ONLY on numbers, but one thing I can agree with them on is that we don't really know. We don't know how much they value barrier over a heal or a 600 range leap vs a 400 range teleport or even if they care about any combo finishers other than blasts. They might even put a higher value than you think on Virtuoso having no aggro management options from clones. But that's neither here nor there when you're attempting to rally for changes to Weaver.

12 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That doesn't make sense. Anet TOLD us the hammer nerf was due to cweaver and ctempest builds being too high in DPS ... so yes it does have SOMETHING to do with it. 

Again, why discrepancies in class/spec gap? Probably because balancing isn't just about the numbers and it IS more complex than you want to admit. 

I'd assume hammer was nerfed due to cweaver and ctempest dps being too higher BECAUSE they overbuffed it in a previous update.  Context matters. Or not, I have no idea since I'm relying on 2nd hand info since, again, I haven't played ele in a hot minute so haven't kept up with it.

[Obtena.7952]

1 hour ago, Leo G.4501 said:

I'd assume hammer was nerfed due to cweaver and ctempest dps being too higher BECAUSE they overbuffed it in a previous update.  Context matters. Or not, I have no idea since I'm relying on 2nd hand info since, again, I haven't played ele in a hot minute so haven't kept up with it.

Sure, I think the same thing. I guess the difference is that I think the context of that change is STILL relevant to how Anet is regarding cweaver as a whole, which contradicts the OP's view. Op thinks Cweaver is a completely has-not class because 'numbers'? Weird conclusion if we actually LOOK at how Anet treats it or even how it performs in general if you remove the constraints the OP imposes on it to make his argument.

Focus on the changes the OP is asking for? I think I've done that no? Like somehow we should just accept the idea that cweaver not having CC is a problem? It's not. Classes/specs have these gaps. It's not unreasonable low CC is a gap for Weaver. If an ele needs CC for an encounter ... they can get it. This is simply a case where someone wants something very specific for a particular spec because they don't want to have to make choices or change anything about their build to get it. 

Other than some weird comparison to other classes skilsets (which isn't really relevant since skillsets aren't intended to be the same across specs/classes in the first place), there actually ISN'T a reason presented for why cweaver should have more CC. It's just some vague notion of "improperly applied balance philosophy", therefore "giev buffz"

The bottomline is that something don't jive about what the OP is saying and how it's being regarded by Anet and even other players ... and it ain't because Anet doesn't know what they are doing with the game or their own philosophy either. 

Edited February 8 by Obtena.7952

[bq pd.2148]

4 hours ago, tiagotatico.6304 said:

power deadeye has more damage and cc than cweaver [..]im not saying it does not have problem but so do ele

power budget of a spec is more than damage and cc, it also has to apply to more than just raids as the same balance is used across all PvE.

being locked to a single target, extremely reliant on allies #conditions/boons for its modifiers while not able to afford non crits for its resource management.. one could argue that warrants significantly more damage on that one target than other specs are doing as mostly AoE.  the fact that it is not doing that i personally see as a much bigger drawback than having a DPS cost to CC.

[Forum Moderator.3419]

Hi Everyone,

I'm locking this thread as it's run its course.

Regards.