3 more months at being at bottom of benchmark

[Agrippa.1693]

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is always you! But easily fixable: put the factor time in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings! I would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

[mikeeens.3542]

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

So u suggest that DEVS nerf all classes just not Necro + buff them so now they can be better than other classes.

Okey - what will happen after? The same b/s only now everyone will complain about others classes... that will be the same. The only thing they could do is dont make any changes with all classes, but increase Necro dps and other stuffs that they can be again useful. Didnt play Necro - dont like that class so idk how bad it is now.

[Dace.8173]

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

[Nimon.7840]

@Dace.8173 said:

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

Lol arguing with meta battle builds. Sorry but most of these builds aren't up to date and not very good.More necros is easy to explain: it was brain-dead gameplay before dhuumfire nerf. Just spam those shade abilities. But that not what good scourges did.Rev is just harder to play, but more rewarding and its far less dependant on teammates to heal/support him.

Yes. I said somewhere that necro is still strong in wvw.But in pve it's now: join group, get kicked.

Won't happen to a rev. But he's also very strong in wvw. And pvp if you are a good rev.

While necro got again pushed into the: go-afk-farm-with-ur-minions-as-only-friends- role again.

[InsaneQR.7412]

I assume they will change stuff with next balance part a lot.They looked at power Sbeast didnt touched the condi or any bad pets.They did not touch renegade at all.And they did not touch the group utility of necro.I think all these things may be work in progress thats not ready yet.So maybe next balance pass will more interedting than this shallow one.

[Nimon.7840]

@InsaneQR.7412 said:I assume they will change stuff with next balance part a lot.They looked at power Sbeast didnt touched the condi or any bad pets.They did not touch renegade at all.And they did not touch the group utility of necro.I think all these things may be work in progress thats not ready yet.So maybe next balance pass will more interedting than this shallow one.

I really hope this patch was just preparation for next patch. So necro gets his well deserved rework.And then give rev it's wanted rework.

[Arzurag.7506]

@Nimon.7840 said:

@InsaneQR.7412 said:I assume they will change stuff with next balance part a lot.They looked at power Sbeast didnt touched the condi or any bad pets.They did not touch renegade at all.And they did not touch the group utility of necro.I think all these things may be work in progress thats not ready yet.So maybe next balance pass will more interedting than this shallow one.

I really hope this patch was just preparation for next patch. So necro gets his well deserved rework.And then give rev it's wanted rework.

Hope dies the very last but I don't think that we can expect a rework that gives necros its power where its due.

[InsaneQR.7412]

@Arzurag.7506 said:

@Nimon.7840 said:

@InsaneQR.7412 said:I assume they will change stuff with next balance part a lot.They looked at power Sbeast didnt touched the condi or any bad pets.They did not touch renegade at all.And they did not touch the group utility of necro.I think all these things may be work in progress thats not ready yet.So maybe next balance pass will more interedting than this shallow one.

I really hope this patch was just preparation for next patch. So necro gets his well deserved rework.And then give rev it's wanted rework.

Hope dies the very last but I don't think that we can expect a rework that gives necros its power where its due.

Maybe not on one patch but some group utility can be implemented. They nade SBreaker which was definetly a PvP spec into a ToP DPS spec. I think it should be possible to make necro useful for groups too.IF they do it idk, but its possible.

[Gustaff.6581]

@"Dace.8173" said:

It's just the reality of competitive gameplay with factions. Now, I'm not saying that Necromancer needs to always be at the bottom (though I keep hearing that Revenant is really the bottom) but let's not act like saying there is always going to be a bottom is sacrilege and something a person should never ever ever ever say. It's ok to say that someone is going to be at the bottom because someone is going to be the bottom. If it's not Necromancer then it would have been someone else.

But I do agree with you on the matter of people obeying "stupid raid sites" as I personally think folks should play what they find fun and more people should be open to allowing people to play whats fun. I don't think everything in the game needs to be about the most DPS you can put out. I main Engineer and Revenant. While Revenant is not the best of the best its loads of fun for me. I have Necromancer as one of my more frequently played back up alts (the other being Elementalist). It really should be the case that more people are accepting of folks who don't care about top DPS.

My issue here is that i really could have no problem if necromancer is in the bottom, but not by huge margins, you see, every other profession can reach at least 32k dps, and necromancer cant even go over 29k. See the problem here? If i would ask for something, is to do at least 32k-35k dps in a single target, WITHOUTH epidemic, and do 38k with epidemic.

So if i gonna pick a dps, then why the hell i would pick a profession which doesnt so much less damage than the others?

@Lily.1935 said:

Scourge is also difficult to use and reaper is frustrating for healers. So both cases they are headaches. If they're not good while being difficult and frustrating for other players why should you bring them?

Well, i see every class as difficult to use, so thats irrelevant, also i dont see the problem with scourge being a headache, if scourge could reach acceptable levels of damage, then no one would be complaining. Not so much experience with reaper, but thats more of a design problem with shroud, anyways, doesnt matter because reaper does even less damage than Scourge.

[Mini Crinny.6190]

I remember the days when 30k was optimal

[Lily.1935]

@Conqueror.3682 said:Well, i see every class as difficult to use, so thats irrelevant, also i dont see the problem with scourge being a headache, if scourge could reach acceptable levels of damage, then no one would be complaining. Not so much experience with reaper, but thats more of a design problem with shroud, anyways, doesnt matter because reaper does even less damage than Scourge.

No, not every class is. And difficulty means that they are less consistent with their damage. Which a good scourge? Sure its consistent. A not good one? Nope. And its not user friendly either. A mess up on the condi rotation means 50-100% of your health worth in damage.

And the shroud as a mechanic needs to be overhauled. I've been saying it for years. About half a decade now... Oh god its been half a decade...

[Obtena.7952]

@Dace.8173 said:

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom.

It's a game people like to play ... even if you aren't the bottom, if you say it enough times, you can convince yourself it's true AND convince yourself it's a compelling enough argument to get that changed. People get mad they aren't the 'worst' because it shatters this little world they have created for themselves that makes them think they are always going to be at the front of the line for the soup kitchen. They don't get that being first in line doesn't get your served first.

I think the bottomline with the class is that it's got some flaws out of the gate that haven't been addressed and no matter how much Anet tries to reconcile that with a few skill changes, what is wrong with the class can't be addressed with those kinds of changes you see in Balancing. IMO, the problem requires as significant a change as Mesmers got with phantasm.

[Dace.8173]

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

Lol arguing with meta battle builds. Sorry but most of these builds aren't up to date and not very good.More necros is easy to explain: it was brain-dead gameplay before dhuumfire nerf. Just spam those shade abilities. But that not what good scourges did.Rev is just harder to play, but more rewarding and its far less dependant on teammates to heal/support him.

Yes. I said somewhere that necro is still strong in wvw.But in pve it's now: join group, get kicked.

Won't happen to a rev. But he's also very strong in wvw. And pvp if you are a good rev.

While necro got again pushed into the: go-afk-farm-with-ur-minions-as-only-friends- role again.

Actually, no I'm not arguing with metabattle builds. I'm really not judging the quality of those builds just pointing out that sites dedicated to builds have X numbers to show. If you have a better site than metabattle then, by all means, link it so I can have someplace else to look at builds at. I have consitently asked folks for other build sites that has a collection of builds and consitently people come back with metabattle. However, when the OP is making an argument based on benchmark test then pointing out what metabattle has to offer is fairly appropriate. Also people wouldn't be playing Scourges if it was bad. Yeah it may be brain dead game play but that does not mean something is good or bad. Scourge clearly had a powerful affect on the game and the increased number of Scourges meant that they were, on some level, not the worst. You do not get a bunch of people playing a brain dead build and Elite if it's actually bad. What good Scourge players do is removed from the issue of if Necromancer is the worst profession. The change to Dhuumfire is too new for anyone to sit back and claim that Necromancer is not the worst of the worst. Game play will let us see that in the long term. Also, if Necromancer is good in WvW then it can't be said that it's bad. You can't say the entire profession is bad based on one mode of play. It would be more accurate to say that Necromancer under performs in PvE but is fine in WvW. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of what people are arguing.

You also seem to be cherry picking qualities to keep Necromancer as bad. Which is fine but that still isn't really what I was pointing out in the first place. I was specifically speaking to the fact that someone has to be at the bottom and questioning why Necromancers fight for the right to have that honor. As for the strength of Revenant, those folks will disagree with you on the strength of the profession in PvP and WvW. So why are you battling it out with them for the honor of being the worst?

@Conqueror.3682 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

It's just the reality of competitive gameplay with factions. Now, I'm not saying that Necromancer needs to always be at the bottom (though I keep hearing that Revenant is really the bottom) but let's not act like saying there is always going to be a bottom is sacrilege and something a person should never ever ever ever say. It's ok to say that someone is going to be at the bottom because someone is going to be the bottom. If it's not Necromancer then it would have been someone else.

But I do agree with you on the matter of people obeying "stupid raid sites" as I personally think folks should play what they find fun and more people should be open to allowing people to play whats fun. I don't think everything in the game needs to be about the most DPS you can put out. I main Engineer and Revenant. While Revenant is not the best of the best its loads of fun for me. I have Necromancer as one of my more frequently played back up alts (the other being Elementalist). It really should be the case that more people are accepting of folks who don't care about top DPS.

My issue here is that i really could have no problem if necromancer is in the bottom, but not by huge margins, you see, every other profession can reach at least 32k dps, and necromancer cant even go over 29k. See the problem here? If i would ask for something, is to do at least 32k-35k dps in a single target, WITHOUTH epidemic, and do 38k with epidemic.

So if i gonna pick a dps, then why the hell i would pick a profession which doesnt so much less damage than the others?

@Lily.1935 said:

Scourge is also difficult to use and reaper is frustrating for healers. So both cases they are headaches. If they're not good while being difficult and frustrating for other players why should you bring them?

Well, i see every class as difficult to use, so thats irrelevant, also i dont see the problem with scourge being a headache, if scourge could reach acceptable levels of damage, then no one would be complaining. Not so much experience with reaper, but thats more of a design problem with shroud, anyways, doesnt matter because reaper does even less damage than Scourge.

Why is being at the bottom judged by DPS? There are other aspects that are important to things like Raids, PvP, and WvW aside from pure DPS. If DPS was all that mattered then honestly the only profession being played would be Elementalist as last I checked they were still the kings and queens of DPS. Also, not every profession is difficult to use. Some are insanely easy and straightforward. > @Obtena.7952 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom.

It's a game people like to play ... even if you aren't the bottom, if you say it enough times, you can convince yourself it's true AND convince yourself it's a compelling enough argument to get that changed. People get mad they aren't the 'worst' because it shatters this little world they have created for themselves that makes them think they are always going to be at the front of the line for the soup kitchen. They don't get that being first in line doesn't get your served first.

I think the bottomline with the class is that it's got some flaws out of the gate that haven't been addressed and no matter how much Anet tries to reconcile that with a few skill changes, what is wrong with the class can't be addressed with those kinds of changes you see in Balancing. IMO, the problem requires as significant a change as Mesmers got with phantasm.

Indeed.

[Nimon.7840]

@Dace.8173 said:

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

Lol arguing with meta battle builds. Sorry but most of these builds aren't up to date and not very good.More necros is easy to explain: it was brain-dead gameplay before dhuumfire nerf. Just spam those shade abilities. But that not what good scourges did.Rev is just harder to play, but more rewarding and its far less dependant on teammates to heal/support him.

Yes. I said somewhere that necro is still strong in wvw.But in pve it's now: join group, get kicked.

Won't happen to a rev. But he's also very strong in wvw. And pvp if you are a good rev.

While necro got again pushed into the: go-afk-farm-with-ur-minions-as-only-friends- role again.

Actually, no I'm not arguing with metabattle builds. I'm really not judging the quality of those builds just pointing out that sites dedicated to builds have X numbers to show. If you have a better site than metabattle then, by all means, link it so I can have someplace else to look at builds at. I have consitently asked folks for other build sites that has a collection of builds and consitently people come back with metabattle. However, when the OP is making an argument based on benchmark test then pointing out what metabattle has to offer is fairly appropriate. Also people wouldn't be playing Scourges if it was bad. Yeah it may be brain dead game play but that does not mean something is good or bad. Scourge clearly had a powerful affect on the game and the increased number of Scourges meant that they were, on some level, not the worst. You do not get a bunch of people playing a brain dead build and Elite if it's actually bad. What good Scourge players do is removed from the issue of if Necromancer is the worst profession. The change to Dhuumfire is too new for anyone to sit back and claim that Necromancer is not the worst of the worst. Game play will let us see that in the long term. Also, if Necromancer is good in WvW then it can't be said that it's bad. You can't say the entire profession is bad based on one mode of play. It would be more accurate to say that Necromancer under performs in PvE but is fine in WvW. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of what people are arguing.

If you want to show that X builds are viable, those builds have to have more than 5 votes for being very good.Sorry but 5 votes don't show anything.If it was 500 ok, and we could talk about it. But 5 to justify that a build is good is just a real good joke.

If you wanna show pve builds ok. Metabattle is fine as they just copy the builds from snowcrows.

But for wvw?

Let's take Blood scourge as example.My guild mates said. But it's a very good build according to metabattle. I told them to not play it. Because its bad.

Well the rezz worked against enemies. But only one time.After that one time they were looking for those down- pulls and killed them easily.They didn't have the problem to cleave people spread, they waited for us to use the pull and then install killed up to 6 people.And that's how it always was. And if you have intelligent enemies this is a really bad build. Guess against idiots this build is really a good build

[Dace.8173]

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

Lol arguing with meta battle builds. Sorry but most of these builds aren't up to date and not very good.More necros is easy to explain: it was brain-dead gameplay before dhuumfire nerf. Just spam those shade abilities. But that not what good scourges did.Rev is just harder to play, but more rewarding and its far less dependant on teammates to heal/support him.

Yes. I said somewhere that necro is still strong in wvw.But in pve it's now: join group, get kicked.

Won't happen to a rev. But he's also very strong in wvw. And pvp if you are a good rev.

While necro got again pushed into the: go-afk-farm-with-ur-minions-as-only-friends- role again.

Actually, no I'm not arguing with metabattle builds. I'm really not judging the quality of those builds just pointing out that sites dedicated to builds have X numbers to show. If you have a better site than metabattle then, by all means, link it so I can have someplace else to look at builds at. I have consitently asked folks for other build sites that has a collection of builds and consitently people come back with metabattle. However, when the OP is making an argument based on benchmark test then pointing out what metabattle has to offer is fairly appropriate. Also people wouldn't be playing Scourges if it was bad. Yeah it may be brain dead game play but that does not mean something is good or bad. Scourge clearly had a powerful affect on the game and the increased number of Scourges meant that they were, on some level, not the worst. You do not get a bunch of people playing a brain dead build and Elite if it's actually bad. What good Scourge players do is removed from the issue of if Necromancer is the worst profession. The change to Dhuumfire is too new for anyone to sit back and claim that Necromancer is not the worst of the worst. Game play will let us see that in the long term. Also, if Necromancer is good in WvW then it can't be said that it's bad. You can't say the entire profession is bad based on one mode of play. It would be more accurate to say that Necromancer under performs in PvE but is fine in WvW. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of what people are arguing.

If you want to show that X builds are viable, those builds have to have more than 5 votes for being very good.Sorry but 5 votes don't show anything.If it was 500 ok, and we could talk about it. But 5 to justify that a build is good is just a real good joke.

If you wanna show pve builds ok. Metabattle is fine as they just copy the builds from snowcrows.

But for wvw?

Let's take Blood scourge as example.My guild mates said. But it's a very good build according to metabattle. I told them to not play it. Because its bad.

Well the rezz worked against enemies. But only one time.After that one time they were looking for those down- pulls and killed them easily.They didn't have the problem to cleave people spread, they waited for us to use the pull and then install killed up to 6 people.And that's how it always was. And if you have intelligent enemies this is a really bad build. Guess against idiots this build is really a good build

I'm not making a viability argument. Logically, if a profession is bad it will have fewer builds due to there being less to do with it that is considered good. Builds that are deemed bad don't seem to make it onto metabattle for long. I brought up those metabattle builds as a comparison point in regards to the discussion of which was worse Revenant or Necromancer. But if you're going to shoot those builds down then provide something to replace it with. I stated that the only reason I go to metabattle is because that's where people say to go when asked where to get good builds. Let's compare and contrast builds. Though it's worth pointing out that the number of votes has no bearing on whether a build is good or not.

Still, at least I'm trying to back my position with observable data. The people who are saying that Necromancer is bad aren't even doing that much. If you think the Blood Scourge build is bad then show us what a good build looks like. Just don't say it is bad and then not provide a comparison point for what is supposed to be good.

Like I said, when I ask for build sites people say metabattle. I have asked before (I even asked in this thread) for better sites. Instead of saying it's a bad build how about showing where better builds can be found so that we can have a real discussion on the merits and flaws of various builds. Otherwise, you have one guy saying that due to DPS Necromancer is bad (though that's flawed logic). Then you have the observable fact that Scourge was a popular build to play. You said it was an easy build to play, cool but easy does not equal bad. And to be frank, people don't bandwagon bad builds. It being easy isn't enough to get a bunch of people to play a profession. You have to remember, in order to play something like Scourge in WvW you have to dedicate the time to unlock all of it's abilities. People aren't going to do that if there is no payoff. It being easy is not motive enough for people to spend time unlocking traits.

[Obtena.7952]

@Dace.8173 said:

Still, at least I'm trying to back my position with observable data. The people who are saying that Necromancer is bad aren't even doing that much. If you think the Blood Scourge build is bad then show us what a good build looks like. Just don't say it is bad and then not provide a comparison point for what is supposed to be good.

There is ALOT of this kind of thing happening. It's amazing how many people think that simply making a statement is something that everyone should just take a face value.

The fact is that people will ignore much of what is good about something to emphasize (and in many cases, sensationalize) what is wrong with it. That's just disingenuous. I've said many times that there is no way anyone can take someone seriously if they don't acknowledge what is good along with what is bad.

Frankly, I don't think it's very relevant what's on some 'most popular' builds website. Those sites are dedicated to people that want to count numbers, not choose and play classes because of theme or mechanics or whatever other personal preferences they have. Fortunately for us, Anet appears to have provided (and favoured correctly) on providing people with a variety of themes and mechanics to choose from ... in opposition to bowing down to bean counters. If people are so hung up about counting beans, there are dozens of MMO's out there that will satisfy their bean counting whims.

[Dace.8173]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

Still, at least I'm trying to back my position with observable data. The people who are saying that Necromancer is bad aren't even doing that much. If you think the Blood Scourge build is bad then show us what a good build looks like. Just don't say it is bad and then not provide a comparison point for what is supposed to be good.

There is ALOT of this kind of thing happening. It's amazing how many people think that simply making a statement is something that everyone should just take a face value.

The fact is that people will ignore much of what is good about something to emphasize (and in many cases, sensationalize) what is wrong with it. That's just disingenuous. I've said many times that there is no way anyone can take someone seriously if they don't acknowledge what is good along with what is bad.

Frankly, I don't think it's very relevant what's on some 'most popular' builds website. Those sites are dedicated to people that want to count numbers, not choose and play classes because of theme or mechanics or whatever other personal preferences they have. Fortunately for us, Anet appears to have provided (and favoured correctly) on providing people with a variety of themes and mechanics to choose from ... in opposition to bowing down to bean counters. If people are so hung up about counting beans, there are dozens of MMO's out there that will satisfy their bean counting whims.

I agree, I think there are things that Necromancer does well. ANet clearly agrees based on their most recent patch and the non Necomancer players seem to stand in agreement that Necromancer does do some things well. I think it's silly to deny that Scourge wasn't a strong build on some level. Maybe it doesn't push out the most DPS (I wouldn't know how well it does there since I tend to play Reaper) but it brought enough to the table that it was one of the most common builds to see from a defending group in WvW. I think one of the flaws here is equating DPS to good. There seem to be other factors such as how well it plays in a team, boon conversion, condi cleanse etc etc. Or rather there should be other factors we should be discussing.

Personally, I like build sites like metabattle because they at least give you some guidance in build creation. I typically modify things to suit my play style or just to make it more fun, for good or ill, but I think they serve an important function in giving us all a general go to spot to start a discussion on builds. But like I said, I'm open to other build sites if there are any.

[Gustaff.6581]

@Lily.1935 said:

No, not every class is. And difficulty means that they are less consistent with their damage. Which a good scourge? Sure its consistent. A not good one? Nope. And its not user friendly either. A mess up on the condi rotation means 50-100% of your health worth in damage.

And the shroud as a mechanic needs to be overhauled. I've been saying it for years. About half a decade now... Oh god its been half a decade...

Im sorry i dont see your point, Scourge rotation is not that complex, you dont have to juke with conjures or kits and you make weapon swap with the same weapons, you must make sure that you use your coodlowns with the correct priority. I mean, i believe any user that messes with their rotation will lose damage, and that doesnt even apply only to scourge.

[Obtena.7952]

@Lily.1935 said:

@Conqueror.3682 said:Well, i see every class as difficult to use, so thats irrelevant, also i dont see the problem with scourge being a headache, if scourge could reach acceptable levels of damage, then no one would be complaining. Not so much experience with reaper, but thats more of a design problem with shroud, anyways, doesnt matter because reaper does even less damage than Scourge.

No, not every class is. And difficulty means that they are less consistent with their damage. Which a good scourge? Sure its consistent. A not good one? Nope. And its not user friendly either. A mess up on the condi rotation means 50-100% of your health worth in damage.

And the shroud as a mechanic needs to be overhauled. I've been saying it for years. About half a decade now... Oh god its been half a decade...

Sorry, I felt a response because I think you hit true here.

The Shroud on Scourge as a mechanic is actually a significant improvement over what it is for Core and Reaper. I'm convince the Scourge version is mechanically sound and well done for two reasons:

1. It's a tried and true approach in ANY MMO. You have a resource pool, it refreshes and you can use it to 'cast spells'. Scourge works exactly that way. You almost can't go wrong with that concept; it's familiar and predictable by veteran players of almost any game.
2. The F skills you have access to as Scrouge are extremely useful, reasonably priced and do not restrict your use of other skills available to you; everything that is WRONG with Core and Reaper Shroud.

There is actually LOTS to like about Scourge ... at least moreso than Reaper and Core and I believe it's all to do with how Anet re-conceived LF use and Shroud skills.

[Wizardauz.3761]

@Dace.8173 said:I agree, I think there are things that Necromancer does well. ANet clearly agrees based on their most recent patch and the non Necomancer players seem to stand inagreement that Necromancer does do some things well.

So what does Necro do well then, that is unique to Necro.

I think it's silly to deny that Scourge wasn't a strong build on some level. Maybe it doesn't push out the most DPS (I wouldn't know how well it does there since I tend to play Reaper) but it brought enough to the table that it was one of the most common builds to see from a defending group in WvW. I think one of the flaws here is equating DPS to good. There seem to be other factors such as how well it plays in a team, boon conversion, condi cleanse etc etc. Or rather there should be other factors we should be discussing.

DPS is ranked. You test all the professions. Playing optimally and then measured. They are organized by numeric value by Damage Output over Time.

But by your explanation DPS numbers shouldn't be valued strictly numerically based upon unique aspects of what each Profession/Elite Spec brings.

What does the Necro bring that is unique among other Professions that is valued enough to warrant a drop in DPS.

Don't get me wrong, i do believe Scourge was strong in WvW, but at this point Necro itself in my opinion, does bring anything unique. Its just an under preforming ranged AoE spec. I'd take a Staff weaver or Mesmer in its place atm.

[Drarnor Kunoram.5180]

@"Dace.8173" said:

Why is being at the bottom judged by DPS? There are other aspects that are important to things like Raids, PvP, and WvW aside from pure DPS. If DPS was all that mattered then honestly the only profession being played would be Elementalist as last I checked they were still the kings and queens of DPS. Also, not every profession is difficult to use. Some are insanely easy and straightforward.

Because the Necromancer has nothing else to supply. Druids bring healing, spirits, Spotter, and Might for the party, Warriors bring banners and Empower Allies, Revenants bring Assassin's Presence, Resistance, and Herald buffs, Chronos bring Quickness, Alacrity, and boon sharing, Guardians bring party-wide blocks, Stability, and more Quickness. Engineers, Thieves, and Necromancers only bring damage to a good party.

Yes, Necromancer does well as training wheels with a Transfusion support setup, but once party members stop going down, its usefulness takes a nosedive off a cliff. Engineers and Thieves can at least compete on the damage front with the Warriors, Revenants, and Guardians. Necromancer can't.

"But Vampiric Aura" No. I'm going to stop you right there. Assuming that you got Vampiric Aura to apply on every hit, it would still increase damage by less than Empower Allies does (as Empower Allies works with damage increases and crits). But you won't get it to apply to every hit, because Vampiric Aura foolishly has an ICD! And the healing on it? Unecessary, as the Druid every raid comp takes anyway covers healing needs just fine.

[Vayne.8563]

I'm interested that people think that balancing has anything at all to do with benchmarks. The logic of this is mind boggling.

Benchmarks are a community way of saying that in perfect conditions this particular profession can achieve this much damage. It says nothing about stuff like survivability.

The percentage of the game's population that use or know about those benchmarks is probably pretty small, as is the percentage of the game that raids. So if 15% of the game's population raid, and 12% of that population are necros, this affects a pretty small group of people by and large. The game isn't going to be balanced around that.

I know in other formats of the game, besides raiding, the necro seems to be fairly popular, so maybe the benchmark isn't the be all end all of balancing, and probably isn't much considered.

Devs are not standing in front of a practice dummy perfecting their rotations, and nor is probably 90% of the game's population. The balance isn't done for one specific demographic, no matter how loud that demographic is.

[Dace.8173]

@Wizardauz.3761 said:

@"Dace.8173" said:I agree, I think there are things that Necromancer does well. ANet clearly agrees based on their most recent patch and the non Necomancer players seem to stand inagreement that Necromancer does do some things well.

So what does Necro do well then, that is unique to Necro.

I think it's silly to deny that Scourge wasn't a strong build on some level. Maybe it doesn't push out the most DPS (I wouldn't know how well it does there since I tend to play Reaper) but it brought enough to the table that it was one of the most common builds to see from a defending group in WvW. I think one of the flaws here is equating DPS to good. There seem to be other factors such as how well it plays in a team, boon conversion, condi cleanse etc etc. Or rather there should be other factors we should be discussing.

DPS is ranked. You test all the professions. Playing optimally and then measured. They are organized by numeric value by Damage Output over Time.

But by your explanation DPS numbers shouldn't be valued strictly numerically based upon unique aspects of what each Profession/Elite Spec brings.

What does the Necro bring that is unique among other Professions that is valued enough to warrant a drop in DPS.

Don't get me wrong, i do believe Scourge was strong in WvW, but at this point Necro itself in my opinion, does bring anything unique. Its just an under preforming ranged AoE spec. I'd take a Staff weaver or Mesmer in its place atm.

Scourge. I think Scourge is a very well done Elite. Granted I don't play it, but that has nothing to do with it being good or bad. I just happen to like swinging a greatsword around with little icicles on it. Scourge still feels like it is a strong condi damage pusher, especially in large groups. I still see it being played a lot in WvW. I don't think it would still be going strong in WvW if it was bad. I find it bizarre that people ignore just how overused Scourge is in WvW in favor of the "we suck narrative." Is that unique? No, not at all but you can't claim you want unique and then talk about DPS since other professions do DPS better than Necromancer from the get go. That's the flaw in tieing it all to DPS, if you do that then there really isn't any reason to play nothing but Elementalist. Clearly that's not the case so clearly, people bring other factors into the equation.

While DPS is ranked it still seems like a horrible way to judge good or bad since you even state that it is "playing optiamilly" and actual in game situations is rarely that. Additionally, I never said DPS shouldn't be valued. I just question it being the marker that you judge good and bad by. It seems like you are picking the one element that promises you will be considered as bad. There are other things people consider when playing and building a team. DPS is one aspect and if you want to talk about what does Necromancer bring to the table that is unique (though I consider Scourge to be unique) then you cannot keep talking about DPS as that is in no way unique.

From the way people talk they just seem to want to call Necromancer bad when I still see it being played a lot in WvW.

@Drarnor Kunoram.5180 said:

@"Dace.8173" said:

Why is being at the bottom judged by DPS? There are other aspects that are important to things like Raids, PvP, and WvW aside from pure DPS. If DPS was all that mattered then honestly the only profession being played would be Elementalist as last I checked they were still the kings and queens of DPS. Also, not every profession is difficult to use. Some are insanely easy and straightforward.

Because the Necromancer has nothing else to supply. Druids bring healing, spirits, Spotter, and Might for the party, Warriors bring banners and Empower Allies, Revenants bring Assassin's Presence, Resistance, and Herald buffs, Chronos bring Quickness, Alacrity, and boon sharing, Guardians bring party-wide blocks, Stability, and more Quickness. Engineers, Thieves, and Necromancers only bring damage to a good party.

Yes, Necromancer does well as training wheels with a Transfusion support setup, but once party members stop going down, its usefulness takes a nosedive off a cliff. Engineers and Thieves can at least compete on the damage front with the Warriors, Revenants, and Guardians. Necromancer can't.

"But Vampiric Aura" No. I'm going to stop you right there. Assuming that you got Vampiric Aura to apply on every hit, it would

still

increase damage by less than Empower Allies does (as Empower Allies works with damage increases and crits). But you won't get it to apply to every hit, because Vampiric Aura foolishly has an ICD! And the healing on it? Unecessary, as the Druid every raid comp takes anyway covers healing needs just fine.

Well, if it has nothing else to supply then why is it still popular in WvW? Are those people just making bad play choices? All of them? Also, I was never going to bring up Vampiric Aura. Vampiric Aura actually has nothing to do with anything I have said up to this point.

@Vayne.8563 said:I'm interested that people think that balancing has anything at all to do with benchmarks. The logic of this is mind boggling.

Benchmarks are a community way of saying that in perfect conditions this particular profession can achieve this much damage. It says nothing about stuff like survivability.

The percentage of the game's population that use or know about those benchmarks is probably pretty small, as is the percentage of the game that raids. So if 15% of the game's population raid, and 12% of that population are necros, this affects a pretty small group of people by and large. The game isn't going to be balanced around that.

I know in other formats of the game, besides raiding, the necro seems to be fairly popular, so maybe the benchmark isn't the be all end all of balancing, and probably isn't much considered.

Devs are not standing in front of a practice dummy perfecting their rotations, and nor is probably 90% of the game's population. The balance isn't done for one specific demographic, no matter how loud that demographic is.

Agreed.

[SidewayS.3789]

@Dace, dude we are talking about PvE not WvW, in case you didnt saw that. In PvE Necro brings next to zero as "support" and crap DPS and its outgunned from all the spots in high end game content. So pls stop posting "buuut scourge is awesome" yeah maybe in WvW,but we are talking about PvE.

[Nimon.7840]

@Dace.8173 said:

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Nimon.7840 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Odeezee.7362 said:

@Arzurag.7506 said:Someone needs to be at the bottom of a list, in this case, it´s necro.Though, you can still do raids as a scourge or power-reaper, as long as you run with a dedicated group, which makes being at the bottom endurable, I guess.

what the actual f*ck? how is this even something to say as though it's okay? ANet suck at balancing and that's why PvP died and they are now working on the rest of the game to give it the end they gave to PvP. and people want to just accept this sort of trash tier balancing???!!! /sigh

He said it because it's true. Someone is going to be at the bottom. It sucks when that bottom is you but someone is always there. I've played enough games over the years to know that while a development team sets out to build a balanced game they rarely end up doing so. I have yet to play the game where someone didn't think that the games developers don't suck at game balance.

There's so many things wrong with this! It sucks when that bottom is you: it even sucks more if that bottom is

always

you! But easily fixable: put the factor

time

in the balancing equation and you're done with it! I.e., in the upcoming 5 years, the Necro will be your absolute highest DPS kings!

I

would definitely not mind ... I think a lot of people will complain though .... And you'll probably be one of them!

Secondly: there are games that balance on a more Flavor of the Month kind of method, where the META changes (sometimes even significantly) every (few) month(s) or so! Imo, that's balancing I would prefer FAR better, then what ANet is doing right now. I also believe that it would make the PUGing community a lot less toxic, mainly because of the fact that it doesn't matter too much on who or what you take, simply because you just don't know for certain what is the best of the best now anyway .... METAs need time to settle, definitely in such a dynamic environment.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. There is always a bottom, always. And if you had read my follow up comment I state that I'm not suggesting that Necromancer should always be that bottom, just that it's not bad, wrong, or EVIL to state the obvious, that someone will be at the bottom. Though it's worth pointing out that Revenant seems to be worse off than Necromancer. I guess you can duke it out with them for the right to be able to claim you're the worst off profession.

But if you think I would complain then you're not really reading what I'm saying as I actually like Necromancer. I have not actually said I like Necromancer at the bottom. I'm just stating the truth that someone is going to be at the bottom. You seem to be reading intent into what has been stated that isn't actually there.

It's odd that people get so upset over stating such a simple fact. Even your suggestion of the flavor of the month Meta changes places someone at the bottom. Though what you suggest likely isn't going to turn out the way you want it too. If the Meta is changing so fast that no one knows for certain who is best then odds are strong that the professions that are at the bottom now stay at the bottom as there wouldn't be time to fine tune what is working and what isn't working.

@Nimon.7840 said:

@mikeeens.3542 said:U cant expect each class with the same balances. There will be always atleast 1 class wich will do less dmg than others... its normal... wrong would be if u couldnt kill anything... then i would agree.

Then ArenaNET should buff each class <% without changing skill cooldowns etc... just buff all classes and thats all... and then game will be booring a/f, because u could kill everything EZ... now u need to challange urself to be better, to make ur character better...

So it's right that necro is always at the bottom? And other classes aren't allowed to be at the bottom, only necro?Sure there will be someone doing less dmg than others, but it's the difference that matters. But it doesn't have to be always necro. And that's how it was and is. Necro was only good when unintended things happened.-horrors-dhuumfire bug-epi bounceThat's the only 3 times when necro was good and instant got nerfed to be at the bottom again.I only play for 3years now. So i started before hot.And necro was always bottom. And from what people tell me, necro was bottom from the beginning of gw2,While ele was always top.

@Dace.8173And if anyone says that rev is bad or bottom, this guy makes me mad.Sure it has its problems but it's super good in PvP and wvw.And In dmg it's way above necro. So why should it be worse than necro?

I do not think you are actually reading what people are saying. I haven't argued that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @mikeeens.3542 isn't arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Obtena.7952 is not arguing that Necromancer needs to be at the bottom. @Arzurag.7506 is not arguing that Necromancer has to be the bottom. All that is being said is that a bottom exists and someone will always occupy it. I'm not sure why you would be mad that Revenant players say they are at the bottom. Last I checked they are not super good in PvP or WvW. I find it bizarre that folks would be upset that someone is saying there is a bottom but then argue that no one else should claim that they are at the bottom. Having followed the Revenant side of things I'm inclined to say they have just as much claim to the bottom as Necromancer does. If we were to take a look at some of the meta builds at present metabattle shows one Revenant build in it's overall meta for PvP and Necromancer with four builds, with two of them being in the Meta category while the Revenant one is in the Good category. In WvW Revenant has three and Necromancer has four. In both modes of play I have observed far more Necromancers than I have Revenants. As a matter of fact, before the patch, I saw about as many Scourges (and some Reapers) as I did Thief and Mesmer (I haven't played WvW since the patch so I cannot comment on if that has changed). One of the things that we had to worry about were the Scourges rolling out the red carpet. Thus I do not think that Necromancer has the only claim to being at the bottom.

https://metabattle.com/wiki/Conquest

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

Lol arguing with meta battle builds. Sorry but most of these builds aren't up to date and not very good.More necros is easy to explain: it was brain-dead gameplay before dhuumfire nerf. Just spam those shade abilities. But that not what good scourges did.Rev is just harder to play, but more rewarding and its far less dependant on teammates to heal/support him.

Yes. I said somewhere that necro is still strong in wvw.But in pve it's now: join group, get kicked.

Won't happen to a rev. But he's also very strong in wvw. And pvp if you are a good rev.

While necro got again pushed into the: go-afk-farm-with-ur-minions-as-only-friends- role again.

Actually, no I'm not arguing with metabattle builds. I'm really not judging the quality of those builds just pointing out that sites dedicated to builds have X numbers to show. If you have a better site than metabattle then, by all means, link it so I can have someplace else to look at builds at. I have consitently asked folks for other build sites that has a collection of builds and consitently people come back with metabattle. However, when the OP is making an argument based on benchmark test then pointing out what metabattle has to offer is fairly appropriate. Also people wouldn't be playing Scourges if it was bad. Yeah it may be brain dead game play but that does not mean something is good or bad. Scourge clearly had a powerful affect on the game and the increased number of Scourges meant that they were, on some level, not the worst. You do not get a bunch of people playing a brain dead build and Elite if it's actually bad. What good Scourge players do is removed from the issue of if Necromancer is the worst profession. The change to Dhuumfire is too new for anyone to sit back and claim that Necromancer is not the worst of the worst. Game play will let us see that in the long term. Also, if Necromancer is good in WvW then it can't be said that it's bad. You can't say the entire profession is bad based on one mode of play. It would be more accurate to say that Necromancer under performs in PvE but is fine in WvW. But that doesn't seem to be the thrust of what people are arguing.

If you want to show that X builds are viable, those builds have to have more than 5 votes for being very good.Sorry but 5 votes don't show anything.If it was 500 ok, and we could talk about it. But 5 to justify that a build is good is just a real good joke.

If you wanna show pve builds ok. Metabattle is fine as they just copy the builds from snowcrows.

But for wvw?

Let's take Blood scourge as example.My guild mates said. But it's a very good build according to metabattle. I told them to not play it. Because its bad.

Well the rezz worked against enemies. But only one time.After that one time they were looking for those down- pulls and killed them easily.They didn't have the problem to cleave people spread, they waited for us to use the pull and then install killed up to 6 people.And that's how it always was. And if you have intelligent enemies this is a really bad build. Guess against idiots this build is really a good build

I'm not making a viability argument. Logically, if a profession is bad it will have fewer builds due to there being less to do with it that is considered good. Builds that are deemed bad don't seem to make it onto metabattle for long. I brought up those metabattle builds as a comparison point in regards to the discussion of which was worse Revenant or Necromancer. But if you're going to shoot those builds down then provide something to replace it with. I stated that the only reason I go to metabattle is because that's where people say to go when asked where to get good builds. Let's compare and contrast builds. Though it's worth pointing out that the number of votes has no bearing on whether a build is good or not.

Guess u did but ok. As far as i know, anyone can upload a build at metabattle, that signed in on the site.And i also posted my scourge build in this forum like 2-3times.Sure there can always be made adjustments. Esp. Scourge has some options to build (traits and gear). That's up to personal preference. But a build shouldn't be bad for the people around you. If you play a selfish build, go do it but don't be disappointed, if others do the same and the Teamplay gets shitty.

Still, at least I'm trying to back my position with observable data. The people who are saying that Necromancer is bad aren't even doing that much. If you think the Blood Scourge build is bad then show us what a good build looks like. Just don't say it is bad and then not provide a comparison point for what is supposed to be good.

I already gave an example.Ok. Sadly i don't have videos to back up. I recently deleted them all.What happens if you play blood scourge:As long as noone goes down, it's not a bad build. But if many people go down and the enemies have half a brain, they will see the pull.Next zergfights, enemy knows you have blood scourges. There is an intelligent enemy commander, that will tell some of his people to specifically look out for the downpulls and then spike this position. This leads to: necro dead, and up to 5 downstate players dead.

Like I said, when I ask for build sites people say metabattle. I have asked before (I even asked in this thread) for better sites. Instead of saying it's a bad build how about showing where better builds can be found so that we can have a real discussion on the merits and flaws of various builds. Otherwise, you have one guy saying that due to DPS Necromancer is bad (though that's flawed logic). Then you have the observable fact that Scourge was a popular build to play. You said it was an easy build to play, cool but easy does not equal bad. And to be frank, people don't bandwagon bad builds. It being easy isn't enough to get a bunch of people to play a profession. You have to remember, in order to play something like Scourge in WvW you have to dedicate the time to unlock all of it's abilities. People aren't going to do that if there is no payoff. It being easy is not motive enough for people to spend time unlocking traits.

Most guilds won't tell you their builds. If the guild finds a super good build that's working for them, they will never show you this build.There's the EZ-builds. But i didn't look up for their builds after the last patch, if they updated it or not.

And if you are too lazy to unlock scourge specialization, then don't do it. Play another Charakter.