Guardian needs help in the support area.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@"Etheri.5406" said:In pvp dropping lines in front or behind enemies predicting their movement is trivial. As a support you can drop a line on your DPS and repetively walk through, back and forth. It might only take them a few seconds to walk around, but it effectively buys you several seconds of "free time" unless they have stab or forces them to use cooldowns. It can also interupt various skills which are otherwise dodges and hard to CC, such as vault spam or rev sword 3.

In WvW dropping lines behind enemies during pirateship is standard. Dropping lines behind / inside your bubbles and pulling players just in front of them, only for them to waste dodges straight into the line due to panic is too.

Sure, in a vacuum the skill looks terrible. But that's probably because you're not being creative with their use. As soon as players run to the portal, 1 line stops them from getting there. Whenever you're fighting in a choke or narrow space, a single line is enough to prevent people from passing.

In WvW, I use line frequently and it grants me far more kills than symbol or the auto attack. If staff is so bad, why is it the main support weapon on FB? Because it sure as hell isn't mace which isn't even ran in PvP at high rating (where sword mobility > mace) nor as useful as staff considering a range-dominant meta.

I'm sorry that the CC on staff requires you to think about your positioning with the skill in order for it to be effective. Even if you can literally drop it straight on top of yourself or an ally and walk back and forth through it denying the enemy the chance to melee you at any point, or it allows the use from range to keep players in your AoE longer. I'm sorry empower requires you to think about where you stand before healing and buffing everyone around you. I understand this is awful gamedesign where "simple" skills that require thought and good placement are bad game design.

LoW as you described is only situationally useful in a zerg vs. zerg. In most scenarios in wvw, the effectiveness of LoW can be called into question: one single stack of stab, one auto-stun-break , or just a very quick stunbreak and a player can pass through the line no problem. Often times, walking around the line costs them next to nothing. In a choke or narrow area, one of two things are true: 1. both zergs are pirate shipping/bombing the choke, so it's a complete non-issue if there are wards in the choke, or 2. A zerg charges through and is loaded up on stability so the ward is useless. The ward does nothing to a zerg that is pushing. You then mention that you get kills with LoW on a zerg that is retreating. The players caught and killed by this are the ones out of fuel and could have been finished off by a damage spike, a roamer, or a pull as well. Most all of these things can be executed faster than a 1s cast time.

Lets not forget comparisons: Ele does it better. Unsteady Ground (aka. Better Line of Warding) casts 4x faster while maintaining the same cooldown and range. On top of this, they have Static Field, hands down the best aoe CC in zerg vs. zerg fights.

LoW is a completely ignorable joke in pvp, and in smaller scale fights so there is no argument there. Also what are you talking about in pvp? Literally every bunker FB runs mace. Most run mace/shield + staff and I've seen many not run staff.

Also in pvp: tell me, in what matchup is you LoWing yourself and running around it going to stop someone in melee range? Most of the damage dealers you have to worry about are ranged or have strong ranged options and the melee-centric either have high stability access or teleports and can very very easily deal with LoW - again, LoW is rubbish compared to Ring of Warding (which actually can CC a teleporter).

Like I said before, people use staff because of lack of better options. That doesn't make staff good, it just makes it the least bad option (it's still bad).

The CC on staff requires you to think about the aoe placement, read the situation, keep track of your own positioning, lead the enemy (since it has a 1s cast time) and keep track of enemy cooldowns to be effective (and less effective than comparable skills on other classes). Maybe if all of these things are true, then it actually is a bad skill and could use a buff?

Empower doesn't require me to think of where I stand, it requires my allies to think of where they stand and communication/coordination to use in a pinch. It restricts gameplay, ever so slightly, for the entire group when it could just be a mobile skill and not at all upset balance.

[Tongku.5326]

Staff right now is in a pretty bad spot. But staff 5 is pretty good. If you want to buff it, make it cleanse 1 condi stack of off allies pasing through it or something like that and it will be awesome.

Staff 1 is just screwed. It really needs a straight DPS buff, or its range back, or something, many things can be done, and simple things too, don't have to go all out and re-invent the wheel on it. And I would not like to see it changed to single target. I would like it to just get buffed in some form to respectable levels and kept the concept of it being a cone AOE.

Staff 2 is horrible and always has been. Now this just needs a rework. Either orb needs to heal allies as it passes through them, or it needs to do more damage on exploding, or something. It also needs to travel a lot faster since it too often can't even catch a moving target.

Staff 3 needs a bit of a buff, not too much, maybe just a little bit more damage on the symbol and 1 second extra duration and it will be OK.

Staff 4, this is the problem child, especially in PVE. There are just too many and far better ways to get might then having to be rooted for the cast duration and giving up a weapon slot for it. This is supposed to be the main party utility, its usefullness as such has fallen drastically. For the occupying a weapon slot + the root it just needs to do a LOT more. I'm not quite sure what to do with it so that it doesn't become too OP, but it needs to change, and I would not remove the root from it either, jsut change something else so that it is actually worth it. It needs to give a really good party wide buff.

[Yannir.4132]

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@"Etheri.5406" said:

I'll be respectful and have actual discussions when players show they're intelligent enough to have a reasonable discussion. I have 0 intention of spoonfeeding players who show their insight into the game is so low they shouldn't be giving ANY feedback, they should be ASKING for feedback on how the game works.

No. You will be -- as all members are required to be -- respectful by either not engaging in a discussion or expressing your thoughts in a less insulting and demeaning manner. No one is asking you to be arbiter of feedback. No one is suggesting that you set a "bar" for feedback, nor judge someone's intelligence.

No one is requiring you to engage with those with whom you disagree if your are able to do so only in a disagreeable manner.

I'm sorry to add an "ArenaNet flag" to this post for moderation-related comments, but reading through this, it seems worthwhile to make clear the very real and very reasonable expectations about this forums as held by other members and held by us, your hosts.

BTW, I think your feedback is very good, and your thoughtful comments -- those that don't involve direct and indirect insults -- deserve a read. Even the OP feels that way, and they hold a differing opinion. Please consider not just

what

you present but

how

you present it, for maximum value to the forum members and the devs. Thank you.

I want to add that constructive and friendly feedback is usually more effective as it reaches people better. If you throw insults around being disrespectful, people tend to get defensive and you don't get anywhere in the discussion. Sure, more sensitive people will buckle into unrelenting criticism but more bull-headed people, like myself, will either push back or ignore that person. Even if the feedback presented is intelligent, the manner in which it's represented can give the exact opposite picture. For that exact reason I didn't want to get involved with this thread before now. I have better things to spend my time on than get into useless, unfriendly arguments.

[Artyport.2084]

@Yannir.4132 said:

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@"Etheri.5406" said:

I'll be respectful and have actual discussions when players show they're intelligent enough to have a reasonable discussion. I have 0 intention of spoonfeeding players who show their insight into the game is so low they shouldn't be giving ANY feedback, they should be ASKING for feedback on how the game works.

No. You will be -- as all members are required to be -- respectful by either not engaging in a discussion or expressing your thoughts in a less insulting and demeaning manner. No one is asking you to be arbiter of feedback. No one is suggesting that you set a "bar" for feedback, nor judge someone's intelligence.

No one is requiring you to engage with those with whom you disagree if your are able to do so only in a disagreeable manner.

I'm sorry to add an "ArenaNet flag" to this post for moderation-related comments, but reading through this, it seems worthwhile to make clear the very real and very reasonable expectations about this forums as held by other members and held by us, your hosts.

BTW, I think your feedback is very good, and your thoughtful comments -- those that don't involve direct and indirect insults -- deserve a read. Even the OP feels that way, and they hold a differing opinion. Please consider not just

what

you present but

how

you present it, for maximum value to the forum members and the devs. Thank you.

I want to add that constructive and friendly feedback is usually more effective as it reaches people better. If you throw insults around being disrespectful, people tend to get defensive and you don't get anywhere in the discussion. Sure, more sensitive people will buckle into unrelenting criticism but more bull-headed people, like myself, will either push back or ignore that person. Even if the feedback presented is intelligent, the manner in which it's represented can give the exact opposite picture. For that exact reason I didn't want to get involved with this thread before now. I have better things to spend my time on than get into useless, unfriendly arguments.

see that is sad.I just wanted to have a real discussion about a weapon that just feels so lackluster.Bring ME YOUR INSIGHT!

[Yannir.4132]

@Artyport.2084 said:

@Yannir.4132 said:

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@"Etheri.5406" said:

I'll be respectful and have actual discussions when players show they're intelligent enough to have a reasonable discussion. I have 0 intention of spoonfeeding players who show their insight into the game is so low they shouldn't be giving ANY feedback, they should be ASKING for feedback on how the game works.

No. You will be -- as all members are required to be -- respectful by either not engaging in a discussion or expressing your thoughts in a less insulting and demeaning manner. No one is asking you to be arbiter of feedback. No one is suggesting that you set a "bar" for feedback, nor judge someone's intelligence.

No one is requiring you to engage with those with whom you disagree if your are able to do so only in a disagreeable manner.

I'm sorry to add an "ArenaNet flag" to this post for moderation-related comments, but reading through this, it seems worthwhile to make clear the very real and very reasonable expectations about this forums as held by other members and held by us, your hosts.

BTW, I think your feedback is very good, and your thoughtful comments -- those that don't involve direct and indirect insults -- deserve a read. Even the OP feels that way, and they hold a differing opinion. Please consider not just

what

you present but

how

you present it, for maximum value to the forum members and the devs. Thank you.

I want to add that constructive and friendly feedback is usually more effective as it reaches people better. If you throw insults around being disrespectful, people tend to get defensive and you don't get anywhere in the discussion. Sure, more sensitive people will buckle into unrelenting criticism but more bull-headed people, like myself, will either push back or ignore that person. Even if the feedback presented is intelligent, the manner in which it's represented can give the exact opposite picture. For that exact reason I didn't want to get involved with this thread before now. I have better things to spend my time on than get into useless, unfriendly arguments.

see that is sad.I just wanted to have a real discussion about a weapon that just feels so lackluster.Bring ME YOUR INSIGHT!

I'll get back to you on that, at work now so not writing any walls here.

[otto.5684]

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@"Etheri.5406" said:

I'll be respectful and have actual discussions when players show they're intelligent enough to have a reasonable discussion. I have 0 intention of spoonfeeding players who show their insight into the game is so low they shouldn't be giving ANY feedback, they should be ASKING for feedback on how the game works.

No. You will be -- as all members are required to be -- respectful by either not engaging in a discussion or expressing your thoughts in a less insulting and demeaning manner. No one is asking you to be arbiter of feedback. No one is suggesting that you set a "bar" for feedback, nor judge someone's intelligence.

No one is requiring you to engage with those with whom you disagree if your are able to do so only in a disagreeable manner.

I'm sorry to add an "ArenaNet flag" to this post for moderation-related comments, but reading through this, it seems worthwhile to make clear the very real and very reasonable expectations about this forums as held by other members and held by us, your hosts.

BTW, I think your feedback is very good, and your thoughtful comments -- those that don't involve direct and indirect insults -- deserve a read. Even the OP feels that way, and they hold a differing opinion. Please consider not just

what

you present but

how

you present it, for maximum value to the forum members and the devs. Thank you.

And I thought no one at Anet ever reads professions sub forms :#

Thanks for the reply!

One thing to add, anyone who purchased the game and follows Anet forum rules, is allowed to say whatever their heart pleases. Is it useful for other posters and devs? No, but they are entitled to it, since they paid for it.

In that spirit, I suggest that wielding a staff transforms gurdian to a dragon with a billion HP, unlimited range and 1 million damage. Elder dragons got nothing on me B)

[Falseprophet.1502]

I was really excited to see an official post by ArenaNet, hoping that the response would include "oh, yes, we are definitely going to be addressing x, y, and z."

BOY, WAS I DISAPPOINTED!

[Dace.8173]

@"Falseprophet.1502" said:I was really excited to see an official post by ArenaNet, hoping that the response would include "oh, yes, we are definitely going to be addressing x, y, and z."

BOY, WAS I DISAPPOINTED!

Well, it may be the case that it isn't an issue that needs to be addressed. What the players believe need to be addressed and what actually does need to be addressed are two separate things and as this thread demonstrates, there isn't exactly a clear-cut position that demands that it is an issue worth addressing. Or it may be the case that there are more pressing matters they are dealing with but not at liberty to say anything about. There is a tendency that if a developer confirms they are investigating something that there will be a fix for it in the near future and if there isn't a fix (or more precisely if it's not fixed the way a person feels it should have been) then the developers comments are construed as lies and the development team ignoring their desires since the development team took the time to acknowledge them in the first place. Player behavior makes it very difficult for developers to come into a conversation like this and weigh in as it is typically a lose/lose proposition in terms of game mechanics and balance patches. It is typically best to remain silent until you have an actual answer or path that you are moving forward with.

[aceofbass.2163]

@"Falseprophet.1502" said:I was really excited to see an official post by ArenaNet, hoping that the response would include "oh, yes, we are definitely going to be addressing x, y, and z."

BOY, WAS I DISAPPOINTED!

Same, I was already skipping through the walls of text and finally found the red tag in which I thought anet would have feedback on the suggestions.

WRONG AGAIN!

[Iozeph.5617]

Remove the range on staff one. We have a better ranged weapon in scepters as it is. Make staff one a melee weapon with a heavy staff style - something similar to Shastarvidiya from India. Change the stance when in combat to reflect this. Nothing showy. No twirling. Just strong, heavy, forward strikes with the leading end of the staff- something almost resembling spear technique. Give it a three strike chain.

1. Head strike: Moderate damage. applies Blind if successful. Heals allies around the guardian. Strikes up to five targets in a narrow cone in front of the player.

2. Throat Strike: Moderate damage. Applies weakness. Heals allies around the guardian. Strikes up to five targets in a narrow cone in front of the player.

3. Heart Strike: Heavy damage, Applies vulnerability and applies a short duration Regeneration to allies around the guardian. Strikes up to five targets in a narrow cone in front of the player.

All the strikes are essentially heavy thrusts, simply linear in motion but altered only slightly to account for aiming the butt of the staff at their respective targets.

Buttons two through five could remain largely the same but with minor improvements such as those suggested above.

[Opopanax.1803]

Staff one needs to be ranged. We have only one ranged weapon: Scepter. Make staff ranged like it should be.

Make 2 ground targetable and faster moving so it doesn't bug out on terrain and add a blast to it.

Make three castable while moving, or give it more reward for the risk.

Lastly this needs to be said: If this makes FB too powerful, then FB needs to be toned down somewhere. Core guardian needs a boost to healing, not FB.

[Etheri.5406]

@Opopanax.1803 said:Staff one needs to be ranged. We have only one ranged weapon: Scepter. Make staff ranged like it should be.

Make 2 ground targetable and faster moving so it doesn't bug out on terrain and add a blast to it.

Make three castable while moving, or give it more reward for the risk.

Lastly this needs to be said: If this makes FB too powerful, then FB needs to be toned down somewhere. Core guardian needs a boost to healing, not FB.

Staff 3 is castable while moving and carries no risk...Giving core guard a boost in healing - especially if it comes from a boost to staff - won't change a thing about core guard's viability or guards viability as a healer in PvE. Especially not if the boosts are the changes you just suggested.

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@"Etheri.5406" said:

I'll be respectful and have actual discussions when players show they're intelligent enough to have a reasonable discussion. I have 0 intention of spoonfeeding players who show their insight into the game is so low they shouldn't be giving ANY feedback, they should be ASKING for feedback on how the game works.

No. You will be -- as all members are required to be -- respectful by either not engaging in a discussion or expressing your thoughts in a less insulting and demeaning manner. No one is asking you to be arbiter of feedback. No one is suggesting that you set a "bar" for feedback, nor judge someone's intelligence.

No one is requiring you to engage with those with whom you disagree if your are able to do so only in a disagreeable manner.

I'm sorry to add an "ArenaNet flag" to this post for moderation-related comments, but reading through this, it seems worthwhile to make clear the very real and very reasonable expectations about this forums as held by other members and held by us, your hosts.

BTW, I think your feedback is very good, and your thoughtful comments -- those that don't involve direct and indirect insults -- deserve a read. Even the OP feels that way, and they hold a differing opinion. Please consider not just

what

you present but

how

you present it, for maximum value to the forum members and the devs. Thank you.

You're breaking your own forum rules by calling me out specifically and discussing forum rules publically. Something tells me if I reply or defend myself here I'll be infracted, posts removed and banned for exactly that. I'll also be told it's supposed to be making us feel safe and secure. Yet very few players even post here and other media regularly have complaints about how heavy this place is moderated, making them feel the exact opposite.

Why is it that you're allowed to break your own rules but we get banned for so much as refering to them? Do you think everyone feels safe in an environment which is heavily moderated and where policies aren't even up for discussion - as even refering to them results in a blanket ban? I thought that level of communication control / propaganda was reserved for dystopia's.

I wonder if there are any ... subtle signs towards the forums not being as safe, secure and a happy place as you'd like to have us believe. I hear searching "forums" in relation to GW2 doesn't lead to anyone saying they're safe, secure and fun. I hear they lead to many many posts and screenshots of users being banned or infracted for some rather innocent posts.

I'd like to have an actual discussion about balance issues or anything else. But even after your post, there hasn't been a single user suggesting changes that would make staff better in PvE rather than completely bonkers in PvP / WvW it's clear that this is not the place nor the medium. I find it entertaining how being nice to everyone is important, yet virtually every suggestion here refuses to take other playstyles into account. It just has to feel nice for me and screw balance, screw other gamemodes, screw efficiency in my own gamemode and if you disagree with my feelings that's rude and condescending. I made 5 posts trying to explain why their balance changes were fundamentally problematic which were pretty nice. And the reply to all of them can be summarized into "I don't care about balance, other gamemodes or other playstyles. I care about mine where staff is not fun enough and doesn't fullfil my fantasies". Funny, cause the original post clearly speaks about what it does and doesn't from a gameplay / functionality point of view.

As a result it's clear this is no place for people who are interested in feedback. This is an echochamber to "politely" complain about our L2P issues and write them off as balance issues. It's no suprise that the only dev posts out here are the ones policing to see if we're nice enough, not anyone looking for feedback or inspiration. I will safely assume I'll get banned for posting this, which solves both our problems. Your forums are safe and secure to your standards, and I won't be tempted to reply to very polite posts that say "I don't care about other users and if you disagree with my opinions you're mean" type players. Who obviously don't mean anything badly, they just lack the knowledge to be able to speak or suggest while keeping other players and playstyles in mind. But don't you dare suggest that - that's not safe, secure and polite to anyone and everyone's feelings are equally valid.

[Opopanax.1803]

@Etheri.5406 said:

@Opopanax.1803 said:Staff one needs to be ranged. We have only one ranged weapon: Scepter. Make staff ranged like it should be.

Make 2 ground targetable and faster moving so it doesn't bug out on terrain and add a blast to it.

Make three castable while moving, or give it more reward for the risk.

Lastly this needs to be said: If this makes FB too powerful, then FB needs to be toned down somewhere. Core guardian needs a boost to healing, not FB.

Staff 3 is castable while moving and carries no risk...Giving core guard a boost in healing - especially if it comes from a boost to staff - won't change a thing about core guard's viability or guards viability as a healer in PvE. Especially not if the boosts are the changes you just suggested.

I meant staff 4. And while it may not make core a viable healer, it would help buffing capabilities. At one time there were core builds that used staff for the boons. I think most people would like to see that come back. The reality is that staff is outcompeted most of the time because staff doesn't give enough to displace a second dps weapon, even though it used to.

And I disagree on spreading healing out to staff. By giving staff better healing (and reducing tome heals) you give firebrand more evened out healing when your tome is on CD, one of the main problems with being a support with a ~30 sec cd.

[Etheri.5406]

@Opopanax.1803 said:

@Etheri.5406 said:

@Opopanax.1803 said:Staff one needs to be ranged. We have only one ranged weapon: Scepter. Make staff ranged like it should be.

Make 2 ground targetable and faster moving so it doesn't bug out on terrain and add a blast to it.

Make three castable while moving, or give it more reward for the risk.

Lastly this needs to be said: If this makes FB too powerful, then FB needs to be toned down somewhere. Core guardian needs a boost to healing, not FB.

Staff 3 is castable while moving and carries no risk...Giving core guard a boost in healing - especially if it comes from a boost to staff - won't change a thing about core guard's viability or guards viability as a healer in PvE. Especially not if the boosts are the changes you just suggested.

I meant staff 4. And while it may not make core a viable healer, it would help buffing capabilities. At one time there were core builds that used staff for the boons. I think most people would like to see that come back. The reality is that staff is outcompeted most of the time because staff doesn't give enough to displace a second dps weapon, even though it used to.

And I disagree on spreading healing out to staff. By giving staff better healing (and reducing tome heals) you give firebrand more evened out healing when your tome is on CD, one of the main problems with being a support with a ~30 sec cd.

Actually back when might was blasted you could overwrite might stacks and elitist groups would kick you because so much as equiping a staff as guardian in PvE was a sin. It happened, but not in good groups.

FB has higher per sec healing when tome is on CD than the meta druid healer in PvE. Core guard can heal more than the meta druid builds per second, too. That said there are several specs that can do even better such as tempest, scrapper, heal rev and heal fb. And none of these are "meta" in PvE. It's almost as if... the reason it's not used in PvE isn't because it doesn't heal enough? Who'd have thought!

Then you start talking about DPS weapons for healing builds... That's great but frankly not the reason it isn't used. Most healing builds struggle at doing any kind of meaningful damage no matter which weapon they're on. Sure you can go with meme harrier or zealot builds but is the lack of those the reason fb / core guard both arent' used in PvE... or is it because the weapon ONLY heals without providing meaningful buffs? Because 12 might for a short duration is just not a meaningful buff compared to HoT powercreep (read : chrono or grace of the land).

So again. Players that will pretend staff isn't used because it doesn't heal well enough when in reality, it's healing capacity isn't even relevant for PvE viability. This further makes the weapon OP in modes where healing is useful (see pvp / wvw) and unused in PvE.

[Opopanax.1803]

It's like you are talking with yourself. I don't see people in this thread asking for guardian to be better than druid about giving offensive buffs like spotter shock. In fact many of us don't want guardian to be a clone of chronomancer gasp.

No need to try to pigeon hole us into saying things we arent. In fact, you fail to even address my points because you are so fixed on what your issues are in wvw.

I get that you are fixated on the fact that you feel that the utility is so powerful in wvw (lol) that anything done to staff would make it too op in wvw. Regardless, you have failed to even understand the pve issues with fb healing as well as staff problems in general. If you can't get passed your wvw centric view then there is no hope of discussion regarding staff in general, at least with you.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@Etheri.5406 So your central argument seems to be that many of our proposed changes to staff are rubbish because they're pvp/wvw centric where guard is already OP.

You seem to be in favor of buffing staff in pve only but we have yet to see you make a single constructive comment along these lines. Instead you've been spending your time insulting other players and putting down their suggestions.

How about you make some suggestions yourself?

[Etheri.5406]

@Arcaedus.7290 said:@"Etheri.5406" So your central argument seems to be that many of our proposed changes to staff are rubbish because they're pvp/wvw centric where guard is already OP.

You seem to be in favor of buffing staff in pve only but we have yet to see you make a single constructive comment along these lines. Instead you've been spending your time insulting other players and putting down their suggestions.

How about you make some suggestions yourself?

My central argument is that the reason guard / FB isn't a thing in PvE isn't because staff and in extension guard and FB as a whole do NOT lack in the healing or utility department. They do this better than current "meta" PvE healers. What it lacks in is providing buffs, particularly offensive ones, like reliable 25 might. (and spotters, spirits, ... but hey). Further buffing its healing does NOTHING to make it viable in PvE. Making it easier to play doesn't either, altho that's acceptable as long as it isn't strict powercreep. In fact it's funny because in the long run, it makes it worse. It pushes guard further into the "healing" rather than the "buffing" department where it requires nerfs for pvp / wvw where it's oppressive yet without any reason to run it in pve because nobody needs someone that heals you to full without providing you with useful buffs.

"But I don't want to be a chrono or a druid". What do you want to be buddy? A heal fb? A heal core guard? You can already be either of those.

My argument is that between gamemodes, at best numbers are split. Never mechanics. If you're going to suggest improvements or changes, work within those constructs. If you cannot then don't be surprised if the changes don't end up the way you expected. And - I know this is a shocker for you boys - but balance depends on where classes are at their best. If staff ele is broken in PVE, even tho it's trash everywhere else, it'll get nerfed. If scourge is broken in wvw / pvp, and bad in pve, it'll get nerfed. And ideally, they nerf in a way so it becomes more viable everywhere - but that's often not the case. So yes, the direct result of you strictly buffing staff for pvp or wvw will result in ... consequent nerfs. And if your changes make the difference between both BIGGER, then you'll only make the situation in PvE worse. But I see taking three gamemodes into account is just really not fun enough. Easier to ignore them. I mean complexity really does take the fun out of things don't you think?

You look at empower and you tell me you "need to be able to move". Not one of you even checks ... "mhm, if I don't need to abuse the healing is there even a reason to cast it?" With max boon duration it keeps up 12 stacks of might just barely, by casting it on CD. And honestly that's pretty bad in PvE terms - unless you need the extra healing. Which frankly you don't. The might however? Yeah kinda lacking there. I'd say drastically increase the duration on that to at least create a scenario where it's worthwhile to swap into other than burst healing. Someone who could do basic math would say "hey, better to go scepter if what you need is might and not extra healing". No suprise that's what players do. I wrote this in several of my posts by the way. That you gotta look at buffs and not plain healing. It's almost like you're too busy reading where i disagree with you to actually read my posts. Keep spamming suggestions at random please. Maybe something sticks.

@"Opopanax.1803" I adressed your points. You're not satisfied, but frankly that's OK. Half the statements you made were misinformed or wrong. You're here to make an argument regarding staff while barely knowing its skills. You pretend it was useful during core days but this is a L2P issue - even back then using it was awful for PvE as it'd overwrite your longer duration mightstacks until this was changed. Feel free to tell me what you do want. Core healer to be viable? I'm all for nerfing fb and making core more viable again, but again your weapon changes did nothing to aid towards that.

Oh wait it "doesn't do enough to replace a second dps weapon". What game are you playing? In the game i'm playing, NOBODY replaces their dps weapon on dps builds with a healing weapon. Utility, sure. In fact, on SUPPORT FB heal builds you don't use staff in pve because all it does is heal. Which nobody needs because you can shit out more heals than any reasonable person would ever need. And frankly i'd rather have fury from sword, protection and breakbar damage from hammer or even... MORE MIGHT by running scepter, pull from greatsword or any other utility you require. The amount of healing staff does is irrelevant for its viability in PvE. How staff can move or not move while doing empower is even more irrelevant. Players asking reworks for skills they can't use effectively even now are hypocrite at best.

"But etheri I don't care about balance. I expect everyone else also not to care about balance because I don't. GW2 is casual, nobody needs balance. All I care about is how my weapon MUST feel fun in hypercasual PvE where performance is all about how hard you pretend to perform. All you need to do is believe! And since I and everyone else don't care about all other gamemodes, can we please finally just ignore those players and discuss how to make it fun?" Sure you can buddies.

Just buff staff 1 and give it 1.5k range so you can afk press 1 and tag everything. I hear that's fun openworld gameplay.I'm not here to expect reasonable balance discussions. I know that it's extremely unlikely i'll get those. I kick players not willing to run cookie cutter builds because I assume the average GW2 player to incapable of making a build for themselves which can perform. Why would anyone assume those players can discuss balance or how to improve the game without completely ignoring functionality and any aspects they don't know / understand? But they're still super valuable members of the communities whose feelings and opinions are to be respected. I'm just here to remind them their ideas aren't as brilliant as they think... Mostly for entertainments sake.

[pelle ossa.9705]

fb in pve have 1 big problem... tempest and druid can heal a lot even far from them , fb can't cos it is designed around the fact that you are a melee class and you fight near enemy.... but when you have to heal in raid the design of firebrand and staff are horrid... and another thing is that druid staff is designed in sinergy with druid obviusly and the staff of tempest is good enough in sinergy too , but staff and firebrand are not in sinergy....about numbers for me fb is fine maybe i will change something in receive the light and merciful intervention

[Arcaedus.7290]

@Etheri.5406 said:

@Arcaedus.7290 said:@Etheri.5406 So your central argument seems to be that many of our proposed changes to staff are rubbish because they're pvp/wvw centric where guard is already OP.

You seem to be in favor of buffing staff in pve only but we have yet to see you make a single constructive comment along these lines. Instead you've been spending your time insulting other players and putting down their suggestions.

How about you make some suggestions yourself?

My central argument is that the reason guard / FB isn't a thing in PvE isn't because staff and in extension guard and FB as a whole do NOT lack in the healing or utility department. They do this better than current "meta" PvE healers. What it lacks in is providing buffs, particularly offensive ones, like reliable 25 might. (and spotters, spirits, ... but hey). Further buffing its healing does NOTHING to make it viable in PvE. Making it easier to play doesn't either, altho that's acceptable as long as it isn't strict powercreep. In fact it's funny because in the long run, it makes it worse. It pushes guard further into the "healing" rather than the "buffing" department where it requires nerfs for pvp / wvw where it's oppressive yet without any reason to run it in pve because nobody needs someone that heals you to full without providing you with useful buffs.

"But I don't want to be a chrono or a druid". What do you want to be buddy? A heal fb? A heal core guard? You can already be either of those.

My argument is that between gamemodes, at best numbers are split. Never mechanics. If you're going to suggest improvements or changes, work within those constructs. If you cannot then don't be surprised if the changes don't end up the way you expected. And - I know this is a shocker for you boys - but balance depends on where classes are at their best. If staff ele is broken in PVE, even tho it's trash everywhere else, it'll get nerfed. If scourge is broken in wvw / pvp, and bad in pve, it'll get nerfed. And ideally, they nerf in a way so it becomes more viable everywhere - but that's often not the case. So yes, the direct result of you strictly buffing staff for pvp or wvw will result in ... consequent nerfs. And if your changes make the difference between both BIGGER, then you'll only make the situation in PvE worse. But I see taking three gamemodes into account is just really not fun enough. Easier to ignore them. I mean complexity really does take the fun out of things don't you think?

You look at empower and you tell me you "need to be able to move". Not one of you even checks ... "mhm, if I don't need to abuse the healing is there even a reason to cast it?" With max boon duration it keeps up 12 stacks of might just barely, by casting it on CD. And honestly that's pretty bad in PvE terms - unless you need the extra healing. Which frankly you don't. The might however? Yeah kinda lacking there. I'd say drastically increase the duration on that to at least create a scenario where it's worthwhile to swap into other than burst healing. Someone who could do basic math would say "hey, better to go scepter if what you need is might and not extra healing". No suprise that's what players do. I wrote this in several of my posts by the way. That you gotta look at buffs and not plain healing. It's almost like you're too busy reading where i disagree with you to actually read my posts. Keep spamming suggestions at random please. Maybe something sticks.

I don't think we're in as big of disagreement as you seem to think we are. I never proposed increased healing to guardian staff. I proposed some gameplay changes that would make it more fun and fluid to use in pvp/wvw and these changes do nothing to buff its healing powers. I also proposed some offensive buffs since staff without healing power does jack squat for healing. You can argue it should be this way but in my opinion, no weapon should be completely useless for all but one build to the degree that staff is. It's fine for 0 HP staff to have poor heals if it could at least deal decent, or reliable damage given a specialized condi or power build... and it can't no matter how high you pump either stat or how godly your reflexes or foresight are. Offensive buffs to staff would have to be very very extreme for it to ever be a viable alternative for an offensive build in either pvp or wvw so you can implement them with almost no worry of repercussions.

I agree with you on increase duration of empower's might stacks. Do you have any other suggestions for buffing staff? A duration increase to empower alone isn't going to change anything. What do you think of the following non-healing related changes/buffs:

-Increase might stack gain to 15 or maybe 18 stacks with empower-Add some sort of boonshare to the final pulse of empower (something like either heat sync or sand squall on tempest's warhorn)-Orb of Light could also grant regen, or be the alternative skill to apply boonshare/boon time extension instead of empower-LoW could grant boons in an aoe on cast and more to allies who cross it.

These are various ones I've seen suggested over time for staff that could be implemented without changing the animations of the skill/reworking the weapon.

[mrauls.6519]

@Arcaedus.7290 he won't be able to reply now since he's banned

[Obtena.7952]

Personally, I think staff tries to do too many things and just does them all like crap.

Anet, pick a focus and give it to the Staff.

[Indure.5410]

My opinions on staff:

1. Give auto attacks a 600 range. It is a support weapon and shouldn't be basically in melee range to use. If weapon cleave through walls in WvW is a problem then give it a higher base damage and nerf its damage coefficient to make it not scale with power as well.
2. Orb of light should be ground targeted so that it can be given a blast finisher.
3. Symbol of Swiftness should be removed because swiftness is the worst boon to get in a 1200 range symbol. You either have to painfully stand in it for 4s to get a reasonable amount of swiftness (which defeats its purpose), you are using it to harass or area control in which case the boons are worthless, or you are in a dungeon/raiding environment where swiftness isn't particularly valuable. I would propose a change to Symbol of Quickness. Firebrands already have a lot of quickness so it doesn't change a lot for them, while introducing a decent quickness option for core guardian. Additionally make it the only symbol that is a fire field, which makes a burst finisher from orb of light more valuable in PVE.
4. Empower is fine, although a boost to 15 might would be nice.
5. Change Line of Warding to give swiftness for 12s upon crossing (replaces swiftness lost from symbol).
6. If orb of light passes through a ward then the detonate awards 2 blast finishers from the combo field detonated on. This gives options to PVE where they can use the line of warding to greatly enhance buffs, for example on a the new fire field for 6 might for 40s (max concentration).

[Opopanax.1803]

@Obtena.7952 said:Personally, I think staff tries to do too many things and just does them all like crap.

Anet, pick a focus and give it to the Staff.

I could see the following big-picture changes to staff:

1. buff healing of staff while nerfing tome 2 to even out healing
2. add some utility of staff. Much of staff's utility that used to make it a good off set was that it brought a lot of utility. That has been power creeped away; the swiftness duration and the might.

[Silmariena.6205]

I am a huge fan of this idea, so let me re-present my thoughts on possible changes that I have already raised in the previous discussion.

Maybe we can finally pay attention to the problem that bothers us :)

@Silmariena.6205 said:I have been tormented by this topic for a long time, especially after the entry of a new specialization. Guardian has always had a predisposition to be support but has never received perfect tools to be a healer, staff has always been a weapon with low dps without high support compensation. I love this class as it is but I feel that I do not have the opportunity to use its full potential and that is why in my mind the idea was made that small (or not) changes make the staff purely healing weapon and open up new horizons :)

1. Touch of light -> Activation time : 3/4Cast a lightning bolt that explodes on impact to hit enemies and heal nearby allies.  Damage: 242 (0.6)  Healing: 292 (0.25)  Number of Targets: 5  Radius: 240  Range: 1200

2.  Orb of Light -> Activation time ½ Recharge : 8Fire a moving orb of light that damages enemies and heals allies it touches. The orb explode in target area to heal nearby allies and grant them light aura.  Damage: 484 (1.2)  Healing: 271 (0.2)  Number of Targets: 5  Range: 1,200Orb explosion heal nearby allies.  Damage: 242 (0.6)  Healing: 788 (1.2)  Light Aura (4s): When struck, you gain retaliation. Incoming condition damage is reduced by 10%. (Cooldown: 1s)  Number of Targets: 5  Radius: 240  Range: 1,200

3. Symbol of Swiftness -> Activation time : ¾ Recharge : 16Sear a mystic symbol into the target area, damaging foes and granting swiftness to allies.  Damage (5x): 1,010 (2.5)?  Swiftness (4s): 33% Movement Speed  Vigor (2s): +50% Endurance Regeneration  Number of Targets: 5  Symbol Duration: 4s  Symbol Radius: 180  Combo Field: Light  Range: 1,200

4. Empower -> Activation time : 1½ Recharge : 20Channel healing and might to your nearby allies. Completing this channel grants more health to your allies.  Final Heal: 750 (0.5)?  Heal Pulses: 248 (0.17)?  Resistance (2s): Conditions currently on you are ineffective; stacks durationMight(4stacks) x3(10s): 120 Power, 120 Condition Damage  Number of Targets: 5  Pulses: 5 Combo Finisher: Blast  Radius: 600

5. Line of Warding -> Activation time : 1 Recharge : 32Create in front of you a barrier that causes enemy projectiles to heal allies.  Duration: 5s  Healing: 122 (0.025)? Protection (4s): -33% Incoming Damage  Combo Field: Water  Range: 1,200

[Yannir.4132]

@Indure.5410 said:My opinions on staff:

1. Give auto attacks a 600 range. It is a support weapon and shouldn't be basically in melee range to use. If weapon cleave through walls in WvW is a problem then give it a higher base damage and nerf its damage coefficient to make it not scale with power as well.
2. Orb of light should be ground targeted so that it can be given a blast finisher.
3. Symbol of Swiftness should be removed because swiftness is the worst boon to get in a 1200 range symbol. You either have to painfully stand in it for 4s to get a reasonable amount of swiftness (which defeats its purpose), you are using it to harass or area control in which case the boons are worthless, or you are in a dungeon/raiding environment where swiftness isn't particularly valuable. I would propose a change to Symbol of Quickness. Firebrands already have a lot of quickness so it doesn't change a lot for them, while introducing a decent quickness option for core guardian. Additionally make it the only symbol that is a fire field, which makes a burst finisher from orb of light more valuable in PVE.
4. Empower is fine, although a boost to 15 might would be nice.
5. Change Line of Warding to give swiftness for 12s upon crossing (replaces swiftness lost from symbol).
6. If orb of light passes through a ward then the detonate awards 2 blast finishers from the combo field detonated on. This gives options to PVE where they can use the line of warding to greatly enhance buffs, for example on a the new fire field for 6 might for 40s (max concentration).

I like the synergy here but there's just 1 problem. Quickness. In a symbol. Symbols are too high output for Quickness.

Example:Standard Symbol 4 second duration, 5 pulses of Boon.What's a good duration for pulsing Quickness? 1 second? Alright.Standard Symbol gives a total of 5 seconds of Quickness baseline.Enter Writ of Persistence, adding 2 more pulses to the skill. That's now 7 seconds of Quickness.What kind of a Guardian uses staff? Support. Well, a support Guardian probably has maxed out Boon duration. (not in PvP though, thinking more in terms of WvW)Which makes that 14 seconds of Quickness.What's a good cooldown considering its potential and likely use? I'd say rather high, +30 second cooldown.Do you really want that skill as your third weapon skill?

It just doesn't work. Generally speaking, this is the reason there's little to none of pulsing Quickness skills in the game. The multiplicative nature of pulsing isn't suited to Quickness. But that's especially true for Guardian symbols, as long as Writ of Persistence exists.