Normalizing Base HP

[otto.5684]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

I'll answer it then....

My Guardian has little base HP, I give it a build that involves Aegis spamming and a tonne of blocks via one way or another because that's a Guardians source of sustainability, I still come out on top in a lot of fights, throwing out large amounts of damage while also sustaining myself quite well with all my sources of blocks...

Now boost my health to that of a Warrior... See why it might not work out?

Regardless of HP pool, warrior has much better blocks and evades than guardian by quite a margin.

do you honestly believe that?

name all the blocks a warrior has, Im certain that Guardian has more blocks by using passives than what a warrior has all up but prove me wrong please....

edit... missed your keyword of better. yea ok, full counter OP if people still attack it.

Let’s compare core guardian with SB.

Core guardian:

1) focus blocks 3 attacks with 35 sec CD.2) VoC 45 sec CD (38 secs traited) 1 aegis.3) renewed focus, 105 sec CD (80 some sec traited) 3 sec block, with no point contribution.

SB:1) 3 sec block with 20 sec CD.2) full counter, 10.5 sec CD.3) GS 3, 0.75 sec evade, with 10 sec CD.4) endure pain 2 sec, 30 sec CD.

This is a pretty large margin for SB, don’t you think?

Comparing with FB bunker is not a good comparison, cuz they are performing completely different roles and FB bunker does no damage. Even there, SB can arguably last longer under focus fire for a few seconds.

seems odd to compare a core spec to an elite spec... redo the math with DH or FB or make the warrior core and then we can compare apples to apples

I noticed you didnt include the many traits guardian has that provide aegisand left out mace 3 which is very similar to full counter mechanics, it blocks and gives an aoe aegis.

Okay, you are either trolling or you no idea about the current PvP meta/balance. Everyone is entitled to post, but it would be really helpful if you arenot knowledgeable about the topic NOT to post about it.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

so when 11k hp classes don't have to gear for hp, what do you think happens to their power level? you don't think they would be op as hell? why not? what about warrior and necro, you think they'll be fine with less hp? necro definitely wont. warrior might be, but then they would probably be forced to take every defensive trait/utility and any build diversity would go out the window. not so different from now sure, but it still isn't right.

Not being

required

to take a vitality amulet/gear would open up

many

more builds for the 3 professions that it would affect. And no, it would not be OP, as the damage difference between zerk and marauder's is negligible.

So let me get this straight: according to your warped sense of logic - Killing the build diversity of

one

profession (which it absolutely would not), is far worse than opening up a plethora of new viable builds for

three

professions? Ok buddy.

have you considered effective hp, through heals/evades/protection and what not? have you seen videos of sword weavers/thieves/guards taking on 2+ people (pvp and wvw)? this hp buff would put those classes on an even more skewed playing field vs others. they don't need more hp. if there is some aspect about their survivability that needs addressing then we can address that, there is no need to just throw on a bunch more hp and see how it goes.

What you are referring to is skill ceiling vs. skill floor. Try again with either skill ceiling vs. skill ceiling or skill floor vs. skill floor, please.

alright. ill do the work for you again lol, but last time.there are two other duels vs bik and zan. feel free to look for some videos by other people yourself.

my point about ceiling vs floor is that the losing side will feel like they have even less of a chance and that will make them wanna quit.

What is this unrelated video you are putting here expecting to back up your claims? You obviously have completely missed the point - me using the term "vs" doesn't mean what you may have thought it meant. A duel between two random players has no bearing on this discussion, which encompasses

every profession vs. every profession

. There's no need for you to repeat your initial argument once it's been countered. If you don't have anything new to add to the discussion, I thank you for your ...contribution?

unrelated? it clearly illustrates what effective hp is, something you clearly have no grasp of. increasing hp across the board to address power creep, instead of directly addressing the power creeped skills, is moronic.

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why is this even being considered? classes with the lowest hp pool, guard thief and ele, already have high survivability if played right. you cant just throw some random number out there and expect things to go ok. the entire profession design was built around this hp difference. instead of worrying about hp, consider smaller things that if buffed would bring the class into a better spot.

Thief is a different story, guardian and ele must use heavy HP and/or healing amulets. Ele in particular does kitten damage. It only excels at side node trolling. Any guardian build not using retaliation, deals terrible damage. Guardian in particular, outside of FB bunker has mediocre sustainability.

From an overall perspective:

1) HP pools where designed with different balance objectives, that do not currently exist.2) even through HP pools stayed the same, damage went through major power creep stages. First, moving to 3 full trait lines. Then introduction of elite lines in HoT. Finally, PoF.3) All builds outside of warrior (maybe necro) must use amulets with HP.

If the HP pools moved as follows:

Small pools: 18kMedium pools: 19.5kLarge pools: 21k

This will be much more in line and way more balanced, considering that main current complaint regarding balance is that damage is too high. This also opens diversity so heavy damage amulets like: berserker, griver, rampage and viper, could see some use, instead of most builds using either marauder or carrion.

Lastly, the HP pools do not make sense in PvE on any leave whatsoever.

now if all 3 hp pools were increased, I could maybe get behind that. something like small 14k, medium 17k, large 21k. despite contrary belief, I understand the desire to increase small hp pools but you cant just make them all equal and expect it to work cuz it wont. that's because all classes are not equal, some have more sustain then others.

[otto.5684]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

so when 11k hp classes don't have to gear for hp, what do you think happens to their power level? you don't think they would be op as hell? why not? what about warrior and necro, you think they'll be fine with less hp? necro definitely wont. warrior might be, but then they would probably be forced to take every defensive trait/utility and any build diversity would go out the window. not so different from now sure, but it still isn't right.

Not being

required

to take a vitality amulet/gear would open up

many

more builds for the 3 professions that it would affect. And no, it would not be OP, as the damage difference between zerk and marauder's is negligible.

So let me get this straight: according to your warped sense of logic - Killing the build diversity of

one

profession (which it absolutely would not), is far worse than opening up a plethora of new viable builds for

three

professions? Ok buddy.

have you considered effective hp, through heals/evades/protection and what not? have you seen videos of sword weavers/thieves/guards taking on 2+ people (pvp and wvw)? this hp buff would put those classes on an even more skewed playing field vs others. they don't need more hp. if there is some aspect about their survivability that needs addressing then we can address that, there is no need to just throw on a bunch more hp and see how it goes.

What you are referring to is skill ceiling vs. skill floor. Try again with either skill ceiling vs. skill ceiling or skill floor vs. skill floor, please.

alright. ill do the work for you again lol, but last time.there are two other duels vs bik and zan. feel free to look for some videos by other people yourself.

my point about ceiling vs floor is that the losing side will feel like they have even less of a chance and that will make them wanna quit.

What is this unrelated video you are putting here expecting to back up your claims? You obviously have completely missed the point - me using the term "vs" doesn't mean what you may have thought it meant. A duel between two random players has no bearing on this discussion, which encompasses

every profession vs. every profession

. There's no need for you to repeat your initial argument once it's been countered. If you don't have anything new to add to the discussion, I thank you for your ...contribution?

unrelated? it clearly illustrates what effective hp is, something you clearly have no grasp of. increasing hp across the board to address power creep, instead of directly addressing the power creeped skills, is moronic.

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why is this even being considered? classes with the lowest hp pool, guard thief and ele, already have high survivability if played right. you cant just throw some random number out there and expect things to go ok. the entire profession design was built around this hp difference. instead of worrying about hp, consider smaller things that if buffed would bring the class into a better spot.

Thief is a different story, guardian and ele must use heavy HP and/or healing amulets. Ele in particular does kitten damage. It only excels at side node trolling. Any guardian build not using retaliation, deals terrible damage. Guardian in particular, outside of FB bunker has mediocre sustainability.

From an overall perspective:

1) HP pools where designed with different balance objectives, that do not currently exist.2) even through HP pools stayed the same, damage went through major power creep stages. First, moving to 3 full trait lines. Then introduction of elite lines in HoT. Finally, PoF.3) All builds outside of warrior (maybe necro) must use amulets with HP.

If the HP pools moved as follows:

Small pools: 18kMedium pools: 19.5kLarge pools: 21k

This will be much more in line and way more balanced, considering that main current complaint regarding balance is that damage is too high. This also opens diversity so heavy damage amulets like: berserker, griver, rampage and viper, could see some use, instead of most builds using either marauder or carrion.

Lastly, the HP pools do not make sense in PvE on any leave whatsoever.

now if all 3 hp pools were increased, I could maybe get behind that. something like small 14k, medium 17k, large 21k. despite contrary belief, I understand the desire to increase small hp pools but you cant just make them all equal and expect it to work cuz it wont. that's because all classes are not equal, some have more sustain then others.

I do not think they need to be equal either. I think the minimum should be around 17-18K to reduce the impact burst damage and open diversity for amulets. Also, the difference between the small and large should be no more than 4K.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

so when 11k hp classes don't have to gear for hp, what do you think happens to their power level? you don't think they would be op as hell? why not? what about warrior and necro, you think they'll be fine with less hp? necro definitely wont. warrior might be, but then they would probably be forced to take every defensive trait/utility and any build diversity would go out the window. not so different from now sure, but it still isn't right.

Not being

required

to take a vitality amulet/gear would open up

many

more builds for the 3 professions that it would affect. And no, it would not be OP, as the damage difference between zerk and marauder's is negligible.

So let me get this straight: according to your warped sense of logic - Killing the build diversity of

one

profession (which it absolutely would not), is far worse than opening up a plethora of new viable builds for

three

professions? Ok buddy.

have you considered effective hp, through heals/evades/protection and what not? have you seen videos of sword weavers/thieves/guards taking on 2+ people (pvp and wvw)? this hp buff would put those classes on an even more skewed playing field vs others. they don't need more hp. if there is some aspect about their survivability that needs addressing then we can address that, there is no need to just throw on a bunch more hp and see how it goes.

What you are referring to is skill ceiling vs. skill floor. Try again with either skill ceiling vs. skill ceiling or skill floor vs. skill floor, please.

alright. ill do the work for you again lol, but last time.there are two other duels vs bik and zan. feel free to look for some videos by other people yourself.

my point about ceiling vs floor is that the losing side will feel like they have even less of a chance and that will make them wanna quit.

What is this unrelated video you are putting here expecting to back up your claims? You obviously have completely missed the point - me using the term "vs" doesn't mean what you may have thought it meant. A duel between two random players has no bearing on this discussion, which encompasses

every profession vs. every profession

. There's no need for you to repeat your initial argument once it's been countered. If you don't have anything new to add to the discussion, I thank you for your ...contribution?

unrelated? it clearly illustrates what effective hp is, something you clearly have no grasp of. increasing hp across the board to address power creep, instead of directly addressing the power creeped skills, is moronic.

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why is this even being considered? classes with the lowest hp pool, guard thief and ele, already have high survivability if played right. you cant just throw some random number out there and expect things to go ok. the entire profession design was built around this hp difference. instead of worrying about hp, consider smaller things that if buffed would bring the class into a better spot.

Thief is a different story, guardian and ele must use heavy HP and/or healing amulets. Ele in particular does kitten damage. It only excels at side node trolling. Any guardian build not using retaliation, deals terrible damage. Guardian in particular, outside of FB bunker has mediocre sustainability.

From an overall perspective:

1) HP pools where designed with different balance objectives, that do not currently exist.2) even through HP pools stayed the same, damage went through major power creep stages. First, moving to 3 full trait lines. Then introduction of elite lines in HoT. Finally, PoF.3) All builds outside of warrior (maybe necro) must use amulets with HP.

If the HP pools moved as follows:

Small pools: 18kMedium pools: 19.5kLarge pools: 21k

This will be much more in line and way more balanced, considering that main current complaint regarding balance is that damage is too high. This also opens diversity so heavy damage amulets like: berserker, griver, rampage and viper, could see some use, instead of most builds using either marauder or carrion.

Lastly, the HP pools do not make sense in PvE on any leave whatsoever.

now if all 3 hp pools were increased, I could maybe get behind that. something like small 14k, medium 17k, large 21k. despite contrary belief, I understand the desire to increase small hp pools but you cant just make them all equal and expect it to work cuz it wont. that's because all classes are not equal, some have more sustain then others.

I do not think they need to be equal either. I think the minimum should be around 17-18K to reduce the impact burst damage and open diversity for amulets. Also, the difference between the small and large should be no more than 4K.

those numbers aren't right to me but hey it might work.

[Solori.6025]

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

I'll answer it then....

My Guardian has little base HP, I give it a build that involves Aegis spamming and a tonne of blocks via one way or another because that's a Guardians source of sustainability, I still come out on top in a lot of fights, throwing out large amounts of damage while also sustaining myself quite well with all my sources of blocks...

Now boost my health to that of a Warrior... See why it might not work out?

Regardless of HP pool, warrior has much better blocks and evades than guardian by quite a margin.

do you honestly believe that?

name all the blocks a warrior has, Im certain that Guardian has more blocks by using passives than what a warrior has all up but prove me wrong please....

edit... missed your keyword of better. yea ok, full counter OP if people still attack it.

Let’s compare core guardian with SB.

Core guardian:

1) focus blocks 3 attacks with 35 sec CD.2) VoC 45 sec CD (38 secs traited) 1 aegis.3) renewed focus, 105 sec CD (80 some sec traited) 3 sec block, with no point contribution.

SB:1) 3 sec block with 20 sec CD.2) full counter, 10.5 sec CD.3) GS 3, 0.75 sec evade, with 10 sec CD.4) endure pain 2 sec, 30 sec CD.

This is a pretty large margin for SB, don’t you think?

Comparing with FB bunker is not a good comparison, cuz they are performing completely different roles and FB bunker does no damage. Even there, SB can arguably last longer under focus fire for a few seconds.

Edit. Nvm on the gs4. I don't technically count endure pain as a block since conditions still eat through it. But that is my opinion on that.Also firebrands are very much still used in PvP.Not sure the point of a core v elite when you could just as easily do elite v eliteAlso. Since we are looking at war v guard. Shouldn't we also look at healing as well?

[Catchyfx.5768]

Delete all class and allow only 1! Problem solved...

Guard is one of the strongest classes if comes to surviving and necro is one of the worst funny right :)If normalize HP normalize everything. Casttimes, stability uptime, boon uptime, same good traits. Same amount of blocks, evades and invuls.Same amount of condi stacks per strike, same amount of everything.

[Crab Fear.1624]

i get a feeling that some of these delete all but one comments come from the fact that they have only played GW2 (as an mmorpg)

[crazyhusky.2985]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

so when 11k hp classes don't have to gear for hp, what do you think happens to their power level? you don't think they would be op as hell? why not? what about warrior and necro, you think they'll be fine with less hp? necro definitely wont. warrior might be, but then they would probably be forced to take every defensive trait/utility and any build diversity would go out the window. not so different from now sure, but it still isn't right.

Not being

required

to take a vitality amulet/gear would open up

many

more builds for the 3 professions that it would affect. And no, it would not be OP, as the damage difference between zerk and marauder's is negligible.

So let me get this straight: according to your warped sense of logic - Killing the build diversity of

one

profession (which it absolutely would not), is far worse than opening up a plethora of new viable builds for

three

professions? Ok buddy.

have you considered effective hp, through heals/evades/protection and what not? have you seen videos of sword weavers/thieves/guards taking on 2+ people (pvp and wvw)? this hp buff would put those classes on an even more skewed playing field vs others. they don't need more hp. if there is some aspect about their survivability that needs addressing then we can address that, there is no need to just throw on a bunch more hp and see how it goes.

What you are referring to is skill ceiling vs. skill floor. Try again with either skill ceiling vs. skill ceiling or skill floor vs. skill floor, please.

alright. ill do the work for you again lol, but last time.there are two other duels vs bik and zan. feel free to look for some videos by other people yourself.

my point about ceiling vs floor is that the losing side will feel like they have even less of a chance and that will make them wanna quit.

What is this unrelated video you are putting here expecting to back up your claims? You obviously have completely missed the point - me using the term "vs" doesn't mean what you may have thought it meant. A duel between two random players has no bearing on this discussion, which encompasses

every profession vs. every profession

. There's no need for you to repeat your initial argument once it's been countered. If you don't have anything new to add to the discussion, I thank you for your ...contribution?

unrelated? it clearly illustrates what effective hp is, something you clearly have no grasp of. increasing hp across the board to address power creep, instead of directly addressing the power creeped skills, is moronic.

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why is this even being considered? classes with the lowest hp pool, guard thief and ele, already have high survivability if played right. you cant just throw some random number out there and expect things to go ok. the entire profession design was built around this hp difference. instead of worrying about hp, consider smaller things that if buffed would bring the class into a better spot.

Thief is a different story, guardian and ele must use heavy HP and/or healing amulets. Ele in particular does kitten damage. It only excels at side node trolling. Any guardian build not using retaliation, deals terrible damage. Guardian in particular, outside of FB bunker has mediocre sustainability.

From an overall perspective:

1) HP pools where designed with different balance objectives, that do not currently exist.2) even through HP pools stayed the same, damage went through major power creep stages. First, moving to 3 full trait lines. Then introduction of elite lines in HoT. Finally, PoF.3) All builds outside of warrior (maybe necro) must use amulets with HP.

If the HP pools moved as follows:

Small pools: 18kMedium pools: 19.5kLarge pools: 21k

This will be much more in line and way more balanced, considering that main current complaint regarding balance is that damage is too high. This also opens diversity so heavy damage amulets like: berserker, griver, rampage and viper, could see some use, instead of most builds using either marauder or carrion.

Lastly, the HP pools do not make sense in PvE on any leave whatsoever.

now if all 3 hp pools were increased, I could maybe get behind that. something like small 14k, medium 17k, large 21k. despite contrary belief, I understand the desire to increase small hp pools but you cant just make them all equal and expect it to work cuz it wont. that's because all classes are not equal, some have more sustain then others.

I would be happy with that increasing HP for all classesI wouldnt need to Vitality on classes anymore.

However i agree with the other guy's HP ranges,Small pools: 18k , Medium pools: 19.5k, Large pools: 21k

Having only 1.5K between Health would be more equal.14K is a bit too low, You have to remember deadeye's can deal 16.2K damage in 1 Hit. also Single target Zerg Builds can tear thru 14K quite easily.So having the lowest Health pools above 16K would be better.

[sephiroth.4217]

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

I'll answer it then....

My Guardian has little base HP, I give it a build that involves Aegis spamming and a tonne of blocks via one way or another because that's a Guardians source of sustainability, I still come out on top in a lot of fights, throwing out large amounts of damage while also sustaining myself quite well with all my sources of blocks...

Now boost my health to that of a Warrior... See why it might not work out?

Regardless of HP pool, warrior has much better blocks and evades than guardian by quite a margin.

do you honestly believe that?

name all the blocks a warrior has, Im certain that Guardian has more blocks by using passives than what a warrior has all up but prove me wrong please....

edit... missed your keyword of better. yea ok, full counter OP if people still attack it.

Let’s compare core guardian with SB.

Core guardian:

1) focus blocks 3 attacks with 35 sec CD.2) VoC 45 sec CD (38 secs traited) 1 aegis.3) renewed focus, 105 sec CD (80 some sec traited) 3 sec block, with no point contribution.

SB:1) 3 sec block with 20 sec CD.2) full counter, 10.5 sec CD.3) GS 3, 0.75 sec evade, with 10 sec CD.4) endure pain 2 sec, 30 sec CD.

This is a pretty large margin for SB, don’t you think?

Comparing with FB bunker is not a good comparison, cuz they are performing completely different roles and FB bunker does no damage. Even there, SB can arguably last longer under focus fire for a few seconds.

seems odd to compare a core spec to an elite spec... redo the math with DH or FB or make the warrior core and then we can compare apples to apples

I noticed you didnt include the many traits guardian has that provide aegisand left out mace 3 which is very similar to full counter mechanics, it blocks and gives an aoe aegis.

Okay, you are either trolling or you no idea about the current PvP meta/balance. Everyone is entitled to post, but it would be really helpful if you arenot knowledgeable about the topic NOT to post about it.

Of course everyone is entitled to post, I was just asking to compare Apples to Apples, was that wrong of me to post that? Or did you think that when I post, I should only talk about the META that gets used by a small handful of try hards? Because my question was aimed at the total sum overall. (when I say try hards, not an insult, but literally the last 200 people in the game to actually care about ranks and actually try hard)

Just seemed odd to me to compare an elite spec against a core... to me that's like saying "what's faster, the horse or the jet?" ... It becomes a very 1 sided answer doesn't it.

Anyway, I admitted I was wrong to you forum guys, apparently Guardian does need to have Warrior base stats, I personally don't think so because I can already do well on the stats we got now and I honestly thought the guardians sustainability came from blocks, Aegis and a bit of healing but apparently not, I was told I am wrong and I accept that.

[otto.5684]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

I'll answer it then....

My Guardian has little base HP, I give it a build that involves Aegis spamming and a tonne of blocks via one way or another because that's a Guardians source of sustainability, I still come out on top in a lot of fights, throwing out large amounts of damage while also sustaining myself quite well with all my sources of blocks...

Now boost my health to that of a Warrior... See why it might not work out?

Regardless of HP pool, warrior has much better blocks and evades than guardian by quite a margin.

do you honestly believe that?

name all the blocks a warrior has, Im certain that Guardian has more blocks by using passives than what a warrior has all up but prove me wrong please....

edit... missed your keyword of better. yea ok, full counter OP if people still attack it.

Let’s compare core guardian with SB.

Core guardian:

1) focus blocks 3 attacks with 35 sec CD.2) VoC 45 sec CD (38 secs traited) 1 aegis.3) renewed focus, 105 sec CD (80 some sec traited) 3 sec block, with no point contribution.

SB:1) 3 sec block with 20 sec CD.2) full counter, 10.5 sec CD.3) GS 3, 0.75 sec evade, with 10 sec CD.4) endure pain 2 sec, 30 sec CD.

This is a pretty large margin for SB, don’t you think?

Comparing with FB bunker is not a good comparison, cuz they are performing completely different roles and FB bunker does no damage. Even there, SB can arguably last longer under focus fire for a few seconds.

seems odd to compare a core spec to an elite spec... redo the math with DH or FB or make the warrior core and then we can compare apples to apples

I noticed you didnt include the many traits guardian has that provide aegisand left out mace 3 which is very similar to full counter mechanics, it blocks and gives an aoe aegis.

Okay, you are either trolling or you no idea about the current PvP meta/balance. Everyone is entitled to post, but it would be really helpful if you arenot knowledgeable about the topic NOT to post about it.

Of course everyone is entitled to post, I was just asking to compare Apples to Apples, was that wrong of me to post that? Or did you think that when I post, I should only talk about the META that gets used by a small handful of try hards? Because my question was aimed at the total sum overall. (when I say try hards, not an insult, but literally the last 200 people in the game to actually care about ranks and actually try hard)

Just seemed odd to me to compare an elite spec against a core... to me that's like saying "what's faster, the horse or the jet?" ... It becomes a very 1 sided answer doesn't it.

Anyway, I admitted I was wrong to you forum guys, apparently Guardian does need to have Warrior base stats, I personally don't think so because I can already do well on the stats we got now and I honestly thought the guardians sustainability came from blocks, Aegis and a bit of healing but apparently not, I was told I am wrong and I accept that.

While this is beside the thread focus, it helps to explain gurdian current balance stats. Core guardian is better than DH and and FB for damage based builds. For power builds radiance and valor trait lines are required. You then need to maintain 100% retaliation. Your options are zeal, virtues or DH. Virtues and Zeal can sustain 100% retaliation. DH cannot. Virtues also offers sustainability, CC break, protection, stability and condi removal. Also, LB in it is current state is a downgrade from hammer or GS. In addition, mediation utilities dominate all guardian builds. You do not need traps, and traps beside ToF tend to be a liability.

FB, works somewhat with power builds. But FB by design is too leveraged on tomes, which does not support power damage. Also, you will suffer from the same draw backs as DH. Bunker FB though is not only meta, it is probably the most broken build in sPvP. It acts as a healer in game that supposedly has no healers.

When I was comparing core guardian with SB, I was comparing the top sPvP damage builds of both guardian and warrior. DH is quite a downgrade compared to core guardian and comparing it with SB (or any meta build fulldiling the same role) is kinda pointless.

As for HP pools, I do not think they need to be equal. I think HP needs to be raised across all HP pools and the difference between HP pools minimized.

[sephiroth.4217]

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:this would nerf classes that don't need it and buff classes that don't need it. this isn't a solution because it would create just as many problems as it would solve.

Can you tell me why Mirage and Holo deserve more HP than the 3 lowest? Or why Spellbreakers and Scourges deserve more than

everyone

? I'd like to hear what logic you have to justify that...

maybe by looking at how each class performs in a pvp scenario you can answer your own question.

Thanks, your statement only reinforces

my

argument. How about you actually answer the question this time instead of a failed attempt at dodging it?

I'll answer it then....

My Guardian has little base HP, I give it a build that involves Aegis spamming and a tonne of blocks via one way or another because that's a Guardians source of sustainability, I still come out on top in a lot of fights, throwing out large amounts of damage while also sustaining myself quite well with all my sources of blocks...

Now boost my health to that of a Warrior... See why it might not work out?

Regardless of HP pool, warrior has much better blocks and evades than guardian by quite a margin.

do you honestly believe that?

name all the blocks a warrior has, Im certain that Guardian has more blocks by using passives than what a warrior has all up but prove me wrong please....

edit... missed your keyword of better. yea ok, full counter OP if people still attack it.

Let’s compare core guardian with SB.

Core guardian:

1) focus blocks 3 attacks with 35 sec CD.2) VoC 45 sec CD (38 secs traited) 1 aegis.3) renewed focus, 105 sec CD (80 some sec traited) 3 sec block, with no point contribution.

SB:1) 3 sec block with 20 sec CD.2) full counter, 10.5 sec CD.3) GS 3, 0.75 sec evade, with 10 sec CD.4) endure pain 2 sec, 30 sec CD.

This is a pretty large margin for SB, don’t you think?

Comparing with FB bunker is not a good comparison, cuz they are performing completely different roles and FB bunker does no damage. Even there, SB can arguably last longer under focus fire for a few seconds.

seems odd to compare a core spec to an elite spec... redo the math with DH or FB or make the warrior core and then we can compare apples to apples

I noticed you didnt include the many traits guardian has that provide aegisand left out mace 3 which is very similar to full counter mechanics, it blocks and gives an aoe aegis.

Okay, you are either trolling or you no idea about the current PvP meta/balance. Everyone is entitled to post, but it would be really helpful if you arenot knowledgeable about the topic NOT to post about it.

Of course everyone is entitled to post, I was just asking to compare Apples to Apples, was that wrong of me to post that? Or did you think that when I post, I should only talk about the META that gets used by a small handful of try hards? Because my question was aimed at the total sum overall. (when I say try hards, not an insult, but literally the last 200 people in the game to actually care about ranks and actually try hard)

Just seemed odd to me to compare an elite spec against a core... to me that's like saying "what's faster, the horse or the jet?" ... It becomes a very 1 sided answer doesn't it.

Anyway, I admitted I was wrong to you forum guys, apparently Guardian does need to have Warrior base stats, I personally don't think so because I can already do well on the stats we got now and I honestly thought the guardians sustainability came from blocks, Aegis and a bit of healing but apparently not, I was told I am wrong and I accept that.

While this is beside the thread focus, it helps to explain gurdian current balance stats. Core guardian is better than DH and and FB for damage based builds. For power builds radiance and valor trait lines are required. You then need to maintain 100% retaliation. Your options are zeal, virtues or DH. Virtues and Zeal can sustain 100% retaliation. DH cannot. Virtues also offers sustainability, CC break, protection, stability and condi removal. Also, LB in it is current state is a downgrade from hammer or GS. In addition, mediation utilities dominate all guardian builds. You do not need traps, and traps beside ToF tend to be a liability.

FB, works somewhat with power builds. But FB by design is too leveraged on tomes, which does not support power damage. Also, you will suffer from the same draw backs as DH. Bunker FB though is not only meta, it is probably the most broken build in sPvP. It acts as a healer in game that supposedly has no healers.

When I was comparing core guardian with SB, I was comparing the top sPvP damage builds of both guardian and warrior. DH is quite a downgrade compared to core guardian and comparing it with SB (or any meta build fulldiling the same role) is kinda pointless.

As for HP pools, I do not think they need to be equal. I think HP needs to be raised across all HP pools and the difference between HP pools minimized.

oh see I was just talking about the HP pool and whats available to use overall... My DH runs the retal traits and virtues and I take the passive stun breaks that also grant aegis and sometimes I take the trait that grants aegis when you block an attack depending if on the build

side note... FB performs quite well with a sage ammy if you play as a burn support, probably not so well in the top 200 but havent had the chance to trial that yet.... its been super fun killing people just by cycling blocks lmao

anyway, my personal opinion is that my guardian doesnt need to have warrior base health pool due to the amount of blocks I have but if I end up getting the boost there wont be any complaints from me either.

[Turk.5460]

@Ferus.3165 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Ferus.3165 said:normalised invis aswell plsand normalised insta cast spells too plsand not to forget normalised teleport spellsand normalised weapon skillsand normalised damage outputand... you know what? just delete all classes except for one. Or play counter strike.

Thanks for bumping the thread :)

np, this let's say "very questionable" idea will never get implemented though. have fun ;)

Thank you for giving the thread attention again, it's a great idea to give it more exposure. :)

[Crab Fear.1624]

This is not GW2 2012.I find it funny that some of the same players that shoot down ideas because they say the game is changing and moving in a new direction are the same players that say ideas can't happen because it's part of "core" design.

:/

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

The concept is too nebulous for me to say for a certainty that it would fix anything. I'd be fine with experimenting with it to see what happens for brief periods of time, but I think that the HP spreads are alright right now. I'd rather focus on strong trait synergies that allow classes to do multiple roles or be carried without needing to have situational awareness.

[Turk.5460]

@Azure The Heartless.3261 said:I'd rather focus on strong trait synergies that allow classes to do multiple roles or be carried without needing to have situational awareness.

Oh you mean like Corona Burst/Holographic Shockwave? xD

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

@Turk.5460 said:

@Azure The Heartless.3261 said:I'd rather focus on strong trait synergies that allow classes to do multiple roles or be carried without needing to have situational awareness.

Oh you mean like Corona Burst/Holographic Shockwave? xD

lmao @ stability on Corona Burst = free shockwave

But yeah. if a class is bunkering hard but still putting out a lot of damage, then devs need to take a look at what role the class/build is intended to play and skew it so it gives more of one avenue and less of the other. Doesnt matter if that's spellbreaker, mirage, Holo, deadeye or whatever else. If you want to roll something forgiving, you should put out less damage as a general rule. I think messing with health without addressing that issue will cause more problems than it fixes right now, but I'm up for being proven wrong on that.

[MrFrusciante.2438]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why is this even being considered? classes with the lowest hp pool, guard thief and ele, already have high survivability if played right. you cant just throw some random number out there and expect things to go ok. the entire profession design was built around this hp difference. instead of worrying about hp, consider smaller things that if buffed would bring the class into a better spot.

glad someone said it. What most people aren't taking into account is that these classes were given utilities, designs and mechanics to match HP as well as a general class basis to work off of. Someone mentioned it before up topas well, what if we gave guards 19k hp( as an extreme example) FBs would be unstoppable unless 2-3 burst in unison. 1v1 forget it, id rather go back to previous bunker meta where we played counters specifically aimed at certain bunkers.what if thieves got same amount of HP with stealth benefits. Nope, nope, nope. NOPE. I had a support thief against us last night and all he did was decap/+1 and mass stealth/rez downs. pain in the ass trying to bait him into a cleave, double kill since they were stealthed and you had to more or less assume/guess where the down went., then aoe spot. what if that thief had 25k hp with runes/setup?

This is my main reasoning and is my opinion as well. Equaling and balance is great. I think its good, really but there are certain doors we don't want to open in regards to it or else we'll all be left playing the same thing with the same effects/mechanics/playstyles and rotations regardless whether its a thief or a warrior. That's boring as fuck to me but to each their own I guess. My favorite part of PvP is learning enemy class mechanics and builds in matches/1v1s and finding counters, getting timing down, etc to each specific build.

Now as a Gw1 player yea I can see positives or more equalizations too but this isn't gw1 and unless they unlock all weapons for all classes, add more skills for everyone universally and tweak a huge number of things it cant ever be gw1 again. we cant just change one major aspect of pvp builds without changing other things to compensate for it. I mean for those who played black desert online, you guys will understand how rash rushed decisions that are not looked at as a whole can literally break and kill an entire pvp scene or a game.

Cant see the forest if you staring at your dick while pissing behind one tree.

wait is that how it went?

[crazyhusky.2985]

@"Menyus.4610" said:It is a very hard suggestion because:

Ele: - weaver has too mnay active defense, tempest would deserve a buff across with core

Mesmer: core base hp is fine, but the 2 elite does not deserve the medium hp pool especially mirage

Necro: Totally fine hp is their class mechanic

Ranger: Core, Druid fine, Soulbeast power creep does not deserve the medium hp pool but i would nerf its damage rather than its hp pool

Thief: would torally deserve a hp increase cos it sometimes dies in stealth when trying to move to its target but on the other hand condi brainless evade spam builds would rise so it would need a fix before that

Enginner: Core and scrapper yes, holo hell no, holo is extremely disgusting in pvp and in wvw

Guardian: Totally fine hp pool, its active and passive blocks sustains the class well

Revenant: needs no change hp wise, more hp would make them unkilablle beasts power vs power

Warrior: Tbh this class is nothing wiothout endure pain an utterly stupid and easy class to play that could be deleted fron the game by one trait/skill change we already saw this, core and berserker are fine with that hp(not really but let it be warrior players mostly noobs the class carries them) but spellbreaker nope nope nope

Conculison somone suggest to attach hp boost or debuff to elite specs good idea boy i support it

Ele - It needs the hp buff, probaley the most one who needs it the most, lowest hp value with the lowest armour type, the blocks are there because it literally needs it in ANY mode to live, just casual roaming in PvE can be hard on elementalist.

Guardian - does need a HP buff, its weak in that department, when the game the only made, it was given low HP due to its blocks however due to added and updated content and elite specs over the years things have changed, now there are many ways around those blocks, with unblockable attacks and triats that apply things straight to the target thus aegis doesn't block them. At this point Aegis is rather useless with many attacks in the game being multiple hitting now and due to how some mechanics on classes work (they have to build up a metre to hit you with a strong attack for power up) that passive is long gone. The passive aegis only blocks 1 attack which is using the first opening hit against guardian, normal the standard attack, then the guardian has to wait 40 seconds for it to refresh, no one tries to up keep aegis since it's pointless now. The sustain is not that good on guard, it helps, but Warrior, Engineer and Ranger have forms of sustain, immunity traits/skills or blocks that help it out just as much as guardian now.

I'll say for Mesmar Mirage does need HP nerf. it has too many evades and 3 dodges, and can make it immune to damage at will. It's very Hard to hit and if tit gets in trouble it just Teleports away. It's all reward and no risk. Base mesmar and Chrono don't they aren't that annoying. they can teleports and clones but they only have 1 distortion so its not like that easily overpower you.

Warrior, Engineer, Ranger, Necro, Rev don't need HP buffs or debuffs.

With Thief its odd, I would agree base Thief and Daredevil need a bit Hp increase but NOT Deadeye, that can stay with low HP, it's too strong, hard to hit and has the longest ranged weapon in the game.The fact you can be hit by AoE while stealthed is a good thing, because it'll be too strong. When stealthed you can't targeted or seen, so they has to be way to still damage you otherwise it'll be unfair to classes that don't have stealth. and also WvW would be thief and mesmar zerg stealth fest on who can stayed stealthed the longest otherwise you die.Deadeye has stealth and can hit people for 16K damage in a single hit, which downs any Ele, Guard or thief without decent amount of toughness and or Vitality investment, it is the thing that kinda sparked the whole power creep thing and people wanting more HP on the low HP classes. Not just it Deadeye but Soulbeast Power as well, it can easily burst damage any targets with amount of HP that is less 14K in a few seconds. Everyone knows at this point that a Mirage's favourite snacks are elementalists and guardians because they can just eat it alive. These are a few reasons why Guardians and Elementalist are FORCED to use trinkets and armour that have Toughness or vitality, which means they have to sacrifice their overall damage output just to stay alive, and it's kinda unfair that other classes don't really need to do that.

No amount of blocks are going to help Guardian and Elementalist when the attacks they're facing are unblockable and damage over their base HP or tear thru any defenses they have and overwhelm them due to their lack of HP.

[Turk.5460]

@"crazyhusky.2985" said:With Thief its odd, I would agree base Thief and Daredevil need a bit Hp increase but NOT Deadeye, that can stay with low HP, it's too strong, hard to hit and has the longest ranged weapon in the game.

Well, not exactly. Ranger Longbow has the longest ranged attacks in the game. On flat ground it goes a little further than 1800 range (even though the tooltip says 1500). On higher ground, Ranger LB can reach upwards of 2500 range (still not addressed or commented on by ANET). DE has to be kneeling, so rooted in place, and the furthest it goes regardless of ground level is 1500 (the tooltip says 1500). If not kneeling, the furthest it will hit is 1200, and often even less than that as it does not get the "enemy moving range-buffer" that every other attack in the game (besides other rifles) gets...

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

@Turk.5460 said:

@"crazyhusky.2985" said:With Thief its odd, I would agree base Thief and Daredevil need a bit Hp increase but NOT Deadeye, that can stay with low HP, it's too strong, hard to hit and has the longest ranged weapon in the game.

Well, not exactly. Ranger Longbow has the longest ranged attacks in the game. On flat ground it goes a little

further than 1800 range

(even though the tooltip says 1500). On higher ground, Ranger LB can reach upwards of 2500 range (still not addressed or commented on by ANET). DE has to be kneeling, so rooted in place, and the furthest it goes regardless of ground level is 1500 (the tooltip says 1500). If not kneeling, the furthest it will hit is 1200, and often even less than that as it does

not

get the "enemy moving range-buffer" that every other attack in the game (besides other rifles) gets...

Lmao

And my throw axe on war gets obstructed by slight terrain changesOutstanding

[kipthelip.5802]

They should normalize it. The idea that certain classes need to have less hit points because of balance reasons is suspect at best. What is so awesome about Guardian that Warrior needs to have so many more base hit points to compensate for it? Especially since they have nerfed Guardians healing abilities time and time again? Any old timers that remember Dark Age of Camelot they did a lot of suspect crap like that and ended up changing it years later. I remember my Hero, the Hibernian tank archetype, having less hit points then the Armsman, the Albion tank archetype. There was no good reason for it.

[Turk.5460]

@kipthelip.5802 said:They should normalize it. The idea that certain classes need to have less hit points because of balance reasons is suspect at best. What is so awesome about Guardian that Warrior needs to have so many more base hit points to compensate for it? Especially since they have nerfed Guardians healing abilities time and time again? Any old timers that remember Dark Age of Camelot they did a lot of suspect crap like that and ended up changing it years later. I remember my Hero, the Hibernian tank archetype, having less hit points then the Armsman, the Albion tank archetype. There was no good reason for it.

Necros can keep their higher hp, I just don't see a reason anymore for everything else not to be in the same pool.