Would you want Staff to work like Trident?

[Dace.8173]

@Opopanax.1803 said:

@Dace.8173 said:

@Opopanax.1803 said:Weapon buffs do come for free for some weapons, even Meta ones. Look at Berserkers Longbow changes last go around. Straight up buffs, no nerfs. Look at Guardian's staff... meta in wvw for support and still buffed with no nerfs.

The questions is does staff need this? I dont think it necessarily does. I posted a thread about "changing staff?" several weeks ago so that there could be a second weapon that could support condi. In reality, I think hammer could be a better option for being a hybrid weapon, but staff could work. The problem is that people are looking for more flexibility in weapon sets.

The reality is, staff has next to zero offense on it, so adding something to it offense wise is extremely unlikely to result in nerfing other skills on it. Extremely unlikely. The reality is that they would not buff it so a skill on it would be a necessary part of a dps rotation. That just aint going to happen; staff already has an identity and they are not going to massively overhaul the thing.

Weapon buffs that happen sans nerf occur when the weapon is underpowered or not performing in a fashion or at a level they want it too. The goal is to maintain balance and you don't maintain balance by buffing something that doesn't need buffing. If something gets a buff but it didn't need it then it will get a nerf to maintain game balance. If all they did was add buffs there would be less complaining on the forums. Staff is already a well-balanced weapon. The staff doesn't need any offensiveness. Revenant has plenty of offensive weapons. The staff is a utility/support weapon and because of this, it doesn't need to be offensive.

So far, everyone who has wanted to change staff has failed to demonstrate that staff is either A. underpowered or B. not performing in a fashion or at a level they want it too. Instead everyone who has suggested changes to staff have attempted to make it into some kind of ultra weapon. They want staff to be more offensive while at the same time tacking on conditions and now changing abilities based on the legend. Somehow folks believe this can be achieved and staff would otherwise remain unchanged. Given previous mechanical changes to already balanced and working weapons, it is clear what would happen to staff if people got what they wanted, and it would not be for the better.

The overwhelming majority of the problems that people try to load onto staff could be fixed if people pushed for fixes to Revenant and it's other weapons. It makes no sense why the staff, of all weapons, is the one that people keep trying to change when there are other weapons that could do EXACTLY what people want and with less overall change. Why do players want to rely on a single weapon? Personally, I want more weapon options, not having to rely on a single weapon to make up for the shortcomings of other aspects.

This quote really demonstrates that you are so contolled by your fear of a compensatory nerf that you havent even heard what the other side has said. Which is suprising considering how much you type back in "response"!

1. No one is suggesting an ultra weapon
2. Almost any of the people that are suggesting changes would prefer an added weapon over changes, but we are also realistic enough to know that it wont happen.

You are the only one that has decided on your own "conditions" that must be met. Even given examples, actual examples of meta weapons and you refuse to acknowledge that buffs can happen without nerfs.

I now know you've mostly been talking with yourself here, but it would have been good if you could at least read what the other side is saying. At this point I really cant take you seriously with realizing that you havent even understood some basic points that the other side has. When I would read your posts, you sounded pretty logical; its too bad that you dont have listening to the other side tied to your logic, because I think you'd actually do even better if you could. If you can get your fear of compensatory nerfing under control, I think you might be able to make some good, logical points that actually address the issues instead of going after red herrings.

No, I'm just a bit more grounded in how ANet operates and maintain a more realistic view of how ANet has demonstrated they operate. If you follow their history of buffs and nerfs and changes you will see that weapons that get a buff but don't need it also get a nerf to compensate for that buff. The staff you bring up from Guardian was useless before it's most recent change. I even came across an Reddit discussion from a year ago (well a year and two months to this very day) in which they were discussing recent nerfs to their staff and how the weapon wasn't worthwhile anymore.

See, it really isn't a matter of fear. I can establish my position with evidence. As the above links will show Guardian staff was nerfed. The recent changes to the staff that everyone brings up as an example of buffing with no nerfing are, in actuality, ANet returning staff to a level it previously held. If I cared to invest the time into it, I could bring in more weapon discussions of weapons that got buffed after being nerfed (such as the Warriors weapons). I refuse to acknowledge that weapons get buffs without nerfs because I did my homework and saw that weapons that got buffed with no nerfs were weapons that had already been nerfed in the past (or is a weapon ANet is trying to get more people to use, they often say as much). You didn't give me an example of a weapon that received only buffs and no nerfs. Though, I am amused of being accused of not considering the other side when other people have pointed out how bad the entire concept offered here is vis a vis discussing the recent Herald change or the downsides that the trident had (saying it would be different is not the same thing as establishing it would be different). Some people forget the fact that a recently buffed weapon was nerfed beforehand because some of those nerfs are years old. If a weapon has gotten a buff and no nerf then one of two conditions applies A. it was nerfed at some point in the past and they are returning it to a power level it previously had or B. it was an underused weapon that ANet wanted to get more people to use. Neither of these conditions exists for the Revenant staff.

Also, the ultra weapon comment was hyperbole and made in reference to the number of times folks keep bringing up staff as the go-to weapon to change. I also have no ignored that folks also requested an added weapon. But that wasn't the point I was making. What I was saying was that of all the weapons people want to change to compensate for the lack of weapons it is the staff that comes up again and again despite the fact it is one of the few weapons Revenant has that does a solid job in its current role. If people were discussing weapons that are underpowered and in need of some love, shortbow, then sure I would be able to see the other sides point that a buff can happen without a nerf. If we were discussing a weapon that could stand to have some condition damage added to it or would make a solid back up weapon to swap to, main hand sword, I would also be open to the other side. However, we are not discussing that. We are discussing taking one of the few weapons that Revenant has and making builds more dependent on it. These conversations don't even remotely get at any of the problems that Revenant suffers from. They don't offer any true fixes. They all focus on a single weapon that we are already too dependant on and trying to make it into a weapon that even more builds have to have and thus more dependent on it (I really would like having a second solid weapon to have in my PvP build). There actually are weapons were a discussion like this makes sense, the staff isn't that weapon.

So yes, I have, in fact, heard the other side. Do not confuse not buying the logic employed as not hearing what the other side has said. I am, however, not swayed by the other side saying it wouldn't also be nerfed when the history of nerfs and buffs in this game shows otherwise. I am also not swayed when the other sides argument pretty much amounts to making Revenant more dependent on a single weapon as opposed to suggestions that broaden build diversity and weapon choices. Which is what all these threads on the staff do. None of the suggestions on what to add to the staff increase build diversity, just build dependency. Finally, I am not swayed by the mere statement that this would be different. If you are going to make the case that this would be different you would have to establish that, not just say but oh this is different (I can highlight segments of the conversation that say just that if one so desires). In the end, yes I am logical. However, I am swayed by equally logical arguments. If I can illustrate that a weapon that appears to have been buffed but not nerfed was in fact nerfed as recent as a year ago and was being returned to a previous power level then what is the logical reason for buying the other sides position? Certainly not based solely on the claim that this time it would be different.

[Buran.3796]

@"Opopanax.1803" said:Weapon buffs do come for free for some weapons, even Meta ones. Look at Berserkers Longbow changes last go around. Straight up buffs, no nerfs. Look at Guardian's staff... meta in wvw for support and still buffed with no nerfs.

Didn't follow the Guardian for a while, but the staff they buffed recently wasn't anywere near to what was for years: from "the loot stick" went to "the weapon no Guardian uses" for months and months. And the buff to the Warrior weapons didn't change at all their meta builds in PvP/roaming, so I guess the buffed pretty underwhelming weapons. ANet doesn't buff weapons which have use/popularity, and staff is being use. Any aditional enhancement of its capabilities will end in butchering what they currently can do... And they are crucial in PvP/WvW due they are the only defensive weapon they left. Want buffs for legeds? Then demand changes in the shield: currently is a turd with no use, so even if they nerf what shields do, no one will notice it.

[Opopanax.1803]

Guardian staff had still been meta in wvw up until the most recent change.As had berserker longbow.

You are simply trying to make a point that is not grounded in history..

Would you be right if they buffed staff to be a full time dps weapon? Yes, you would be. If they buffed staff to be a full time dps weapon, I would certainly expect a nerf... however no one is asking for that.

I think you are using hyperbole when you try to equate what we are asking for on staff (or hammer). Most of the asks have not been outrageous.

[Dace.8173]

@Opopanax.1803 said:Guardian staff had still been meta in wvw up until the most recent change.As had berserker longbow.

You are simply trying to make a point that is not grounded in history..

Would you be right if they buffed staff to be a full time dps weapon? Yes, you would be. If they buffed staff to be a full time dps weapon, I would certainly expect a nerf... however no one is asking for that.

I think you are using hyperbole when you try to equate what we are asking for on staff (or hammer). Most of the asks have not been outrageous.

I see, so you are going to ignore the fact that a year ago it got nerfed and was deemed useless by Guardian players. Even if I accepted your argument at face value the changes to Guardian staff made it viable in PvP and PvE, which it was not meta in. So again, a weapon that had suffered nerfs was given a buff. There's no way you can argue around it as you are limiting your argument to one mode of play. I am not. Trying to limit your argument to just WvW is silly since the ramifications of the Guardian staff buff went beyond one mode of play. Even if you are correct about it for WvW it wasn't improved to make it better for WvW but for PvP and PvE. So a weapon that had been nerfed was in fact buffed and not the other way around. There is no denying that, unless you are going to claim that the players in those threads were mistaken about the staff being nerfed or make the claim that the changes to Guardian staffed only benefited it in WvW (not a true statement) then my statement that it was nerfed and then buffed is true and your statement that a weapon got buffs without nerfs is false. Additionally, it doesn't matter if all your asking for is a support buff and not a full DPS buff. Support weapons get nerfed too, see the Guardian staff.

As for a point not grounded in history, I linked you seven threads that spanned the course of a year. You have linked zero threads. I have established a clear path for my argument based on previous conversations had by Guardian players. You have not. I have put more work into establishing a history than you. We have your opinion that the history is the way you claim it is. I have provided proof and evidence, via the actual arguments made by Guardian players, that the history is the way I said it was. This isn't a matter of me saying that it was nerfed and you have to believe me on faith. If no one in this conversations believes me then go read the seven threads I linked. They back my position. You have not on faith but via the actual discussions had by Guardian players that the staff, pre-buff, was useless. Not my opinion. Not my memory. Not my guess. You have actual statements from Guardian players. So yes, my position is grounded in history better than yours is.

Finally, asking for Revenant players to be even more dependant on a single weapon is outrageous. Even if I were to accept the argument that weapons receive buffs with no nerfs (despite the fact that I've proven otherwise) what you guys are asking for is that Revenant players become even more dependent on a single weapon. Revenant players should be demanding that more weapons be as useful as the staff, not the staff to carry the responsibilities that other weapons should already be shouldering. It makes zero sense that people want to be more reliant on one weapon (this isn't hyperbole the last three weapon threads are about changing staff and the only other thread is about how weak shortbow is and how Renegade sucks).

I have said nothing about the hammer and you can't randomly toss that into the discussion and act like my comments apply to it.

[Clownmug.8357]

This profession has too many gimmick mechanics already.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

No, because there will be too many instances where you are channeling the wrong legend to get the effect you want from the weapon. So you either wait to swap legends or wait to swap weapons. Legends change your 6-10 skills and your F2, and I think that's sufficient.

In addition this would create a huge balancing mess, which isn't an issue for underwater as nobody cares about anything that happens underwater.

[Opopanax.1803]

You are way off base on guardian. And the threads that you link are exactly like these threads regarding staff. In fact, many wvw guardians were afraid (like you) that buffing staff would mean nerfing other parts to staff. They continued to argue just like you that staff was meta in wvw, so any buff would be a problem

Guess what? Buff with no nerf. Your arguments and threads you linked just backfired on making my point for me. It is case in point to what is being argued right here!

And for what it is worth, Guardian staff is now better than its ever been. 1200 auto range, that will jump to multiple targets and also proc VoJ passives. A blast finisher added to boot.

And again, no one is asking to make staff more important. Any changes that have been asked for would not make staff a ultra weapon like you are continue to hyperbole on.

I'll let you carry on, but I do have other things to spend my time on. Farewell!

[Dace.8173]

@Opopanax.1803 said:You are way off base on guardian. And the threads that you link are exactly like these threads regarding staff. In fact, many wvw guardians were afraid (like you) that buffing staff would mean nerfing other parts to staff. They continued to argue just like you that staff was meta in wvw, so any buff would be a problem

Guess what? Buff with no nerf. Your arguments and threads you linked just backfired on making my point for me. It is case in point to what is being argued right here!

And for what it is worth, Guardian staff is now better than its ever been. 1200 auto range, that will jump to multiple targets and also proc VoJ passives. A blast finisher added to boot.

And again, no one is asking to make staff more important. Any changes that have been asked for would not make staff a ultra weapon like you are continue to hyperbole on.

I'll let you carry on, but I do have other things to spend my time on. Farewell!

Uh hu, you keep right on thinking that. You clearly are not arguing in good faith. Lucky for me the overwhelming majority of the people who looked at this thread don't support changing staff.

[Rogerthatroger.6409]

please don't take away and/or change rev's best utility weapon

[Rasp Sabreblade.5421]

I voted Yes. This should be for all weapons.

Rev feels like the trident is the way Anet intended all the weapons to work. Each weapon has its own set of skills, but minor flavor changes based on the Legend you are using at the time.

The only real change the staff needs - is to stop dropping those stupid orbs and just be a area heal, and when traited it should give AoE swiftness and regen.