Warrior Is a deadhorse murdered by incompetent balance team

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

@Blumpf.2518 Arms gives extra Adrenaline on Crit, but the rest of the tree is bleh in PvE and even more bleh in competitive play.

 

Merciless hammer is the best adrenaline gain you can ask for, but it shares a slot with Berserker's Power.

 

Opportunist could be reworked so that it no longer gives Fury, but just grants the 5 adrenaline whenever you inflict a movement impairing condition and remove the ICD. That would go a long ways in helping fuel adrenaline.

[Gorem.8104]

I feel like the only reason I play my warrior now is for nostalgia reasons. He's my Char boy who I love to play. 

 

Even though my other classes, such as even ranger, in solo play is tankier, heals more, and does more damage all while having perm swiftness boost. Or play Rev and solo everything. Then in pvp, Other classes are better. 

 

Yay, at least we got a spot in raids 😛 

[Gorem.8104]

On 6/23/2021 at 8:14 AM, Telgum.6071 said:

I think the problem isn't warrior, but other classes overperforming. 

 

I think this may always be the truth. We are essentially the most balanced class. We are not over the top, we are balanced. A normal class for anyone to play. Other classes should be glad they are not at our level 🙂

[Jzaku.9765]

On 6/23/2021 at 9:43 AM, Obtena.7952 said:

Why is there a need to make FH baseline to increase rotation complexity to compensate for the small number of available weapon skills if you can already do that by making meaningful trait choices?

 

I'm not questioning the difference between how non-Discipline and Discipline builds work here. The question I am always going to ask is you is why FH being available as a trait should be changed to a baseline skill.

 

That's the whole point of traits being meaningful choices to players; because those traits ARE influential and change how you play the class and are INTENDED to be different. Again, variation in play/feel is an INTENDED result of making different trait choices. Therefore, it CAN'T be a reason to make FH baseline.

I see your point, but I feel like you haven't considered that Warr weaponskill design (inherent to the class) is blatantly designed around frequent use of weapon swap via Fast Hands (not inherent to the class) throughout all 9 years of this game.

 

Core Warr weapon skill design is incredibly 1 dimensional, Hammer being all CC, GS having no way to set its own 100b up, etc etc to force you to abuse fast weapon swap to enjoy what other classes have without needing to swap at all. To put it another way, other class' weapons form a complete deck, whereas Warr weapons have only half an answer. If Fast Hands didn't exist Warr GS would probably have a block and stun complimenting the nuke and mobility to form a complete kit (Read: Ranger GS)

[Obtena.7952]

55 minutes ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

I see your point, but I feel like you haven't considered that Warr weaponskill design (inherent to the class) is blatantly designed around frequent use of weapon swap via Fast Hands (not inherent to the class) throughout all 9 years of this game.

 

Core Warr weapon skill design is incredibly 1 dimensional, Hammer being all CC, GS having no way to set its own 100b up, etc etc to force you to abuse fast weapon swap to enjoy what other classes have without needing to swap at all. To put it another way, other class' weapons form a complete deck, whereas Warr weapons have only half an answer. If Fast Hands didn't exist Warr GS would probably have a block and stun complimenting the nuke and mobility to form a complete kit (Read: Ranger GS)

Well, I have because there is ACTUALLY a small number of weapon skills that benefit from FHands due to the range of weapon skills based on their CDs. That's not a vast number of skills and the impact of having more frequent application of those limited number of skills is arguable.

Edited June 30, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Jzaku.9765]

2 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, I have because there is ACTUALLY a very small number of weapon skills that benefit from FHands due to the range of CDs that are impacted by it. IN otherwords, a weapon skill only benefits from Fast Hands if it's CD is less than 10 seconds and more than 5 seconds. That's NOT alot of skills. 

So Burst Skills, which is actually the profession mechanic the class is centered around? Although I do feel that this reply about CDs kind of missed the point. 

[Obtena.7952]

49 minutes ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

So Burst Skills, which is actually the profession mechanic the class is centered around? Although I do feel that this reply about CDs kind of missed the point. 

Well, it doesn't miss the point at all. The value of Fast Hand is directly linked to the CD's on warrior's weapon skills.  If the argument is that FH should be baseline because it's 'really valuable' to all warrior builds, then having a look at the number of weapon skills that ACTUALLY benefit from FH due to their CD's gives you alot of information about how 'valuable' FH ACTUALLY is to all warrior builds ... and the fact is that it's not because there aren't many weapon skills that benefit from FH and when they do, they aren't as significant of an impact on play as people would make it sound they are. 

 

Again, this isn't about the benefit of Fhands. It's about why it should be baseline vs a choice as a trait. I don't see anything here you are saying that justifies the transition. Sure, the profession is centered around burst mechanic. What does that have to do with Fast Hands? Fast hands has no impact on how often you can use the Burst mechanic. 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[RoflCat.9827]

2 hours ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

GS having no way to set its own 100b up

 

Utility skills?

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, Jzaku.9765 said:

So Burst Skills, which is actually the profession mechanic the class is centered around? Although I do feel that this reply about CDs kind of missed the point. 

You need to take a step back and understand that faster weapon swap isn't exactly "strong because warrior", but it's "strong because that's how this game works" with each weapon being it's own skill bar. Without picking the one specialisation that contains FH in the first place, the FH trait isn't exactly that much difference for warrior as it would be on any other weapon swapping class. That literally includes the class that shares the resource between the weapons instead of having CDs on them simply because it increases the choice of the skills you have available for use without getting locked out of the other set for extended period of time. You're basically saying that FH is important for warrior because it makes it easier to adapt the skillbars to the situation and that's exactly the same for other classes.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

4 minutes ago, RoflCat.9827 said:

 

Utility skills?

He was referencing the fact that there are several weapon sets that have hard CCs on them to help setup their own 'bursts' while warrior weapons really don't have that contained within their own bars thus the need outside of the weapon itself to setup the burst.

[RoflCat.9827]

24 minutes ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

He was referencing the fact that there are several weapon sets that have hard CCs on them to help setup their own 'bursts' while warrior weapons really don't have that contained within their own bars thus the need outside of the weapon itself to setup the burst.

 

 

But he was talking about fast hands, i.e. that warrior 'need' that 5s weapon swap to function.

 

In PvE you shouldn't even need a setup considering how most bosses are either going to ignore CC anyway or they're stationary so it's unnecessary.

 

And in PvP..well, I don't touch conquest but being able to just burst someone every 10s  (the constant weapon swap) doesn't seem balanced/plausible to me considering the cooldown on most CC skills are longer than that.

If you need 20s per burst...feels more reasonable, but at that point FH doesn't have as much benefit so eh.

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by RoflCat.9827

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

1 hour ago, RoflCat.9827 said:

 

 

But he was talking about fast hands, i.e. that warrior 'need' that 5s weapon swap to function.

In relation to the fact that our weapons don't have the setup skills coupled with damage skills on the same weapon bars.

1 hour ago, RoflCat.9827 said:

In PvE you shouldn't even need a setup considering how most bosses are either going to ignore CC anyway or they're stationary so it's unnecessary.

PvE is PvE. AA kills everything.

1 hour ago, RoflCat.9827 said:

And in PvP..well, I don't touch conquest but being able to just burst someone every 10s  (the constant weapon swap) doesn't seem balanced/plausible to me considering the cooldown on most CC skills are longer than that.

If you need 20s per burst...feels more reasonable, but at that point FH doesn't have as much benefit so eh.

 

That depends on the CC and the burst skill in question.

[RoflCat.9827]

48 minutes ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

In relation to the fact that our weapons don't have the setup skills coupled with damage skills on the same weapon bars.

 

 

 

Hammer? Sword/Mace? Mace/Axe? If you want both CC and damage on the same bar you can.

Just not 100B damage skill on the same bar.

 

 

 

Also, again, utility slots? What do you think those are for?

 

[Grand Marshal.4098]

6 minutes ago, RoflCat.9827 said:

 

 

Hammer? Sword/Mace? Mace/Axe? If you want both CC and damage on the same bar you can.

Just not 100B damage skill on the same bar.

 

 

 

Also, again, utility slots? What do you think those are for?

 

What Lan (I believe) is describing is a weapon set (no mix-matching) which has all the necessary utilities to it. Axe/Axe lacks CC, Mace/Mace lacks cleave, Sword/Sword is hybrid with decent mobility and a block (probably the most complete set, no CC tho). 

 

Unlike say, GS Ranger having mobility, cleave, CC, block, and even a mechanic of recharging its skills/boosting its own burst with no skills. 

 

Warrior is ofc built differently, but as far as competitive goes, you'll find the lack of such QoL in weapon sets restricts us to the best option available of GS. Mobility and cleave with the assistance of utilities. 

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

What Lan (I believe) is describing is a weapon set (no mix-matching) which has all the necessary utilities to it. Axe/Axe lacks CC, Mace/Mace lacks cleave, Sword/Sword is hybrid with decent mobility and a block (probably the most complete set, no CC tho). 

Oh, so Axes, Maces and Swords are locked out of using them in pair with different weapons, now that makes sense! I didn't know they're all two-handed weapons that can't mix and match with others.

 

Seriously, the post you've answered to literally wrote:

"Hammer? Sword/Mace? Mace/Axe? If you want both CC and damage on the same bar you can.

Just not 100B damage skill on the same bar."

But for some reason you're explaining to him that if you limit yourself to "axe/axe" then you have no cc? Then pick something that fills the spot you want to be filled?

 

[Grand Marshal.4098]

6 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Oh, so Axes, Maces and Swords are locked out of using them in pair with different weapons, now that makes sense! I didn't know they're all two-handed weapons that can't mix and match with others.

 

Seriously, the post you've answered to literally wrote:

"Hammer? Sword/Mace? Mace/Axe? If you want both CC and damage on the same bar you can.

Just not 100B damage skill on the same bar."

But for some reason you're explaining to him that if you limit yourself to "axe/axe" then you have no cc? Then pick something that fills the spot you want to be filled?

 

😐

 

Yes, because the initial argument was about the weapon set itself, no combinations whatsoever.

 

For warrior to be effective you need, you must, you have to, do all this mix and matching between weapons, which is the reason why many advocate for FH baseline, as it would allow fast, efficient access to the whole weapons kit equipped (be it CC from a Mace, cleave from an Axe, evade from a GS). And even then, the set at hand may still be lacking something, which forces you into your second weaponset obviously enough.

 

I personally, don't mind FH staying as is. I simply slot Discipline anyway for the additional effects. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Grand Marshal.4098

[Sobx.1758]

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

😐

 

Yes, because the initial argument was about the weapon set itself, no combinations whatsoever.

Weaponset is whatever you use together, the twohanders are a rigid weapon sets, but single-handed weapons are not. And that's what the comment you've responded to said. You're basically repeating "if I intentionally limit myself then there's not enough utility". Then just... don't intentionally limit yourself?

 

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

For warrior to be effective you need, you must, you have to, do all this mix and matching between weapons,

And other classes don't? What even is this pseudo-argument? This is NORMAL in this game. Just because you think "axe only belongs with another axe" is your self-implemented limitation and misconception about how this game works.

 

 

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

which is the reason why many advocate for FH baseline,

No, "many advocate for FH baselie", because -again- due to how this game works it's convenient to not be locked out of the second weapon skillbar and it's EQUALLY CONVENIENT FOR OTHER CLASSES. That's the reason "many advocate" for that.

 

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

as it would allow fast, efficient access to the whole weapons kit equipped (be it CC from a Mace, cleave from an Axe, evade from a GS).

Ah, so... still exactly the same amount of convenience other classes would have from it?

Yup.

 

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

And even then, the set at hand may still be lacking something, which forces you into your second weaponset obviously enough.

....like other classes, because this is not some "warrior thing", this is just how this game works.

 

6 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

I personally, don't mind FH staying as is. I simply slot Discipline anyway for the additional effects. 

Yup, I agree because without discipline, FH doesn't do for warrior more than for other classes and that's pretty much what I'm saying here.

 

[Dao Jones.6720]

16 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

What Lan (I believe) is describing is a weapon set (no mix-matching) which has all the necessary utilities to it. Axe/Axe lacks CC, Mace/Mace lacks cleave, Sword/Sword is hybrid with decent mobility and a block (probably the most complete set, no CC tho).

What a strange argument. "Sameweapon/sameweapon" isn't a weaponset - it's two weapons you're using together, so the notion that similar weapons in both hands is anything other than a choice is just odd. It's like saying "I can't have CC, damage, and mobility using just Banners". Yeah - that's why you're not in any way required or expected to use only one type of utility skill on your skill bar.

 

Axe/Axe lacks CC? Yeah - so swap in a Dagger, Mace, or Sword. Mace/Mace lacks cleave? Yep - add an Axe, Dagger, or Sword. Like... that's why you're using two different weapons, rather than one two-hander.

 

I think we can all agree that Greatsword lackluster for a Warrior compared to, say, a Ranger. (Hell - I'd even argue that Reapers and Mesmers get better mileage out of GS than Warriors.) But Warriors have such a wide variety of weapon combos that you're absolutely able to set up combos effectively within one weaponset, and can chain damage just fine without needing Fast Hands.

[Grand Marshal.4098]

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Weaponset is whatever you use together, the twohanders are a rigid weapon sets, but single-handed weapons are not. And that's what the comment you've responded to said. You're basically repeating "if I intentionally limit myself then there's not enough utility". Then just... don't intentionally limit yourself?

But I didn't advocate for people to just run dual of the same weapon. Simply commented on how instances of dual wielding the same weapon cannot provide you with enough utility in order to use them to their fullest. 

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

And other classes don't? What even is this pseudo-argument? This is NORMAL in this game. Just because you think "axe only belongs with another axe" is your self-implemented limitation and misconception about how this game works.

We are only talking about warrior in this instance while bringing up ranger as an example. You are misinterpreting the argument which was how dual wielding the same weapon does not always benefit you, since the roles between weapons varry. 

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

No, "many advocate for FH baselie", because -again- due to how this game works it's convenient to not be locked out of the second weapon skillbar and it's EQUALLY CONVENIENT FOR OTHER CLASSES. That's the reason "many advocate" for that.

Yeah, obviously. Especially on a class that doesn't have a third skill bar like warrior. There's a lot of advantages to that. Even if it's convenient for other classes as well, they have other mechanics involved, as FH only involves warriors. Ultimately, it's all about whether there are skills off CD even with weapon swap to make the most out of the trait. 

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

Ah, so... still exactly the same amount of convenience other classes would have from it?

Yup.

No other classes have FH anyway. As for the weapon combos, they are required. No one said they weren't or that you must self - lock yourself out of them. It's about the conceptual use of a weapon and how well it's Off hand complements it's main hand. 

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

....like other classes, because this is not some "warrior thing", this is just how this game works.

Yeah sure. We talking about the combos available to warrior though. 

51 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

 

Yup, I agree because without discipline, FH doesn't do for warrior more than for other classes and that's pretty much what I'm saying here.

 

Technically it does. Since it's a significant part of the trait line and why it's being used n the first place as well as debated upon. 

 

In any case I believe other changes are of superior importance. 

 

My initial explanation of the argument I understood was about how well the main hand of a weapon can match well with its off hand. That's not a weapon set like GS, yes, but conceptually they can be used together to perform a task. Whether the dual weapons perform said task efficiently and whether the roles of main hand and off hand can provide utility (mobility, block, cc etc) outside of their main role is the main idea behind this talk from my perspective. 

 

Ofc someone can disagree and even I don't want to see mace/Mace or axe/axe share more or less the same utility. But all in all many of those weapons can be tweaked a bit to provide a better experience with or without FH. 

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

But I didn't advocate for people to just run dual of the same weapon. Simply commented on how instances of dual wielding the same weapon cannot provide you with enough utility in order to use them to their fullest. 

Ok, but you understand you've quoted the post that listed mixed weaponsets and then you've responded to it by... listing mirrored "axe/axe", "mace/mace" weaponsets pretending that's somehow meaningful? A weaponset isn't "two of the same weapons", the weaponset is "what you've decided to slot". If you make a choice to limit yourself to one pair of weapons then it's your own problem and not an actual issue. You can mix and match according to your preference, that's how this game works.

It's as if you'd suddenly come up with an argument about specialisations being bad because when you keep picking SPECIFICALLY "1/1/1", "2/2/2", "3/3/3" slots then they're not good or optimal. Well, that's the reason you can pick how you want. "axe/axe" is one of the weaponsets you can equip. "axe/WHATEVER ELSE" and "WHATEVER ELSE/axe" are also weaponsets. You intentionally limiting yourself like that is not an argument for anything, because this is not the actual ingame limitation.

 

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

We are only talking about warrior in this instance while bringing up ranger as an example. You are misinterpreting the argument which was how dual wielding the same weapon does not always benefit you, since the roles between weapons varry. 

Nothing in the game says you have to carry 2 of the same weapons. This is not what "weaponset" means. This is not how this game works.

 

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

Yeah, obviously. Especially on a class that doesn't have a third skill bar like warrior. There's a lot of advantages to that. Even if it's convenient for other classes as well, they have other mechanics involved, as FH only involves warriors. Ultimately, it's all about whether there are skills off CD even with weapon swap to make the most out of the trait. 

If it's so obivous (I mean, I really think it is, it just seems that not for everyone for some reason?), then stop pretending it's just "for warrior" for some reason. The trait is strong, because it's strong due to game mechanics, not due to the single class. And that's not a reason to suddenly start making strong traits into inherent passives.

Your last sentence is still as true for warrior as it is for other weapon-swapping classes.

 

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

No other classes have FH anyway. As for the weapon combos, they are required. No one said they weren't or that you must self - lock yourself out of them. It's about the conceptual use of a weapon and how well it's Off hand complements it's main hand. 

Sure, but if that's the argument, then so is "no class has FH as inherent passive", I guess?

I don't understand which "weapon combos" you're talking about now. Still about same type onehanded weapons? No, they're not required, far from it. It's nothing else than your own limitation you've decided to put into equasion for the sake of pretending it's an argument when it's not.

 

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

Yeah sure. We talking about the combos available to warrior though. 

Yeah and you can easly match onehanded weapons according to your needs.

 

2 hours ago, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

Technically it does. Since it's a significant part of the trait line and why it's being used n the first place as well as debated upon. 

Technically it does, HOW? Outside of disci spec it does pretty much the same thing it does for other classes. So no, technically it doesn't.

Because it's convenient to not be locked out of the other weaponbar for longer period of time? Yup, it's still the same for other classes.

 

 

[Grand Marshal.4098]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Ok, but you understand you've quoted the post that listed mixed weaponsets and then you've responded to it by... listing mirrored "axe/axe", "mace/mace" weaponsets pretending that's somehow meaningful? A weaponset isn't "two of the same weapons", the weaponset is "what you've decided to slot". If you make a choice to limit yourself to one pair of weapons then it's your own problem and not an actual issue. You can mix and match according to your preference, that's how this game works.

It's as if you'd suddenly come up with an argument about specialisations being bad because when you keep picking SPECIFICALLY "1/1/1", "2/2/2", "3/3/3" slots then they're not good or optimal. Well, that's the reason you can pick how you want. "axe/axe" is one of the weaponsets you can equip. "axe/WHATEVER ELSE" and "WHATEVER ELSE/axe" are also weaponsets. You intentionally limiting yourself like that is not an argument for anything, because this is not the actual ingame limitation.

 

Nothing in the game says you have to carry 2 of the same weapons. This is not what "weaponset" means. This is not how this game works.

 

If it's so obivous (I mean, I really think it is, it just seems that not for everyone for some reason?), then stop pretending it's just "for warrior" for some reason. The trait is strong, because it's strong due to game mechanics, not due to the single class. And that's not a reason to suddenly start making strong traits into inherent passives.

Your last sentence is still as true for warrior as it is for other weapon-swapping classes.

 

Sure, but if that's the argument, then so is "no class has FH as inherent passive", I guess?

I don't understand which "weapon combos" you're talking about now. Still about same type onehanded weapons? No, they're not required, far from it. It's nothing else than your own limitation you've decided to put into equasion for the sake of pretending it's an argument when it's not.

 

Yeah and you can easly match onehanded weapons according to your needs.

 

Technically it does, HOW? Outside of disci spec it does pretty much the same thing it does for other classes. So no, technically it doesn't.

Because it's convenient to not be locked out of the other weaponbar for longer period of time? Yup, it's still the same for other classes.

 

 

I didn't quote the original comment to prove something, I merely explained to the comment I quoted what I believed the previous poster meant. Something besides mix and matching the one handed weapons. I didn't say that's how the game works lmoa. I was talking about how two weapons were conceptualized as a main hand and an off hand meant to somewhat complement each other, which isn't always the case, although the designs do give us evidence that that was the course of action Anet wanted to go after, even if in the end it was dropped/not executed properly etc.

 

Yeah I'm not pretending anything. Warrior lives on bursts and weapon swapping since bursts are locked on weapons and they are the main way of dishing out damage. Thieves, Rangers, Engis, Guards, Revs, Mesmers, Necros, they don't have their weapon define their mechanic. They still get their shourd, their clones, their pets, their utility based toobelts. So if anything the contrary applies. Sure give low CD weapon swap to a ranger and they will be happy. Won't affect their gameplay nearly as much as warrior, which is built around having 4s weaponswap. I didn't say that, the devs made it that way. For a reason. Which is that it's a unique approach to warrior's mechanics.

 

FH gives you 5s baseline, with runes of warrior you can make it 4. Very few good sigils have low enough of an ICD to be used by other classes at 4s. But what is discipline? A tratline with a minor which gives you reduced weapon recharge. Why is it there if it can be of value for all classes? Beccause the line is built around allowing you to use the low CD weapon swap without having to actually use your bursts: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Brawler's_Recovery https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Versatile_Power https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Versatile_Power 

 

^ This is why FH has more value on warrior. Those traits wouldnt have 4s ICD if the devs hadn't thought of the reason behind giving warrior FH in the place. You can gain adrenaline, cleanse and gain might by weaponswapping with FH. Baseline or not. You do not get similar stuff with other classes. FH on Rev would no benefit it. On guard either etc.

 

For the combos I meant mixing them. You can play whatever you like, the argument was how well a weapon which funtions as a main hand and an off hand can sustain itself. 

 

 

 

[oscuro.9720]

There are a lot of, uh, unique arguments floating around this thread. I feel like providing my 2cents, at least in regards to FH.

 

I’m not going to comment on what will “fix” warrior, because, to honest, I don’t know, and I don’t know what would be regarded as balance for warrior. I don’t really have much of an opinion either way on FH being baseline or not, but I will say I will not be running a build that doesn’t have it. In a game that is more fast paced, with more variety and utility being issued to classes with every Espec, I think we can agree that warrior is being somewhat left behind. It’s simplicity, once a strength, is now a limiting factor that makes it hard to balance without being thrown to one extreme or the other. 
 

At the moment, fast hands is, for all intents and purposes, necessary in competitive modes. That’s not to say you can effectively run without it, I have, but after the large nerf patch, it’s become even less viable than before. 

 

Fast hands provides pseudo-versatility for warrior. Having access to a larger variety of skills (namely mobility and burst skills) more frequently closes the gap between warrior and other classes somewhat. It also lets a warrior use 4 on-swap social in close-to the same time period that other classes can use two. Again, this gives warrior a lot more versatility. Without fast hands, bursts not only have to be timed to CC and burst skill cooldowns, but also to be sure your weapon swap is ready so you can smoothly execute a combo. Without fasthands, you are left fairly vulnerable, as you are on one set for 4 extra seconds. Basically, FH helps to keep warrior relevant to the skill quantity inflation that has been more rampant in other classes. Additionally, FH may promote a bit more build diversity by making Discipline less necessary, but the rest of the skill lines are still unbalanced, so it would probably only add one or two builds overall.

 

This gets into the conundrum. I’m pretty sure I would still run the Discipline line, even if FH was base line. Brawler’s recovery and Warrior’s sprint are what I miss the most when I swap off discipline every now and again, especially with the proliferation of immobilize. Maybe I would run spell/str/tactics, but I feel it would still be less optimal.

[Sobx.1758]

On 7/1/2021 at 9:35 PM, Grand Marshal.4098 said:

I didn't quote the original comment to prove something, I merely explained to the comment I quoted what I believed the previous poster meant. Something besides mix and matching the one handed weapons. I didn't say that's how the game works lmoa. I was talking about how two weapons were conceptualized as a main hand and an off hand meant to somewhat complement each other, which isn't always the case, although the designs do give us evidence that that was the course of action Anet wanted to go after, even if in the end it was dropped/not executed properly etc.

If that was what anet would be aiming at, then these weapons wouldn't be separate one-handed ones that can be freely mixed and matched between each other, but instead they'd be made into ""two-handed weapons"" where equipping Axe would automatically equip another Axe. It's no the case because mixing and matching to use what you want/need is the actual intention of that system. Not to mention the existance of main/off hand weapons that don't have their off/main hand counterparts.

 

Quote

Yeah I'm not pretending anything. Warrior lives on bursts and weapon swapping since bursts are locked on weapons and they are the main way of dishing out damage. Thieves, Rangers, Engis, Guards, Revs, Mesmers, Necros, they don't have their weapon define their mechanic. They still get their shourd, their clones, their pets, their utility based toobelts. So if anything the contrary applies. Sure give low CD weapon swap to a ranger and they will be happy. Won't affect their gameplay nearly as much as warrior, which is built around having 4s weaponswap. I didn't say that, the devs made it that way. For a reason. Which is that it's a unique approach to warrior's mechanics.

No, warrior isn't built around 4s weaponswap, lol. If anything is, then it's just disci spec. The devs also didn't "make it this way" -if they wanted to "make warrior innately have FH", it would have it as a class passive. It's not a class passive, but instead a disci trait, because it's designed around disci spec, not warrior as a whole. And you show that nicely enough below:

 

Quote

FH gives you 5s baseline, with runes of warrior you can make it 4. Very few good sigils have low enough of an ICD to be used by other classes at 4s. But what is discipline? A tratline with a minor which gives you reduced weapon recharge. Why is it there if it can be of value for all classes? Beccause the line is built around allowing you to use the low CD weapon swap without having to actually use your bursts: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Brawler's_Recovery https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Versatile_Power https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Versatile_Power 

 

^ This is why FH has more value on warrior. Those traits wouldnt have 4s ICD if the devs hadn't thought of the reason behind giving warrior FH in the place. You can gain adrenaline, cleanse and gain might by weaponswapping with FH. Baseline or not. You do not get similar stuff with other classes. FH on Rev would no benefit it. On guard either etc.

You might have missed where I keep writing that it's not much different for other professions than it is for warrior without discipline. Linking to disci traits doesn't change anything I said, it pretty much just reinforces it. If you need to pick disci for fh to matter for warriors any more than it would for other classes, then the warrior itself isn't somehow made around fh, the disci spec is and you'd need to pick it anyways to make full use of fh in any other manner than the rest of the classes. And as such, it fits RIGHT in that spec, not as a baseline passive for the whole class. And that's how devs intended and made it.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Caedmon.6798]

I also feel more supportive when i run on my thief for allies as opposed to on my warri. Im able to share stealth/stunbreaks/condi cleanse/vigor/might/fury etc. Warri is severely lacking in what its supposed to be.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Caedmon.6798

[Sonork.2916]

Obligatory, "There's a balance team?"