Curse

Cuilan · Apr 25, 2011, 06:57 PM // 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkeyflower

Do you realize this discussion is in regards to PvP?

I know what you think it is, but the topic was made for PvE players to see and to be baited into making certain responses.

cantalus · Apr 25, 2011, 07:38 PM // 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuilan

I know what you think it is, but the topic was made for PvE players to see and to be baited into making certain responses.

doubtful, i suspect the thread starter made it for anet to see

deluxe · Apr 25, 2011, 08:03 PM // 20:03

Both really, it always give good lulz to read replies from people who take it serious.
While the OP is not serious at all, it is a serious issue we're talking about here.
The dervish update took all the fun out of pvp there was left for me.
All I play is some GvG and RA nowadays, but both are completely wrecked so i'm just going to stop GW till they destroy dervishes in pvp.

Still Number One · Apr 25, 2011, 08:09 PM // 20:09

This is quite possibly the greatest read I have had on this forum in a few years. Kudos to Deluxe. He expressed the problems with Dervishes in a very funny and witty manner, which has led to many funny posts taking the joke suggestions seriously. Much love.

Fate Crusher · Apr 26, 2011, 12:32 AM // 00:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

Well this was the original response I got, but no one responded to the question it leads to, which is 'how is nerfing dervishes the solution to a lack of depth in their gameplay?'

Lemming sums it up pretty frankly.

But also please refer to my earlier posts:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fate Crusher

There is not a single IAS without a negative effect except for Heart of Fury. No other profession can also maintain IAS + IMS simultaneously.
How can it be down to the playerbase to create the build when they created an IAS skill with no drawback? Fundamentally, alarm bells should have been ringing since no other profession has access to such OP skill, not to mention it's forever maintainable as well.

Deluxe's mighty banter shows how Anet have taken the Dervish a step in the wrong direction. I'm all for Dervishes to be a viable pvp option to provide conditional pressure and tear down spikes. But they're become auto-attacking monstrosities.

And anybody who thinks otherwise clearly never played GW when it was balanced. Pz.

Even my last post already mentions: "All warrior skills come with a cost. Dervish skills have no procc and no drawbacks for bashing your head on your keyboard."

So CLEARLY the answer everyone is trying to explain is a way to balance this issue is by creating drawbacks and sacrifices for enabling this pressure (such as the pressure of a warrior increasing his IAS 33% - double damage received). There's nothing wrong with creating a new viable frontline, but at the moment, no other profession gets a chance at producing the amount of pressure that a Dervish exhumes (RELEASES... @Cuilan). I'm sorry if my command of English forgoes your higher cognitive abilities.

Azazello, you're also taking the term "nerf" too literally. Maybe others would like to see Dervishes stricken down to the ground but most will agree, along with the OP, that there is balance required between the frontline professions. The OP shows a stark contrast (the difference... @Cuilan) between the pressure dealt from a warrior and from a Dervish.

Anet might have had different gameplay styles in mind, but the new Dervish builds *Here's the humdinger of the argument can provide increased pressure without any hindrance to their performance. This (@Cuilan) is where the specific skill and tactics of a good warrior comes in where they're capable of creating opportunities through Dchop/Bulls/Shock or even Frenzy. If you think there is no skill involved in leading a team to victory (also known as killing people) through exploiting the correct windows of opportunity (@Cuilan, also known when prot monks are spamming because they are low on energy = guaranteed dchop) then you're playing the wrong game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuilan

I know what you think it is, but the topic was made for PvE players to see and to be baited into making certain responses.

Even though Deluxe has already explained, I just want to add that the post was to show the stark difference between different frontline professions. Simply put, it's illogical to create such a Dervish in comparison to a warrior and still pass it off as a viable balance. And unless you've never experienced balance gameplay (Even Quake's asymmetrical balanced gameplay), The idea of PvP in Guild Wars has already gone over your head and I suggest you Observe more.

The update created great new gameplay but it also paved a way for epic lunacy to run rampant. To simply compare the difference between warriors and Dervishes makes it clear and also makes you wonder whether the brains of the development team were left locked up or whether they realised at all how inconsistent this update has become.

Coney · Apr 26, 2011, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Warriors have awesome armor + shields, and killer blocking skills. You are comparing apples and oranges, and wanting the triple attack hits that dervs get... I guess something like that might be barely fair for mauls, but then warriors are awesome for KD...

pinkeyflower · Apr 26, 2011, 02:44 AM // 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coney

Warriors have awesome armor + shields, and killer blocking skills. You are comparing apples and oranges, and wanting the triple attack hits that dervs get... I guess something like that might be barely fair for mauls, but then warriors are awesome for KD...

Since when does a warrior use blocking skills? AoB+Mysticism=~100AL and no shield sets work against holy damage.

FoxBat · Apr 26, 2011, 06:04 AM // 06:04

Avatar damage conversion is much better than letting grenth avatars and the like cover conjure with enchant spam.

The derv IAS just need a big drawback, or else chopped down to 15% or so. If you're going to make the teardown + enchant effects this good (and nerfing near all of them won't be easy), the raw scythe DPS has to come down, including IASing while IMSing. Not that this will fix wounding strike, but at least that's one skill.

Essence Snow · Apr 26, 2011, 06:09 AM // 06:09

Tbh I could care less if anything is done...nice to see dervs in the limelight for the time being no matter how many ppl with war mains are upset by it.

Azazello · Apr 26, 2011, 06:11 AM // 06:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

How is nerfing dervishes the solution to a lack of depth in their gameplay?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Nerfing dervishes is the solution to a lack of depth in dervish play.

Non sequitur?

@Fate Crusher, you're making more sense than anyone I've seen discussing this issue, although you should be aware that your apparent need to belittle people says quite a lot more about you than the person you direct those comments toward.

I like what you're saying about warriors having to watch their ability use while dervs just spam, although I think you're possibly exaggerating slightly when you say 'all', and that doesn't do your arguments credibility any favours. For example, how is dismember a more skill intensive ability than wearying strike?

Bulls is not a good example at all either, saying it requires skill to use well doesn't change the fact that it's an extremely strong warrior ability. To be fair though, if I were to look a little deeper, some of the reason dervs aren't bringing bulls isn't simply due to a lack of space on the bar, but due to the fact that both the opportunity to use it and some of the utility it brings are reduced by being able to maintain both an ias and ims while crippling everyone nearby.

So I definitely see what you mean, frenzy for example doesn't simply come with the double damage drawback, but the drawback of no IMS stance being available while IASing, KDs are more challenging to use well than 'herp... damage', etc.

Seems like a lot of the issues you're highlighting are caused by the low energy cost (relative to derv regen) of many flash enchantments with a few points in mysticism. Obviously heart of fury is a fair bit over the top (in fact it seems a little silly to introduce such a strong ability tied to one class by being quite bad without points in that classes primary attribute... although everyone was happy to see flail restricted to warrior only after assassins started using it to see some play), but frenzied warriors under harrier's haste would be no joke either, it's just that they can't maintain an IAS+IMS nearly as well, or more to the point, that dervs don't have to watch their resources at all in order to do so.

So the basic problem is that dervs can just spam shit and win? What are the main culprits, ability wise? Is it partially due to mysticism and 4 pips of regen? What changes would you recommend?

Being realistic, bringing a neutral, unbiased view, avoiding exaggeration, knowing the answers to the obvious questions that your comments raise... in short, presenting a real argument and showing that you've actually put some thought into your words, is far more likely to get you taken seriously. Seems like a lot of bandwagoneering going on when it's so difficult to encourage anyone to do so.

Elnino · Apr 26, 2011, 06:32 AM // 06:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

Tbh I could care less if anything is done...nice to see dervs in the limelight for the time being no matter how many ppl with war mains are upset by it.

It's not about ppl with war mains being upset. It's about a lack of balance in PvP and the fact that Dervish's are insanely overpowered and can do pretty much everything at a high standard.

pinkeyflower · Apr 26, 2011, 06:33 AM // 06:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

Non sequitur?

@Fate Crusher, you're making more sense than anyone I've seen discussing this issue, although you should be aware that your apparent need to belittle people says quite a lot more about you than the person you direct those comments toward.

I like what you're saying about warriors having to watch their ability use while dervs just spam, although I think you're possibly exaggerating slightly when you say 'all', and that doesn't do your arguments credibility any favours. For example, how is dismember a more skill intensive ability than wearying strike?

Bulls is not a good example at all either, saying it requires skill to use well doesn't change the fact that it's an extremely strong warrior ability. To be fair though, if I were to look a little deeper, some of the reason dervs aren't bringing bulls isn't simply due to a lack of space on the bar, but due to the fact that both the opportunity to use it and some of the utility it brings are reduced by being able to maintain both an ias and ims while crippling everyone nearby.

So I definitely see what you mean, frenzy for example doesn't simply come with the double damage drawback, but the drawback of no IMS stance being available while IASing, KDs are more challenging to use well than 'herp... damage', etc.

Seems like a lot of the issues you're highlighting are caused by the low energy cost (relative to derv regen) of many flash enchantments with a few points in mysticism. Obviously heart of fury is a fair bit over the top (in fact it seems a little silly to introduce such a strong ability tied to one class by being quite bad without points in that classes primary attribute), but frenzied warriors under harrier's haste would be no joke either, it's just that they can't maintain an IAS+IMS nearly as well, or more to the point, that dervs don't have to watch their resources at all in order to do so.

So the basic problem is that dervs can just spam shit and win? What are the main culprits, ability wise? Is it partially due to mysticism and 4 pips of regen? What changes would you recommend?

Being realistic, bringing a neutral, unbiased view, avoiding exaggeration, knowing the answers to the obvious questions that your comments raise... in short, presenting a real argument and showing that you've actually put some thought into your words, is far more likely to get you taken seriously. Seems like a lot of bandwagoneering going on when it's so difficult to encourage anyone to do so.

AoB means you get adrenaline very quickly and coupled with a perma-IAS allows you to have wearying charged up in half the time dismember takes. Also, because it causes teardown and the availability of teardowns you not only get the deep wound but the secondary teardown effect and burning all on one target.

Frenzied warrior's under Harrier's Haste have to invest in Wind Prayers, go Dervish secondary instead of Elementalist and taking Shock, use 10 energy which stretches the Warrior's energy pool and if the guy is perma-frenzied accomplish nothing by being dead all the time. How is Bull's irrelevant? Because it is strong it has a drawback meaning you have to use it effectively; actually land Bull's to get the effect. If you spam it and hit a stationary foe all you've done is waste energy and removed the possibility of using it again for another 10 seconds. Dervishes don't bring Bull's because a) you have to invest in Strength b) they only KD for 2 secs c) it is irrelevant when you can perma-cripple.

I would like to ask one thing. Have you/do you PvP? If you don't, stop, make a warrior and dervish, go to gwpvx, grab either the Cripslash bar or Eviscerate bar and Avatar of Balthazar bar. Go into something like RA and play a few matches with both bars. Compare efficacy, resolve questions.

Azazello · Apr 26, 2011, 06:43 AM // 06:43

Pinkey, most of what you're saying goes both ways. Some of it actually works counter to the point of view you're trying to present. I don't even really know where or how to begin discussing it with you in light of that. Dervs are stronger than warriors because they can only KD for 2secs?

The derv>warrior=bad thing isn't going to fly either, unless you can highlight a pre update post of yours complaining about warrior>derv? Devs are probably finding the playerbases sudden urgent need to balance frontline classes more humorous than anything else.

pinkeyflower · Apr 26, 2011, 06:52 AM // 06:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

Pinkey, most of what you're saying goes both ways. Some of it actually works counter to the point of view you're trying to present. I don't even really know where or how to begin discussing it with you in light of that. Dervs are stronger than warriors because they can only KD for 2secs?

The derv>warrior=bad thing isn't going to fly either, unless you can highlight a pre update post of yours complaining about warrior>derv? Devs are probably finding the playerbases sudden urgent need to balance frontline classes more humorous than anything else.

What are you talking about? You said, "some of the reason dervs aren't bringing bulls isn't simply due to a lack of space on the bar, but due to the fact that both the opportunity to use it and some of the utility it brings are reduced by being able to maintain both an ias and ims while crippling everyone nearby." I said they don't bring Bull's because dervs only KD for 2 seconds compared to Warrior's being able to KD for 3 seconds in addition to other reasons.

Why would I post about warriors>dervs from before? Warriors were balanced. I should complain about a balanced profession? The argument is about balance not power although by being stupidly powerful dervishes are being shown to be unbalanced. A profession should fit a specific role but currently dervishes pretty much do everything a warrior does and more.

Again, have you/do you play PvP? If you don't, follow my last statement in my previous post then talk.

Azazello · Apr 26, 2011, 07:06 AM // 07:06

Yes, some of the reason. The point of the statement however was that saying 'bulls requires skill' is irrelevant in light of the fact that it's such a strong ability, skill required or no. The OP uses much better examples, strong abilities that are completely outclassed by dervish abilities. Dervs don't have bulls, to me, that looks like a point in favour of warriors.

Highlighting reasons why dervs aren't bringing bulls simply makes warriors look even better, which doesn't seem to be your aim. Not a good example.

The statements about balance with no reference point still aren't helping btw. Warriors were balanced relative to what? Certainly not other frontline professions.

pinkeyflower · Apr 26, 2011, 07:21 AM // 07:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

Yes, some of the reason. The point of the statement however was that saying 'bulls requires skill' is irrelevant in light of the fact that it's such a strong ability, skill required or no. The OP uses much better examples, strong abilities that are completely outclassed by dervish abilities. Dervs don't have bulls, to me, that looks like a point in favour of warriors.

Highlighting reasons why dervs aren't bringing bulls simply makes warriors look even better, which doesn't seem to be your aim. Not a good example.

The statements about balance with no reference point still aren't helping btw. Warriors were balanced relative to what? Certainly not other frontline professions.

Bull's is weak without skill. If you read the description it inflicts +dmg and KD if you hit a moving foe. Thus the warrior must anticipate when the target will move and position himself in a way that will allow him to maximize the chances of landing Bull's on a moving target.

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I don't want to sound like an arrogant prat but if you don't know how/why dervishes are unbalanced and overpowered you a) don't PvP, b) are a dervish, or c) are just moronic.

Warriors are balanced because they had weaknesses that could be exploited, had a specific role, had a mechanism that rewarded skilful play and punished or at least weakened unskilful play.

Again, if you don't play PvP, roll a warrior with either Criplash or Eviscerate and dervish with AoB. Play a few matches in RA. Compare efficacy, resolve questions)

Laylat · Apr 26, 2011, 07:45 AM // 07:45

I remember when Order of the Vampire got nerfed and now no longer has effect if you're under another Nercomancer enchantment. They could do the same for Avatars--remove their relationship with enchantments and nullify their abilities if under a Dervish enchantment.

Azazello · Apr 26, 2011, 07:45 AM // 07:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkeyflower

Warriors are balanced because they had weaknesses that could be exploited, had a specific role, had a mechanism that rewarded skilful play and punished or at least weakened unskilful play.

Again, if you don't play PvP, roll a warrior with either Criplash or Eviscerate and dervish with AoB. Play a few matches in RA. Compare efficacy, resolve questions)

See this is the issue. The two statements don't follow. You're talking about two separate things. Derv>war isn't relevant to warrior having weaknesses, particularly when talking about things like bulls, which dervs have no equivalent to. If elementalists had a 'win target match' ability that was very difficult to use, they would be OP, no matter how hard it was to use.

I think we're actually on the same page in that regard, proposing that dervish gameplay needs to be deepened, basically that the recharge and resource costs associated with dervish abilities are not sufficient to promote decision making, that the best decision is always 'use it now'.

This is why I started asking questions. Screaming 'dervs are op' is just noise. It's useless. You need to define OP. In this case, we seem to be talking about dervish gameplay not rewarding skill, or sufficiently punishing a lack thereof. I've suggested a few other definitions but no one seems to think they apply. Personally I think that dervs are strong enough right now that they are restricting team builds to 'teams with 2-3 frontliners' and 'bad teams', but no one really seems to be validating that, so perhaps I'm wrong.

pinkeyflower · Apr 26, 2011, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

See this is the issue. The two statements don't follow. You're talking about two separate things. Derv>war isn't relevant to warrior having weaknesses, particularly when talking about things like bulls, which dervs have no equivalent to. If elementalists had a 'win target match' ability that was very difficult to use, they would be OP, no matter how hard it was to use.

I think we're actually on the same page in that regard, proposing that dervish gameplay needs to be deepened, basically that the recharge and resource costs associated with dervish abilities are not sufficient to promote decision making, that the best decision is always 'use it now'.

This is why I started asking questions. Screaming 'dervs are op' is just noise. It's useless. You need to define OP. In this case, we seem to be talking about dervish gameplay not rewarding skill, or sufficiently punishing a lack thereof. I've suggested a few other definitions but no one seems to think they apply. Personally I think that dervs are strong enough right now that they are restricting team builds to 'teams with 2-3 frontliners' and 'bad teams', but no one really seems to be validating that, so perhaps I'm wrong.

How is Bull's Strike a win button? Your example with the elementalist is horrible because no skill would ever be purposely introduced that allowed you to simply win. Dervishes>warriors because they've all but removed sword and axe warriors from the game.

OP=overpowered. In this case being able to do apply insane amounts of pressure with a skillset that allows it to play recklessly and not be punished for it as well as lacking traditional weaknesses through their own condition removal that also doubles as perma-cripple.

i farm baddies · Apr 26, 2011, 08:37 AM // 08:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkeyflower

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I don't want to sound like an arrogant prat but if you don't know how/why dervishes are unbalanced and overpowered you a) don't PvP, b) are a dervish, or c) are just moronic.

sorry, but you are an arrogant prat. whatever that means. every post i see you post at the end it says if u dont pvp ur an idiot....basically. being mean to pve'ers gets you off? pm me and our guilds can pvp it out on the battlefield. we'll put u in ur place.