Curse

NerfHerder · Nov 11, 2010, 05:24 AM // 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by HigherMinion

Air is fine. As fine as elemental damage goes.

Sure, an Ele's Air/Lightning Dmg is good, unless you compare it to a Rt's ability to do Lightning Dmg.

Horus Moonlight · Nov 11, 2010, 05:37 AM // 05:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaigoda

You're using bad logic. Sure, in that very specific situation you'd pick a Warrior over a dervish, but in situations where the warrior is worse than the derv or the is no warrior at all, the derv becomes far more desirable, and you'd probably pick him over a caster over something. A ranger on the other hand, is semi-versatile, but is crappy at all of it, so you'd never pick him.

Here's a better example:
A dervish and some casters are sitting in a mission. You gladly take the dervish because he can deal craploads of damage easily and quickly, and can still pump SY just as well as anyone. You don't care that he might be worse than Wars or Sins, because Wars and Sins aren't around currently.

On the other hand:
A ranger and some casters are sitting in a mission. You take a caster, because rangers are just plain godawful. You don't care that he's better at using a bow than anybody, because bows are absolutely terrible in PvE.

A third situation:
A ranger an dervish are sitting in a mission, and no one else. You take the Dervish, because they actually do something, rather than firing the equivelent of 6 foam pellets at monsters (a.k.a. Barrage).

Here's another example:
You don't have ANYTHING, and you've got access to a taser (the Derv) and a bow and arrow (the Ranger). You pick the taser because, even though it's not as deadly as guns and stuff, you don't have access to any guns! You don't pick the bow because while it does have a niche role of being ranged, it's so ineffective compared to the technology power creep of the taser that it's not worth taking no matter what.

In other words, if I had to pick between ANYONE and a ranger to team with, I would pick anyone but the ranger. If I had to pick between anyone and a dervish, I'd only not pick the dervish if there was a good warrior or good sin around, which is somewhat likely not to happen, considering how dead GW is at this point.

Wow, you didn't get his point at all (not to mention the horrific analogy you used). The only thing I could agree with was the fact that rangers are god awful.

I'm not going to waste time writing something that was already said ad nauseam so I'll just quote it:

Quote:

Originally Posted by reaper with no name

Of course, none of this addresses the fact that the very assertion that the dervish is "more powerful" than most classes in the game makes no sense, because comparing melee damage (what dervishes do) to caster damage and healing and damage mitigation (what most of the classes in the game do) is like comparing apples to oranges and bananas and dump trucks. They are not interchangeable. Really, the only classes that the dervish can be objectively compared to are those that do the same thing it does: melee damage, just like how you can't objectively compare a healing monk to an SS necromancer.

Jaigoda · Nov 11, 2010, 06:04 AM // 06:04

There's a point where straight damage outstrips pretty much all utility. GW is just about at that point in PvE. Things die fast enough that you can get a lot of "utility" just by killing everything before they can do much of anything. That, combined with SY, is what puts melees so far ahead of casters in general. Like I said, I'd usually rather have a good Derv in my party than a good caster, unless I already had 2 or more melees in he party.

Just as an extremely exaggerated example, if melees could deal 1000DPS, and utilities could perma-lock a mob for 10 seconds, you'd want to pick the melee over the utility simply because the melee kills a lot faster, and the vast majority of enemy mobs don't have the utility to shut down their rediculous DPS. Sure, the utility would work, and you could bring some slower DPS and still kill pretty safely, but it would take longer for little benefit. And considering how PvE is focused on doing things in the fastest way possible, that utility would be thrown out the window in favor of pure, massive DPS.

But my original point was, dervishes, while not the best profession, can at least do SOMETHING. But rangers are inferior in every aspect. That's what I'm trying to get Reaper to understand. Sure, dervishes could use a buff, but the game would be more balanced overall if Ele's or rangers were buffed instead. If my comparisons were bad, sorry, I was in a hurry, and I was just trying to make a point.

FoxBat · Nov 11, 2010, 06:20 AM // 06:20

It's very easy to compare melee and caster damage actually. You just look at the DPS. Melee has it, casters don't, even the AP abusing kind.

The ONLY thing casters have business doing besides defense/heals (direct or indirect, i.e. panic, minions, spirits), is buffing melee further. If they have room left on their bar after doing that to their best ability, they can add some damage. Otherwise you're just wasting resources. It's also very easy to take too much "utility/defense" when you should just be adding more melee to your party. Melee rangers, melee eles, it doesn't matter if they suck compared to warriors and what not, it's better than their own alternatives.

H/H notoriously suck at melee movement and positioning, which forces you into more caster damage than you like. In general you should always be playing the melee role here, as heroes can adequately handle the rest. If your class makes you unwilling to frontline with a melee weapon then it's strictly inferior for H/H.

Alot of characters are thus FAR WORSE than dervishes, but people play by some fiction like casters are supposed to cast, or that classes should stick to their best role, even when that role isn't needed in the given situation or party. It's that fiction that makes dervs look bad, and unpopular with pugs, but it's extremely arbitrary.

Sytherek · Nov 11, 2010, 10:46 AM // 10:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

It's very easy to compare melee and caster damage actually. You just look at the DPS. Melee has it, casters don't, even the AP abusing kind.

The ONLY thing casters have business doing besides defense/heals (direct or indirect, i.e. panic, minions, spirits), is buffing melee further. If they have room left on their bar after doing that to their best ability, they can add some damage. Otherwise you're just wasting resources. It's also very easy to take too much "utility/defense" when you should just be adding more melee to your party. Melee rangers, melee eles, it doesn't matter if they suck compared to warriors and what not, it's better than their own alternatives.

I still wonder what game y'all are playing.

Sure, I can see the numbers, but they don;t matter. Really, you can finish the PvE game, hard mode and all, EASILY, without any PvE skills, AP, or whatever.

If you're having fun, wonderful. But making such absolute statements is just... silly. It's like saying someone shouldn't drive a car unless it helps the fastest cars on the road get faster. Do you only own a Bugatti or Ferrari?

Sankt Hallvard · Nov 11, 2010, 11:11 AM // 11:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

H/H notoriously suck at melee movement and positioning, which forces you into more caster damage than you like. In general you should always be playing the melee role here, as heroes can adequately handle the rest. If your class makes you unwilling to frontline with a melee weapon then it's strictly inferior for H/H.

Alot of characters are thus FAR WORSE than dervishes, but people play by some fiction like casters are supposed to cast, or that classes should stick to their best role, even when that role isn't needed in the given situation or party. It's that fiction that makes dervs look bad, and unpopular with pugs, but it's extremely arbitrary.

Since when were classes rated based on how well they perform with h/h? In a balanced setup every class should have a role, and for most classes the main purpose is not to deal dmg. If you play pve wanting to deal as much dmg as possible you should obviously pick a physical character. There's nothing unbalanced or unfair about this, it's exactly the same way it works in pvp. The physicals deal the dmg while the rest of the team(the majority!) is devoted to letting the physical(s) do their job or to prevent the enemy physical dmg from killing their own team.

There are limits to how many physicals you can run in pve too, if you take away ER healers, SYs spam and the monster's dumb AI.

There are far bigger problems in the game than rangers and dervs not getting playtime in pve. I'm betting my life that 99% have more than one charater anyway, it's not like a big hurdle to pve. Just play one of your other characters that's not a ranger, or if you still insist to feel your ranger to be powerful again try some pvp.

Can we please start channeling anet's attention and limited resources to the areas of the game that need it the most?

drkn · Nov 11, 2010, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Well played PI mes can keep a balled group of mobs 4 out of 6 seconds on the ground, just sayin'.

Catchphrase · Nov 11, 2010, 01:26 PM // 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Trust me, I get it, I know that Dervishes are boring and have a terrible primary attribute, terrible energy that makes you unable to use terrible skills. I would not want to play a Dervish because there's nothing to them and I can't imagine it's fun.

However, you do get 16 Scythe Mastery, and you get to put up AoHM to multiply damage by 70%, and then Asura Scan for another 70%, and then you mash your face on the keyboard to autoattack for 100 damage, hitting 3 targets, with buffs multiplying and charging adrenaline like crazy and all that. Yeah, you're 3 PvE skills and a scythe, and it rolls over everything.

I'd love for the class to be more than 3 PvE skills and a scythe, that would make it a lot more fun, deep and interesting; but the fact is those 3 PvE skills are ridiculous, you have the best weapon, and anything that can't utilize those doesn't come close.

Linking AoHM to Mysticism would at least make this the province of the Dervish alone, so they'd have a unique role, even if they still were shallow and boring.

Damage is the last thing dervish needs. And you said it right although with with a dry sense of sarcasm thrown in. I played it and I felt it is fine except it lacks fluidity in executing its role as damage dealer, that's all. On the contrary, I felt scythes should be toned alot across all professions, and more efforts should be focused on making dervish enchantments relevant to their roles and not some random PbAOE damage mixed in with some conditions. If Anet cannot draw a clear line on what roles can a dervish perform in the party, I'd rather they postpone the update.

Verene · Nov 11, 2010, 02:27 PM // 14:27

Quote:

I would not want to play a Dervish because...I can't imagine it's fun.

Fun is subjective. I don't understand why people love playing Warriors, Assassins, Necromancers, or Monks. I find them boring, tedious, and just plain not very fun most of the time.

There are only so many unique roles available to melee. We've got the flexible fighter (warrior), the glass cannon (assassin, though no one plays them that way, thank you Critical Agility), and the AoE meleemancer (dervish, though most enchantments other than AoHM aren't worth using). Tie AoHM to Mysticism, and suddenly 'sins with scythes aren't as superior as they supposedly are (having played my 'sin with a scythe, it sure as hell doesn't feel superior, but I'll go with it). Do something to Mysticism so it doesn't act as a half-assed Soul Reaping and is actually worthwhile. Change the enchantments available so that they're actually worth using. Make them instant cast, lower the durations, make it actually worth removing them, give more options of doing so...

diabiosx · Nov 11, 2010, 02:29 PM // 14:29

Well my impression of what makes a dervish class an unique melee class when they were introduced is their ability to deal AoE damage. And what makes dervishes suck is that that unique ability is tied to the scythe that any class can use. The AoE melee property is also terrible since its radius is "adjacent to foes," which is very small. And looking at their attack skills, the Dervishes are very good at putting out conditions(wounding strike) I think it will be nice to play more into condition pressure with the dervishes instead of buffing damage on skills.

Anyways to another topic, Flash Enchantments prediction. Based on its name, that means the enchantments will be instant cast and based on this, I can predict that there will be some broken dervish secondaries running around. Anyways if they introduce this concept, it doesnt really help the dervish class as a primary, or maybe their goal is to make dervishes into a powerful secondary class. lawl

LordDragon · Nov 11, 2010, 02:50 PM // 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by FengShuiDove

There are too many good hybrid combinations to have any reason to take down one. Discord did it first, but it doesn't really do it best anymore.

Exactly. I have been running hybrid builds since heroes were added to the game. It seemed obvious to take Dunkoro and Tahlkora and add some mesmer interrupt/energy gain skills to their bars after the first few times playing them.

Over the years I have fine tuned them both into protection/healing/damage machines that work very well. Nerfing Discord will not fix the perceived 'problem' because people will find something else. Then what? Nerf everything till nothing works well at all?

I personally do not consider such builds over powered. I consider them exactly what good players SHOULD come up with for their heroes. The fact that they have become common knowledge is also a good thing in my opinion. This makes the game MORE accessible to new players not less.

As to the OP. Dervish updates are needed because the mechanism behind the dervish is flawed. I am not sure how they can fix that but I have hopes that they will.

MithranArkanere · Nov 11, 2010, 03:54 PM // 15:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verene

Fun is subjective. I don't understand why people love playing Warriors, Assassins, Necromancers, or Monks. I find them boring, tedious, and just plain not very fun most of the time.

There are only so many unique roles available to melee. We've got the flexible fighter (warrior), the glass cannon (assassin, though no one plays them that way, thank you Critical Agility), and the AoE meleemancer (dervish, though most enchantments other than AoHM aren't worth using). Tie AoHM to Mysticism, and suddenly 'sins with scythes aren't as superior as they supposedly are (having played my 'sin with a scythe, it sure as hell doesn't feel superior, but I'll go with it). Do something to Mysticism so it doesn't act as a half-assed Soul Reaping and is actually worthwhile. Change the enchantments available so that they're actually worth using. Make them instant cast, lower the durations, make it actually worth removing them, give more options of doing so...

I think fun in games is like music. Not everything works with everyone, but there are some tunes that most people like.

After the changes they made to ritualists, mesmers and hammer warriors I played a lot again with them, even though I barely used them before.
Ritualsits where too slow for PvE. mesmers too single-target centered and warriors... well... you didn't see much effect while playing as a hammer warrior.

Going back to the music example, It's like comparing this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20qZtnODB0w
And this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4
Some people like the original, but most people like Gary Joule's version.

While in PvP the most important thing is balanced gameplay to make it fair since you are not supposed to win 50% against players with the same skill; in PvE the most important thing is just plain fun, since you are supposed to beat the monsters 100% of the time once you get skilled enough.

Now, the hard thing is getting the tune that works with most people.

Bodock · Nov 11, 2010, 04:06 PM // 16:06

Strength needs a buff it doesn't do anything it is the worst primary out there, not mysticsm.

If they gonna nerf where there is no point in other classes using secondaries then just take secondaries out.

ErrantVenture · Nov 11, 2010, 04:15 PM // 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodock

Strength needs a buff it doesn't do anything it is the worst primary out there, not mysticsm.

If they gonna nerf where there is no point in other classes using secondaries then just take secondaries out.

Strength has built in armor-pen, body blow, bulls, enraging charge, flail, prot strike, rush, shield bash, sprint and (in PvE) warrior's endurance.

There's nothing wrong with the strength attribute at all, and warriors are one of the most well-designed professions in the game. Quit whining and l2p.

Reformed · Nov 11, 2010, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

...in PvE the most important thing is just plain fun, since you are supposed to beat the monsters 100% of the time once you get skilled enough.

Buffing lower tier professions to make up for years worth of unchecked power creep (aka 'fun') is certainly the easiest solution but it's also the worst. This is also historically a favorite strategy to 'fix' things...overshoot the mark and then nerf after the fact to adjust for blatantly overpowered elements. What should really be happening is selective nerfs to the top tier to bring their relative strength more in line with other available options.

Just to reiterate, Anet has stated they have limited resources numerous times. If it comes down to buffing a profession that doesn't need to be buffed vs. new content or work in PvP this is a no-brainer. If they still had unlimited resources and could do all of these things and do them well then I'm sure the objections, myself included, would go away.

diabiosx · Nov 11, 2010, 04:34 PM // 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodock

Strength needs a buff it doesn't do anything it is the worst primary out there, not mysticsm.

If they gonna nerf where there is no point in other classes using secondaries then just take secondaries out.

strength has very strong skills in its line.

AngelWJedi · Nov 11, 2010, 04:38 PM // 16:38

So..if it is going to happen to today it would be in the afternoon right? or was today just that maintaince which i can tell did nothing to help with the lag. xD

Jaigoda · Nov 11, 2010, 05:04 PM // 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

Since when were classes rated based on how well they perform with h/h? In a balanced setup every class should have a role, and for most classes the main purpose is not to deal dmg. If you play pve wanting to deal as much dmg as possible you should obviously pick a physical character. There's nothing unbalanced or unfair about this, it's exactly the same way it works in pvp. The physicals deal the dmg while the rest of the team(the majority!) is devoted to letting the physical(s) do their job or to prevent the enemy physical dmg from killing their own team.

But PvE is not PvP. In PvE, the midline's role is significantly reduced. The main point of the midline (in a balanced setup, at least) is to mitigate damage through stuff like BSurge and Empathy, and also to make sure that the melees can deal the damage they're supposed to (enchant removals, snares, and sometimes hex/condition removal). In PvE, the whole damage mitigation area is made null by SY, ER, and in H/H, N/Rt's with Soul Reaping to power nearly unlimited heals. And in the majority of areas, keeping peope clean is unnecessary because the monsters pack inadequate skills that don't need to be removed. That means that the midline's only job in PvE is relegated to keeping the melees happy. Sure, they can do other stuff, but they'd be better off just buffing the crap out of melee and pushing their DPS into the hundreds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

There are limits to how many physicals you can run in pve too, if you take away ER healers, SYs spam and the monster's dumb AI.

But why take those away? They're there, and we're talking about who's the best and/or worst in realistic situations (as in, comparisons that restrict the use of PvE skills are irrelevent here).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

There are far bigger problems in the game than rangers and dervs not getting playtime in pve. I'm betting my life that 99% have more than one charater anyway, it's not like a big hurdle to pve. Just play one of your other characters that's not a ranger, or if you still insist to feel your ranger to be powerful again try some pvp.

But buffing characters is easier to do than fixing the rest of the game. And considering how lazy ANet's been when it comes to GW1 (I'm not faulting them on this - they should be focusing on GW2), fixing a profession or two would sound a lot more attractive than trying to unbreak the game. And anyway, sure, you can just say "don't play that profession", but it's hard not to play a certain profession when you're trying to progress them through the game and/or get titles for them. A lot of peoples' mains were ele and ranger, and now most of them are probably collecting dust because they're ineffective and boring to play.

jazilla · Nov 11, 2010, 05:13 PM // 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reformed

Just to reiterate, Anet has stated they have limited resources numerous times. If it comes down to buffing a profession that doesn't need to be buffed vs. new content or work in PvP this is a no-brainer. If they still had unlimited resources and could do all of these things and do them well then I'm sure the objections, myself included, would go away.

After seeing how many costumes they sold this past holiday, the "limited resources" reason isn't a reason anymore. Last time I checked, it was money spent in GW1, by GW1 players for their GW1 characters. It would be nice to see some of those "limited resources" poured back into the game that it was spent on.

Reformed · Nov 11, 2010, 05:23 PM // 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazilla

After seeing how many costumes they sold this past holiday, the "limited resources" reason isn't a reason anymore. Last time I checked, it was money spent in GW1, by GW1 players for their GW1 characters. It would be nice to see some of those "limited resources" poured back into the game that it was spent on.

My gut feeling is it's a lot easier to get the art department to design and implement some costumes than it is to pull people off for balance updates and subsequent testing. Cosmetic items are almost certainly less demanding on development time than skill changes are and I'm sure the money that changes hands doesn't hurt.