Curse

UnChosen · Aug 21, 2008, 09:11 PM // 21:11

From developer updates"

"Smiter's Boon is a key skill in smite-heavy PvP teams that were generally overpowered and which too strongly discouraged the use of hexes and conditions. Their combination of healing, damage, and removal invalidated a lot of alternative builds within Team Arenas and has had a negative impact on GvG combat.

We recognize that the changes to this skill will essentially remove it from play. In the future, we may consider whether or not there is an incarnation of this skill that would be viable but balanced. For now, we do not expect it to see serious use. "

Bolded part is what I feared, they might not ever buff it to a point where it can even be used in RA/FA/alliance battle. And there's a high chance it won't, just look at all the other nerfed smite skills sitting there doing nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Sorry, but heals of 85 aren't much? Along with the mitigation, damage and spammability of Reversal of Damage?

Whatever you're smoking, it must be good stuff.

I said a SINGLE smiter's boon monk in a later post. Its only truly overpowered when there are a lot of them.

The Meth · Aug 21, 2008, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Anyone with half a brain should know [Smiter's Boon] was overpowered just from the skill concept. It allowed a normally damage based attribute to heal effectively at the same time. Want to blind that warrior? Sorry, you are actually helping the other team because now they can smite that off. lulz.

The change itself does seem more like izzy had totally forgotten about nerfing it up until the last minute and instead of thinking what would be a suitable change he just flipped and thought something along the lines of "'ah hell lets just bury it under 100 feet of shit". As it is right now Smiter's Boon may be the first skill to actually be less useful then an unused skill slot. Might as well go into PvP with a signet of capture.

FrAnt1c² · Aug 21, 2008, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnChosen

From developer updates"

"Smiter's Boon is a key skill in smite-heavy PvP teams that were generally overpowered and which too strongly discouraged the use of hexes and conditions. Their combination of healing, damage, and removal invalidated a lot of alternative builds within Team Arenas and has had a negative impact on GvG combat.

We recognize that the changes to this skill will essentially remove it from play. In the future, we may consider whether or not there is an incarnation of this skill that would be viable but balanced. For now, we do not expect it to see serious use. "

Bolded part is what I feared, they might not ever buff it to a point where it can even be used in RA/FA/alliance battle. And there's a high chance it won't, just look at all the other nerfed smite skills sitting there doing nothing.

I said a SINGLE smiter's boon monk in a later post. Its only truly overpowered when there are a lot of them.

Wait, so if you make the skill description something like: "There can only be one copy of this skill in your team" makes it "balanced"?

Winterclaw · Aug 21, 2008, 09:16 PM // 21:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aera Lure

Anet needs to learn to balance hopefully before GW2 comes out. Clearly they know how to nerf and buff, but they lack subtlety and too many skills fall into oblivion or rise to overuse.

I think it'd be more likely that half of the shut-ins that play GW will get a date with an actual member of the opposite sex before that happens.

Anyways, I think it would have been better if they upped the recharge a little on smiters boon and then limited the number of spells it would work with. Either that or completely change the functionality.

FrAnt1c² · Aug 21, 2008, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Yes propably, + recharge and + casting time would have been better, easier to interupt and if you remove the enchant it takes longer for the smiter to re-enchant himself...

Daf · Aug 21, 2008, 09:21 PM // 21:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by C. Seer

• Updated the AI for Heroes and henchmen to fix an issue that caused them to occasionally become confused and run in circles.

I laughed so hard with that.

pretty good update

Abedeus · Aug 21, 2008, 09:23 PM // 21:23

I think most of the people telling "nerf was needed" are forgetting one thing.

Balancing - okay.

STOMPING IT TO THE GROUND WITH 15 TON HAMMER IS WRONG. And then kicking it and tearing off it's limbs also.

They could just make it so recharge was, like, 35 seconds. So with +20% enchanting you would have a duration/recharge ratio almost 1:1 instead of 3:1. Or raise energy to 10. Or cast time to 1 second + 20 seconds recharge. I mean, come on - making a skill 270 times weaker IS EXTREMELY STUPID.

Snow Bunny · Aug 21, 2008, 09:25 PM // 21:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

STOMPING IT TO THE GROUND WITH 15 TON HAMMER IS WRONG. And then kicking it and tearing off it's limbs also.

You're right Abedeus. We should have stomped it into the ground with a 90 TON hammer, 90 to represent each second of its recharge. Besides kicking it and tearing off its limbs, we then should have fed it to pittbulls.

I propose it inflicts exhaustion as well.

Taurucis · Aug 21, 2008, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

So to all of you saying that this nerf was unnecessary, no u.

It's not that the nerf was unnecessary, it's more like they went overboard. As a lot of people say... they took an OP'ed skill, and turned it into garbage, instead of turning it into something neither OP'ed, and neither garbage.

The Meth · Aug 21, 2008, 09:29 PM // 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

I think most of the people telling "nerf was needed" is forgetting one thing.

Balancing - okay.

STOMPING IT TO THE GROUND WITH 15 TON HAMMER IS WRONG. And then kicking it and tearing off it's limbs also.

They could just make it so recharge was, like, 35 seconds. So with +20% enchanting you would have a duration/recharge ratio almost 1:1 instead of 3:1. Or raise energy to 10. Or cast time to 1 second + 20 seconds recharge. I mean, come on - making a skill 270 times weaker IS EXTREMELY STUPID.

Yes, it was harsh. But its MUCH worse for the game to have 1 skill overpowered then to have 1 skill underpowered. I'm pretty sure izzy will try to make it less worthless later, but right now he didn't want to mess around testing and possibly leave it still overpowered and abused for PvP. So nerf it into the ground for now and buff its was back up later.

Most of the nerfs you listed would make almost no difference btw. It would still leave it overpowered. Energy wasn't a problem, the monks can spend 5 more any time. Recharge doesn't matter as long as you have 1:1 because you can pretty much prevent any stripping of enchants by covering yourself up a few times. 1s cast time wouldn't help much as far as interrupts go because its self target, any monk could take 5 steps back out of interrupt range and cast it.

Abedeus · Aug 21, 2008, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Quote:

I propose it inflicts exhaustion as well.

Meh, I already proposed it. Then skill would be 2700 times weaker.

Quote:

It's not that the nerf was unnecessary, it's more like they went overboard. As a lot of people say... they took an OP'ed skill, and turned it into garbage, instead of turning it into something neither OP'ed, and neither garbage.

It's called BALANCED. Not OP and not garbage = balanced skill. I know, it's hard to remember that word, seeing as almost nothing is balanced out correctly except for some old old skills like Eviscerate or Restore Conditions...

Quote:

Recharge doesn't matter as long as you have 1:1 because you can pretty much prevent any stripping of enchants by covering yourself up a few times.

Shattering Sin says hi, Pain of Disenchantment, Strip Enchantments, Rend Enchantments say hallo too. I mean, a half decent mesmer would shatter it as soon as monk puts it up. I mean, monks DON'T have infinite energy to cover themselves with 6 enchantments.

How about 1:1 and 10 energy? Then it would be...decent. I mean monk can't spam 10 energy skills all the time, can he.

MagmaRed · Aug 21, 2008, 09:30 PM // 21:30

I'd think a 30 second duration is fine. To 'balance' it, make the recharge 45 seconds. This would mean even if it wasn't removed, it wouldn't be up at all time. If it was removed, it would be down for a LONG time. Smiting having a support role was a great idea. I loved the skill when it was first introduced, as it allowed someone to deal some decent damage while still providing team support. Maybe bump the energy cost to 10, or 15 at most, and increase cast time to 1 second, 2 at most.

Or, to stick with Izzy's nerf strategy, make it like the old Healer's Boon. Maintained enchantment that cut into the enegry regen. Only works for x number of spells, and then ends the enchantment. With a cut in energy regen, it would be harder to spam spells, and with it ending after a small number of uses, it would need to be reapplied frequently.

I see a LOT of possible nerfs that would still make it useable, and some which would give an easy PvE/PvP split that would still work nicely.

Winterclaw · Aug 21, 2008, 09:34 PM // 21:34

But appearently they wanted it to be garbage Taurucis and took the easy way out. Why? I have no clue.

Axagoth Baal · Aug 21, 2008, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Smiter's Boon needed some nerf. RaO Ranger teams were too powerful. But this is too much and completely eliminates the skill from the game. I'd rather see a smaller nerf to S. Boon and a little nerf to RaO. The whole build would be a bit without making a skill useless.

Anyway I'm sure it's not a perma-update, at least about the boon.

Bocjo Bassannn · Aug 21, 2008, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrAnt1c²

Wait, so if you make the skill description something like: "There can only be one copy of this skill in your team" makes it "balanced"?

Carefull I made this suggestion along with several others in a post earlier in this thread that was removed without so much as a pm as to why from some random guru mod that obviously didnt take his/her happy pill today......

I totaly agree... in fact I went a step farther... in pvp areas why not simply restrict the number of any character class on a team. Would that not also eliminate tons and tons of the overpowered combos that have been a source for such huge debates over the last few years?

I wonder how overpowered a team would be if you were not allowed more than one character class of any type to any match in any pvp area?...... Imagine having to use .... 1 monk... 1 rit and 1 para just to keep your team up in ha..... I all the sudden see skill meaning something .... and build wars screeching to a halt.... But hey if your gonna dream dream big right......

cgruber · Aug 21, 2008, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Let me put this out to you all, because it's quite apparent that a lot of you don't understand the nerf.

If any of you have been GvGing at all recently, you would have come into contact with this skill and hate it dearly.

With the build it was in, it allowed for 4 monks to smite off damage from RaO axe rangers spamming deep wound and interrupts, normally inevitably eating up small prots and interrupting key skills.

You couldn't use condition pressure or conditions at all; the monks would smite it off for a lot of damage (80+). You couldn't overload them with hexes; the same would happen.

All the while, your midline, so responsible for opening the way for damage on the opposite team, was useless. If your warrior opened up with attacks, he'd frenzy and have Reversal of Damage and god-knows-what-else smite skills blow him up.

It was terrible and boring to play against.

So to all of you saying that this nerf was unnecessary, no u.

I have played against quite a few times in recent weeks but all it takes is a rend to destroy any healing potential those monks had. Theres a reason they run quad monk, it's because they heal for shit. I'm not saying smiter's boon didn't deserve a nerf to some degree, hell simply putting a 60 second recharge on it would be quite effective.

Sai Rith · Aug 21, 2008, 09:39 PM // 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

But appearently they wanted it to be garbage Taurucis and took the easy way out. Why? I have no clue.

No, they wanted it to be garbage until the monthly ends. As stated numerous times, Smiter's Boon was OP, and caused an IMBA mix of Offense AND Defense, all due to ONE skill. Regarding that and the new meta change (thanks to gvG updates by Izzy <3), Smiter's Boon was common skill, and a game-breaking one. The upcoming monthly was probably gonna involve many Smiters. With that being said, Izzy did the right move to fix it. After the monthly, I am sure positive (99.9% sure to be exact), it will be tampered with, so it will be balanced, or at least usable to an extent.

Nude Nira · Aug 21, 2008, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spazzer

We could make a shovespike guild!

Team Apathy already did that...and they lost. If they had won, probally a different story.

The Meth · Aug 21, 2008, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

Shattering Sin says hi, Pain of Disenchantment, Strip Enchantments, Rend Enchantments say hallo too. I mean, a half decent mesmer would shatter it as soon as monk puts it up. I mean, monks DON'T have infinite energy to cover themselves with 6 enchantments.

How about 1:1 and 10 energy? Then it would be...decent. I mean monk can't spam 10 energy skills all the time, can he.

If you are against 1 monk, sure. How are you gonna stop 3-4+ monks? Is your hypothetical team half mesmers? I think a monk could still upkeep it with reduced time and 10 energy, remember they have castigation signet, which would basically make the cast free every 15 seconds. I'm sure we will be testing changes such as that a few weeks from now, but for the time being Izzy decided the skill needed to go.

Crimso · Aug 21, 2008, 09:51 PM // 21:51

I think it was a badly designed skill to begin with, it was more valued in the smiting builds than the elite skills used. Smiters Boon itself qualifies as an elite skill in my opinion since it was basically a smiting version of healers boon with a slightly different effect.