Curse

jazilla · Dec 15, 2011, 05:19 PM // 17:19

Does anyone here argue that the Ele SHOULDN'T be the main damage dealer again? I'd like to see some reasons why the initial "nuker" of the game shouldn't fill that role anymore?

zwei2stein · Dec 15, 2011, 05:53 PM // 17:53

Did someone seriously claim Enfeebling Blood is weak skill?

Feeble minds theese days...

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazilla

Does anyone here argue that the Ele SHOULDN'T be the main damage dealer again? I'd like to see some reasons why the initial "nuker" of the game shouldn't fill that role anymore?

Here.

Elementalist SHOULDN'T be The damage dealer.

Why? Because there are 9 other classes that need reason to exist. There should should not be "main" class for anything.

Also, his initial role (as in, role to which elementalist was most suited in begining, hence wards/blinds/snares) was 75% support/control.

Elementalist has poor synergy with other classes. Zero synergy to be specific. While physicals can enjoy being helped out by other classes and thus provide motivation for more diverse setups, elementalist just does not need anyone else in party than elementalists to be effective.

News skills are prime example. Eles now can provide interesting buffs to alies. But what can allies do for eles besides vacating party slot in favor of another ele?

(that was not that hard, was it?)

Now, elementalist being powerfull damage dealer again? That is commendable effort.

Martin Alvito · Dec 15, 2011, 07:24 PM // 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Why? Because there are 9 other classes that need reason to exist. There should should not be "main" class for anything.

That's an impossibility due to the design of the game. The game revolves around two conditions: not dying and killing monsters. The mechanics of those conditions preclude having ten genuinely useful classes in PvE.

Either team members are self-sufficient, or they need someone to keep them upright. If self-sufficiency is possible, only classes which can provide it will be included. If not, some class is going to be most effective at keeping people alive, and will see play in those slots at the expense of other classes.

Some combination of skills and tactics is going to kill the monsters faster than all other combinations. In other words, an optimal team build exists for any given purpose. Only a limited number of possible purposes are profitable and therefore see replay, with the result being that some classes see play and others get marginalized.

If there were enough profitable areas to farm and enough variability across those farms, then it would be possible for all classes to have a use. Unfortunately, that requires precisely balancing the time -> reward function across a bunch of endgame content areas, and that just isn't going to happen. Doing so would be overly costly to the developer, and would spread the player base out even more thinly.

In principle it's possible to have all ten classes see play in PvP if there are enough viable builds, but it turns out that it's very difficult to create such diversity in a dog-eat-dog competitive environment. Players are too incentivized to find the optimal build and tactics.

urania · Dec 15, 2011, 07:25 PM // 19:25

big update hit gw. guess it's the update they 'accidentally' leaked a week ago?

HigherMinion · Dec 15, 2011, 07:32 PM // 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

big update hit gw. guess it's the update they 'accidentally' leaked a week ago?

It's loading now. If it isn't the ele update, I will be very cross with you.

EDIT: Cross >: (

zwei2stein · Dec 15, 2011, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

If there were enough profitable areas to farm and enough variability across those farms, then it would be possible for all classes to have a use. Unfortunately, that requires precisely balancing the time -> reward function across a bunch of endgame content areas, and that just isn't going to happen. Doing so would be overly costly to the developer, and would spread the player base out even more thinly.

In principle it's possible to have all ten classes see play in PvP if there are enough viable builds, but it turns out that it's very difficult to create such diversity in a dog-eat-dog competitive environment. Players are too incentivized to find the optimal build and tactics.

Lets just not consider farming (which produces only abominable builds) and PvP (where this kind of ballance is indeed not worth issues and effort).

I am more talking about general PvE. Anytime you look for PUG or pick your heroes - there you have a bit more leeway with power levels and group composition (as no-one has desire to wait hours to get perfect party).

What is undesirable is to create enviroment where most players can agree that certain class is simply must-have.

Yes, we have monks and their monopoly at keeping people alive ... two party slots permanently occupied. I do not think we would ever want some of remaining slots reserved for another class.

That is, of course, overblown concern, considering age of game.

jazilla · Dec 15, 2011, 09:32 PM // 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Lets just not consider farming (which produces only abominable builds) and PvP (where this kind of ballance is indeed not worth issues and effort).

I am more talking about general PvE. Anytime you look for PUG or pick your heroes - there you have a bit more leeway with power levels and group composition (as no-one has desire to wait hours to get perfect party).

What is undesirable is to create enviroment where most players can agree that certain class is simply must-have.

Yes, we have monks and their monopoly at keeping people alive ... two party slots permanently occupied. I do not think we would ever want some of remaining slots reserved for another class.

That is, of course, overblown concern, considering age of game.

I never take monks into PvE with heroes. I use N/Rt healers and Mesmer heroes and their hex removal. There is no monopoly on what gets in really.

Malganis · Dec 15, 2011, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by HigherMinion

It's loading now. If it isn't the ele update, I will be very cross with you.

EDIT: Cross >: (

Its the Wintersday update. Did you miss the post that said this Ele update would be after Wintersday?

Jeydra · Dec 16, 2011, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by HigherMinion

Mistrust deals 140dmg vs Destroyers whilst Searing Flames does 0! Tadah!

And Searing Flames does I-don't-know-how-much to Mantid Diggers while Mistrust does 0

And yes, Enfeebling Blood is a weak skill. If you're having trouble with melee, use Aegis. If you're STILL having trouble with melee (and it's not your technique ...), use an Ineptitude Mesmer. Monk heroes definitely do not have a monopoly on keeping people alive; I regularly use one only and have recently been trying to use none. There is something of a monopoly on what gets in, however. I would never run without Ritualists and seldom go without Necromancers, Mesmers and (yes) Elementalists.

drkn · Dec 16, 2011, 01:52 AM // 01:52

Quote:

I never take monks into PvE with heroes. I use N/Rt healers and Mesmer heroes and their hex removal. There is no monopoly on what gets in really.

So you always have two (?) slots reserved for necros turned into healers via terribly broken secondary profession mechanics and/or a mesmer who's dining on hexes, probably throwing some shutdown/armor-ignoring skills in the meantime.

Still, you have your staple. You need a healer, and there are three generally used archetypes of healers used across GW; two of them are not even a primary monk or ritualist. This leads to a conclusion that, actually, N/Rt and E/Mo being so good at healing might be somewhat beneficial to the game itself - it creates some diversity, without the need to rely on just one (actually two, after the dawning of Factions) class that can heal and protect the party well enough to survive the hard mode elite areas.
Without N/Rt and E/Mo, monks would, pretty much, be a must in every party (rits might be acceptable, but probably would be a bit frowned upon, and monks would be preferred). This would, actually, further lead to more players picking monk as their main, or at least setting up a viable secondary monk character, what coupled with the great demand for monk heroes, would make the prices of monk runes skyrocket through the roof, making it much harder to set up a proper monk hero/character for new players.
The above rant is a bit off-topic, but not so much - its conclusion lies in my belief that E/Mo infusers/bonders shouldn't be erased, though they should be nerfed a bit, just the same as N/Rt healers. Primary monks and ritualists should hold the upper hand when it comes to keeping people alive, but other professions - or, for the very least, other caster professions - should be able to contribute to it as well, fulfilling the role of an off-healer, or becoming the main healer for not-so-high-end content. For example, it might be fun to rework some of the useless monk or rit healing spells so that they would become useful in the hands of a primary mesmer, with high fast casting, so that yet another class could fill the niche of party's healer - but, keep in mind, still inferior than primary healer classes.
I realise it's too late for such a drastic change and balancing the healing/support power of classes and their mixes (which, as i like to point out, are the greatest problem when it comes to balancing GW), i'll end up with a reference to Jazilla - be it monk or necromancer, everyone has to dedicate a slot or two for a toon that primarily focuses on keeping the red bars up. It makes those classes/people who can roll a healing role invaluable and necessary, giving them the monopoly. I know about events held out for fun when everone in the party is of the same profession, but has anyone ever completed any HM elite area with only warriors, without resorting to severely overpowered consumables or other broken things like SY or perma?
This only proves that, god-mode broken mechanics aside, healers - though not necessarily monks - got monopoly of getting into virtually every party. And the opposite of this is what i'm looking forward to in GW2.

Swingline · Dec 16, 2011, 02:31 AM // 02:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Yes - but it doesn't deal 34 damage. That is blatant exaggeration and obscures the differences, viz. if Searing Flames got buffed to deal 1060 damage per hit, it is going to be hugely overpowered even though it still "only does full damage in some cases".

If Swingline wants to argue that Searing Flames / Elementalist damage in general is underpowered, he ought to do it fairly.

Your just arguing for the sake of arguing Jeydra. At least Elnino got the point.

Lanier · Dec 16, 2011, 05:30 AM // 05:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

And yes, Enfeebling Blood is a weak skill. If you're having trouble with melee, use Aegis. If you're STILL having trouble with melee (and it's not your technique ...), use an Ineptitude Mesmer.

err, no. Enfeebling blood is very, very good. It alone makes melees a piece of cake to defend against. Aegis is good too... but I would still rather have enfeebling in my party due to the short duration of aegis. Then again, I usually use both because I like excessive defense. As for the ineptitude mesmer comparison... no, just no. You can't tell someone to replace a skill (enfeebling blood) with an entirely new character. Personally, I find illusion mesmers to be a waste of a party slot anyway. Enfeebling blood is easy enough to place on just about any character in the party (a smite monk, a dom mesmer, an ele, a SoGM rit, etc.), and I would far rather bring a single, powerful non-elite melee shutdown skill (or 2 if you want to count my party's copy of aegis) than an ineptitude mesmer.

Jeydra · Dec 16, 2011, 08:29 AM // 08:29

@Swingline - maybe, but I still feel it's grossly unfair that you claim Searing Flames does 34 damage while Mistrust does 142.

@Lanier - Ineptitude Mesmers are bad, I completely agree, but in certain areas where there are plenty of melee mobs I use them for damage. Damage, not defense. The fact that they double as defense is just icing on the cake.

Enfeebling Blood is still bad. Melee monsters generally don't pose enough of a threat to warrant taking more than one copy of Aegis. You have plenty of time; in that 11s of Aegis you can not only kill some of those monsters, you can fix the aggro of the rest onto something disposable (minions, spirits, EBVAS). Enfeebling Blood cannot be setup before aggro, does not necessarily hit all targets (unlike Aegis, which automatically protects the entire party), involves health sacrifice, locks down a primary or secondary (again unlike Aegis, because you are either running ST Prot when you have Displacement and Shelter, or you need Prot Spirit anyway; personally most of my available secondary profession space goes into "Fall Back", I have 3 copies in the team) and does not protect against stuff like Savage Slash, Savage Shot, Skull Crack and Temple Strike.

tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.

zwei2stein · Dec 16, 2011, 09:19 AM // 09:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.

Since when is this "either or" situation? Three copies of FB is quite overkill.

Besides, Enfeebling Blood also gives protection to non party members (minions, spirits, escorted npc). That is very valuable.

There are few mobs with skills that require blocking on your side.

Jeydra · Dec 16, 2011, 10:54 AM // 10:54

Aegis > Enfeebling Blood like 99.99% of the time, zzz. I use three copies of Fall Back because two copies leads to downtime; with the standard 9-spec Command you have 4s downtime. To get to no downtime you need like 14 Command, which in turn forces you to use Paragons, which are in general subpar heroes. Three FBs also helps patch up any lagging heroes (e.g. I hit one Fall Back and someone isn't affected, I can hit another and get the entire party running and still not have downtime).

Minions don't need defending, if they live great and if they die so be it, triggers Death Nova too. Spirits don't die easily with their massive health (Spawning Power ftw) and can be resummoned. Escorted NPCs also should not die with the massive health and armour they seem to have for some reason, and besides like all other characters the real threat to them are casters, not melee.

Sure there are a few skills that hit harder when blocked, but they are all way less dangerous than the ones that hit harder when not blocked. What's the strongest skill out there that hits harder when blocked anyway, Irresistible Blow? How is that even comparable to Savage Shot / Temple Strike / Skull Crack etc?

tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.

Elnino · Dec 16, 2011, 12:03 PM // 12:03

So now it's Aegis vs. EB huh?

Aegis being the mathematically superior skill doesn't mean that EB is a weak skill. I personally bring both because I can fit them in nicely into my team build.

Kunder · Dec 16, 2011, 12:43 PM // 12:43

1 EB is enough to have 100% uptime. You need 3x Aegis for that, which translates into 3 heroes that need to take a secondary and invest lots of attribute points that are otherwise useless. I can use those to kill things faster or move around faster.

EB working on minions can't be overstated if you use them. With EB nothing can kill minions other than spell casters with strong nuking abilities. Furthermore, the better player you are the more damage that the minions take in your place. Many battles not a single of my party members comes under attack from an enemy, Aegis would be useless. If you want minions to be able to tank through HM DoA, you need something like EB.

Mathematically EB is not inferior to Aegis in protective ability, it is quite comparable if not better in some instances. Aegis is 50% miss chance, EB is -66% damage plus -1 attributes (another -3-5% on average probably). Aegis has the side benefit of working vs attack skills and adrenaline, but enemies that hit for 200 damage apiece are dealing 90% of their damage with what EB is reducing. Unless the enemy is using interruption skills that need to be blocked I would put EB firmly ahead of Aegis. EB is also consistent unlike Aegis where there is a 12.5% chance of 3 of those hits getting through in a row and killing a character quickly. Not terribly likely in individual battles but over the course of an area it can easily translate into an extra death.

Gill Halendt · Dec 16, 2011, 12:57 PM // 12:57

So, basically, some people are trying to say that Weakness (in this case, mantainable, AoE Weakness) sucks.

I might be in the wrong topic then, thought this was a thread about some December update, not "What's The Stupidest Thing You've Heard While Playing Guild Wars?"

Kunder · Dec 16, 2011, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

So, basically, some people are trying to say that Weakness (in this case, mantainable, AoE Weakness) sucks.

I might be in the wrong topic then, thought this was a thread about some December update, not "What's The Stupidest Thing You've Heard While Playing Guild Wars?"

Better. AoE maintainable Weakness for 1e in an attribute that some 75% of GW players already have at 16-19 on a character in their group.

qazwersder · Dec 16, 2011, 02:10 PM // 14:10

I think its important to remember that some skills/classes are overpowered and not that the majority are underpowered.

If we say that everything needs a buff apart from Mes, rits and dervs, maybe its that mes, rits and dervs need a nerf.

Its also important to remember not all classes have the same role or achieve things in the same way. They are meant to be played differently.