Curse

Cuilan · Mar 01, 2011, 03:23 PM // 15:23

Soldier's Fury has two 33%'s of things physicals would want, so one can say that skill is superior of the three. I don't see that skill as niche at all. There's far more enchantment removal in this game than there are ways of shutting down shouts/echo.

Khomet Si Netjer · Mar 01, 2011, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

It's hard to take you seriously when -20 AL is such a sticking point. It's so completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of PvE to a midliner with 106 armor, especially when your class is usually boosting the entire party's armor in some way or another. It's a far lesser cost than not having your IAS ready to go at start of combat, or worse in the elite's case, having 25% vs 33% attack rate. Leave it for people with some understanding of the game to discuss how paragons might be usefully improved.

Your false assumptions are the problem.
You say that -20 armor is no big deal for a midliner, but that is because you are narrow minded. Let's imagine that I want to use Soldier's Fury or Aggressive Refrain on my paragon, and I want to use a scythe, or daggers, or a sword or axe or hammer. With normal armor levels that would be viable, but with -20 armor the paragon is running into melee with 60AL, or 76AL if he has a shield and a one handed weapon and attribute points to use it. The warrior will have 100-116AL, and the dervish 80+ depending on mysticism. (not counting insignias)
So what you have done with your assumption is remove some kinds of play from being viable options. For those with short memories, sword-wielding paragons with Soldier's Fury were used in HA for a while. This is no longer seen because of the rampant nerfing. Rangers have been doing this for a long time with Rampage As One... this is not really an option for paragons though because of the crippled IAS.

No other profession has to deal with -20 armor to get faster attack speed, it is not balanced to punish paragons in this way. And the double damage IAS skills that warriors have need to go as well, otherwise dervishes will make them obsolete.

Captain Bulldozer · Mar 01, 2011, 07:43 PM // 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khomet Si Netjer

Your false assumptions are the problem.
You say that -20 armor is no big deal for a midliner, but that is because you are narrow minded. Let's imagine that I want to use Soldier's Fury or Aggressive Refrain on my paragon, and I want to use a scythe, or daggers, or a sword or axe or hammer. With normal armor levels that would be viable, but with -20 armor the paragon is running into melee with 60AL, or 76AL if he has a shield and a one handed weapon and attribute points to use it. The warrior will have 100-116AL, and the dervish 80+ depending on mysticism. (not counting insignias)
So what you have done with your assumption is remove some kinds of play from being viable options. For those with short memories, sword-wielding paragons with Soldier's Fury were used in HA for a while. This is no longer seen because of the rampant nerfing. Rangers have been doing this for a long time with Rampage As One... this is not really an option for paragons though because of the crippled IAS.

I agree with you. The -20 armor nerf was a bad way of fixing the application of cracked armor. A non-removable IAS which can be kept up permanently during battle by just playing normally (never using the skill a second time) is too powerful and needs a healthy drawback. The drawbacks used to be cracked armor (which was easily removed) and a 25e cost. I'd say the cost should be lowered to 5e, and the reapplication effect should be done away with, or at the very least made to require something more significant than a shout. Why should a leadership oriented profession be relegated to the back/mid line anyway? Plenty of leaders are up front in the thick of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khomet Si Netjer

No other profession has to deal with -20 armor to get faster attack speed, it is not balanced to punish paragons in this way. And the double damage IAS skills that warriors have need to go as well, otherwise dervishes will make them obsolete.

I think the warrior IAS skills are generally quite well balanced. The new derv skills need some adjusting still (which I think its reasonable to expect to see in the near future), so let's wait til we see how it plays out. Certainly the paragon skills are crappy in comparison, and those should receive some reworking. I myself wonder why it is that, currently, the leadership profession works best when there are lots of them together. That's not how it works normally... too many brass hats in the room makes things worse. Paragons should be party buff machines... a role that they don't quite occupy at present.

Kaida the Heartless · Mar 01, 2011, 07:49 PM // 19:49

Paragons need to stay nerfed. They synergize to well with each other to be buffed. They have already been through a skill overhaul because they were so unstoppable.

Honestly, do I need to make some comparisons in favor of the Paragon? The list would be just as long.

Khomet Si Netjer · Mar 01, 2011, 08:11 PM // 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

Paragons need to stay nerfed. They synergize to well with each other to be buffed. They have already been through a skill overhaul because they were so unstoppable.

Honestly, do I need to make some comparisons in favor of the Paragon? The list would be just as long.

all professions tend to synergize well with one another... consider the way necromancer teams steamroll pve, or the way ritualist teams do the same. Should we nerf those because they work well together? To put it bluntly... your logic sucks.

Mednes · Mar 01, 2011, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

Paragons need to stay nerfed. They synergize to well with each other to be buffed. They have already been through a skill overhaul because they were so unstoppable.

Honestly, do I need to make some comparisons in favor of the Paragon? The list would be just as long.

So basically Paragons should be limited to 1 build (imba) so they stay balanced, while other profs can have more builds? Then you don't even need to play the Paragon since you only can play 1 build in the whole game...
Not saying that Paragons CAN'T play other builds, but let's be realistic, why should you go something else when you know other professions can do it better and Imbagon is better?

That's just unfair.

Cuilan · Mar 01, 2011, 09:46 PM // 21:46

Hey guys, let's see your paragon Onslaught bars, huh? Doesn't require a lot of attribute points and I haven't seen any that are all that great for the dervish. Amaze me.

Rites · Mar 01, 2011, 09:49 PM // 21:49

it still boils down to a paragon is MEANT to be a midliner NOT a warrior/derv replacement

THAT is the reasoning behind the AR

BUT since you are being stubborn about it---
80 + 16 = 96
subtract the 20 = 76 (with shield still in hand)
but remember to add the bonus from centurions for your shouts = 86
Only thinking of the 2 main areas hit which are chest and waist/pants
i dont know anyone that puts +AR to all pieces

and seriously, 20 AR in my opinion isnt that much of a difference, my ranger survives melee builds just fine and thats only 70 AR

your AR doesn't really seem to fall below that which the paragon is supposed to have anyway cuz it is a MID-LINER

if the AR is really that much of an issue, then play W/P or D/P instead of the other way around

Racthoh · Mar 01, 2011, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mednes

Not saying that Paragons CAN'T play other builds, but let's be realistic, why should you go something else when you know other professions can do it better and Imbagon is better?

Because playing the same 8 skills gets tiring after a while, even if your standard of fun is measured by a build's successfulness.

MisterB · Mar 01, 2011, 10:04 PM // 22:04

You all know that Aggressive Refrain and/or Soldier's Fury paired with Centurion's insignia is -10 armor, right? Right?!

Rites · Mar 01, 2011, 10:20 PM // 22:20

ok, lets look at this another way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterB

Frenzy and Primal Rage double damage to the user. Flurry reduces damage dealt by 25%.

all physical classes have IAS', some are conditional (rangers need pets for their better IAS), others have drwbacks (I believe frenzy causes wars to have to suffer double damage). BUT they have to be recast when the duration ends.
the paragon IAS is a little different. unlike all the other classes, a paragon's main IAS (aggressive refrain) is 100% sustainable once cast. as long as a shout ends, it is refreshed. now another tidbit to add to this is the fact that the shout does NOT have to be from that specific paragon, ANY member of the team with shout skills can help the paragon maintain its aggressive refrain as long as said skill shows up on the monitor. considering how powerful this effectively makes aggressive refrain, it is my thought that the devs decided they needed a drawback of roughly equal value, thus the reduction in armor.

Side note: i would take the armor reduction over double damage anyday, specially if i could maintain my IAS indefinitely

/fixed

and this is roughly the same as my original arguement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mednes

Let's take an example:
I've done all campaigns in NM. Then I decide to do everything (missions, VQ etc.) in HM. Then I'm forced to play imbagon, becuase you need it otherwise you're not that effective. If you want to do P/R with a pet in HM you're not doing your para 'JOB'. If you bring a melee weapon you deal less damage than other profs would.

So you're forced to play imba in HM otherwise the Paragon would be the weaker version of other profs.

MisterB · Mar 01, 2011, 10:23 PM // 22:23

Frenzy and Primal Rage double damage to the user. Flurry reduces damage dealt by 25%.

Mednes · Mar 01, 2011, 10:28 PM // 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racthoh

Because playing the same 8 skills gets tiring after a while, even if your standard of fun is measured by a build's successfulness.

Exactly, so you're 'forced' to play another build becuase of the boredom. But at the same time other builds are less effective, thus making you go back to the imba.

Let's take an example:
I've done all campaigns in NM. Then I decide to do everything (missions, VQ etc.) in HM. Then I'm forced to play imbagon, becuase you need it otherwise you're not that effective. If you want to do P/R with a pet in HM you're not doing your para 'job'. If you bring a melee weapon you deal less damage than other profs would.

So you're forced to play imba in HM otherwise the Paragon would be the weaker version of other profs.

[email protected]!k3 · Mar 02, 2011, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Even If some of the refrains are maintainable like Aggressive, Burning, etc. The amount of ways to keep them are extremely limited and in certain situations impractical. For example, let's say you got a build that needs AR, so you decide to bring two shouts to upkeep them (I'll use Energy and Adrenaline for the sake of the argument) You bring "GftE!" and Anthem of Flame, sounds great right? All right let's put our Para in a situation, such as DoA, those little beetle critters are going to spam you blindness or you get Soothing Images casted on you; that means so adrenaline gain, so no "GftE!" which also denies you your precious energy gain from leadership, that's one down. Anthem of Flame, tsk-tsk, if you think this'll keep your energy up, Even with 16 in leadership your only getting a net energy of +3e. Again in DoA, you encounter a mesmer... I spit on your energy gain from Anthem of Flame and trying to recast AR or anything else at that moment. (Oh that gives me the shivers of ever being in that situation!) Now, lets put both of them in a convenient location where the para is basically as useful as nipples on a breastplate. SoO, not only are you getting abused by those trigger-happy, blind-surging, spammer wizards, but your getting shut down by the mesmers who eat your energy away like a plump man in a buffet. What are you expected to do then? the Dervish has unconditional energy gain that rivals the ranger's expertise and if we're accounting a zealous scythe against a zealous spear... think about the children, how will we feed our poor children the vital energy that they oh-so-need! (not to mention that Dervs have a killer system of adrenaline skills, that puts the para's to shame. C'mon a adrenaline spell! rofl) Anywho... Sorry for the big block of text, and I hope I enlightened (hopefully, entertained.) the few who so kindly read this.

Rites · Mar 02, 2011, 05:27 AM // 05:27

the situation you just described is not just for paragons.... all classes have to worry about their e-management and adrenaline in DoA, but as far as this post goes, this wasn't the arguement.
why are you going DoA with only 2 paras anyway? only a fool thinks that they can do DoA with only a midline physical team with no hex removals.

WarcryOfTruth · Mar 02, 2011, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mednes

Exactly, so you're 'forced' to play another build becuase of the boredom. But at the same time other builds are less effective, thus making you go back to the imba.

Let's take an example:
I've done all campaigns in NM. Then I decide to do everything (missions, VQ etc.) in HM. Then I'm forced to play imbagon, becuase you need it otherwise you're not that effective. If you want to do P/R with a pet in HM you're not doing your para 'job'. If you bring a melee weapon you deal less damage than other profs would.

So you're forced to play imba in HM otherwise the Paragon would be the weaker version of other profs.

I have never felt forced to Imbagon for anything I've ever done, elite areas or otherwise, what does your post even mean?

Rites · Mar 02, 2011, 05:59 AM // 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarcryOfTruth

I have never felt forced to Imbagon for anything I've ever done, elite areas or otherwise, what does your post even mean?

the general consensus is that imbagon is the ONLY viable build for paras

WarcryOfTruth · Mar 02, 2011, 06:42 AM // 06:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rites

the general consensus is that imbagon is the ONLY viable build for paras

That's another thing I never understood.

Racthoh · Mar 02, 2011, 09:49 AM // 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mednes

Let's take an example:
I've done all campaigns in NM. Then I decide to do everything (missions, VQ etc.) in HM. Then I'm forced to play imbagon, becuase you need it otherwise you're not that effective. If you want to do P/R with a pet in HM you're not doing your para 'job'. If you bring a melee weapon you deal less damage than other profs would.

The point of my original post was directed more at the community that feels they're obligated to run the most effective build at all times, because nowadays "fun" and "effectiveness" are apparently interchangeable. The tone of your post suggests you PUG a lot; "need", "forced", "Save Yourselves!" is hardly a necessity for clearing Hard Mode content. Players had their Vanquisher and Guardian titles well before the introduction of PvE skills. I know I was chaining Defensive Anthems with Morgahn originally, and boy before they changed Angelic Bond was that skill ever awesome in Eternal Grove. With half the party's bar at your disposal there's no reason why you can't build against the particular challenge ahead. Honestly when I look at some of the builds used to speed clear they look like a random mish mash of skills and yet they're brutally effective at getting the job done. While I hate the concept entirely that essence of analyst goes to show you can make something work in the right area with enough tweaks.

Khomet Si Netjer · Mar 02, 2011, 01:11 PM // 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rites

it still boils down to a paragon is MEANT to be a midliner NOT a warrior/derv replacement

THAT is the reasoning behind the AR

BUT since you are being stubborn about it---
80 + 16 = 96
subtract the 20 = 76 (with shield still in hand)
but remember to add the bonus from centurions for your shouts = 86
Only thinking of the 2 main areas hit which are chest and waist/pants
i dont know anyone that puts +AR to all pieces

and seriously, 20 AR in my opinion isnt that much of a difference, my ranger survives melee builds just fine and thats only 70 AR

your AR doesn't really seem to fall below that which the paragon is supposed to have anyway cuz it is a MID-LINER

if the AR is really that much of an issue, then play W/P or D/P instead of the other way around

So you are saying that a ranged attacker should have less armor than a melee attacker. If a paragon (AL80 + 16 from shield) throws spears, he should get -20 armor because spears are oh-so-powerful and they deliver ranged damage. (OMG!) So you say we should give him 60-76 armor to make things fair. However if the warrior picks up the same spear and loads up a convenient IAS (flail for example) he can be dishing out the same spear damage or more with 116AL. If the warrior has 116AL while throwing spears that's okay, but when the paragon does it he must be punished and receive an armor penalty? What about Ranger spearchuckers? Or spear wielding Assassins? Or spear-throwing Spirit's Strength ritualists? Other characters can become ranged attackers and fulfill the same ranged-damage role as the paragon, almost always doing more damage as well, and they do not have to suffer this armor penalty. This was created purely as a method of punishing paragons based on perceived PvP imbalance... and what they have done is imbalance things further. Here's where your "FRONT-LINER" / "MID-LINER" logic fails completely... any profession can pick up a "FRONT-LINER" or "MID-LINER" weapon and use it and this is even more true in Guild Wars 2 where a character's role and skills are determined by the weapon he wields.