Curse

Patccmoi · Mar 16, 2007, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

It's BS because it's an attempt to sweep the idea that elementalists can really suffer from enhanment removal under the proverbial carpet. - EDIT - I do aplogize for not making that more clear. I have a bad habit of doing that.

But that is why I posted the link to wiki (I apologize for not knowing that we are being elitist against the wiki around here these days and admit that I did not take the time to read that because I really don't care what the quid pro quo of the 1337 is).

The points is that there seems to me to be many ways to remove an enchantment. This does not mean that you will face all of them as some of you have been clever enough to catch on to. But it does vqalidate the wild theory that you will encounter other forms of enchantment removal, thereby unsweeping the idea that the only enchanment removal you will ever face as an elementalist using long recharging enchanments will be insiginificant.

Try an elemental attunement elemenatlist in GvG and see how often you get it stripped. It may not be every time it's up but it will be often enough to significiantly hinder your damage output (unless you cover it well). And that was the orginal point after all wasn't it?

You should know very well that not every guild, team or player is going to adhere to the standards you have set forth.

I freely admit it may be the way that was described in the top miniscule percentile - I wouldn't really know - but the other 99% of us encounter enchanment stripping often enough to know better than to use long recharging enchanments.

And that is the reason, at least I thought, that others have stated that using long recharging enchantments in PvP was generally a bad idea. Maybe I'm totally wrong and it's really a good idea.

Maybe long recharges don't matter. Maybe you will never have any enchanments stripped. These things could be true, but I can guarantee you by way of intimate experience, that the instant you start hitting for hundreds of points of damage in rapid succession that will all change.

And what if, say, you think ahead and make a team build around it? Like, say you have an Aegis chain, that's one cover enchant reapplied every 10s or so, and unless the other team has a heavy enchant removal (like Gaze, which IS very uncommon) then you're actually quite safe.

And also consider that if the other team are using their enchantment removal to strip your attunements because you're a real treath instead of, say, removing a Spirit Bond to actually score a kill, then you're achieving something already. You're using their ressources to counter you. It's the same way that a warrior that is blind and kited all the time doesn't DIRECTLY pressure the other team, but it uses their ressources and time to counter him instead of directing them to crush your team.

I used attunements in GvG and you see good teams use them all the time too. They're really not that vulnerable (not with a cover enchant anyway) and they're worth it in general considering how big of a difference they make for energy management.

If you have a team build where they don't fit (like if it's the only enchant in your team, then i agree, an attunement IS a bad idea), well consider other options if you want an Ele, like a Mind Blaster for Fire (those can work very well without attunement), or using something like Ether Prism, dual Glyph (GoE + GoLE), etc. But in general, i never had trouble using attunements, sometimes they'll get stripped, but that's the same as a melee that gets shutdown through mass hexes or blind, etc. The thing is, sometimes they'll be up, and you just gotta make good use of them then.

Zonzai · Mar 17, 2007, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

And what if, say, you think ahead and make a team build around it? Like, say you have an Aegis chain, that's one cover enchant reapplied every 10s or so, and unless the other team has a heavy enchant removal (like Gaze, which IS very uncommon) then you're actually quite safe.

Unfortunately, I've rarely been in a situation where my guild has made their own builds. Usually they have just been borrowed from others, with modifications. But in none of those builds was an elemental attunemnt ever used effectively.

The only time I've seen elemental attunemnts used well was back in the day of air spikers or when running both ele enchantments, covering with armor of earth and doing an air/earth spike. But sadly those builds are pretty much useless in the current metagame.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

And also consider that if the other team are using their enchantment removal to strip your attunements because you're a real treath instead of, say, removing a Spirit Bond to actually score a kill, then you're achieving something already. You're using their ressources to counter you. It's the same way that a warrior that is blind and kited all the time doesn't DIRECTLY pressure the other team, but it uses their ressources and time to counter him instead of directing them to crush your team.

You make a good point Pat. I actually never thought of it like that before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

I used attunements in GvG and you see good teams use them all the time too. They're really not that vulnerable (not with a cover enchant anyway) and they're worth it in general considering how big of a difference they make for energy management.

I do see people using them, but I also see them being stripped when they are used. Not always, but often enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

If you have a team build where they don't fit (like if it's the only enchant in your team, then i agree, an attunement IS a bad idea), well consider other options if you want an Ele, like a Mind Blaster for Fire (those can work very well without attunement), or using something like Ether Prism, dual Glyph (GoE + GoLE), etc. But in general, i never had trouble using attunements, sometimes they'll get stripped, but that's the same as a melee that gets shutdown through mass hexes or blind, etc. The thing is, sometimes they'll be up, and you just gotta make good use of them then.

I know what you are talking about and I agree, having a team build with a random nuker thrown in is futile. And my complaint isn't that it can't be done, it's that when (and not if) it does happen you are useless for 45 seconds, not 15, not 20 but 45.

Ensign · Mar 17, 2007, 04:41 AM // 04:41

Attunements became much more viable with the nerf to Drain Enchantment. Shatter has pretty much always been saved for spiking since it's the strongest individual spike skill in the game...Drain was what people threw at Attunements, they actually looked for Attunements to pull since they were such consistent targets for the free energy. But now that Drain is only really viable at all on a Mantra of Recovery bar, you don't encounter it all that often, and not nearly enough to obsolesce attunements.

I've played a double attunement guy in several dozens of matches now and I can't say I've ever lost an attunement to a straight removal. I always had either Storm Djinn's Haste or Flame Djinn's Haste to keep on top and that's all that ever got blown up.

Pointing to a list of enchantment removal on wiki implies that you do not understand the difference between the list of skills that exist, the list of skills that are good at what they do, and the list of skills that are actually run. It's a variation of the 'you can counter it!' that's brought up in any sort of balance discussion by the utterly clueless that serves no purpose beyond derailing the discussion at hand. If you're wondering why you're getting such a harsh reaction to what truly was a mindless, dismissive comment, that's why.

Peace,
-CxE

Symbol · Mar 17, 2007, 05:04 AM // 05:04

I have to wonder how much of this thread is outdated.

* Non-elite energy management is really good now
* Dual attunements are infinite energy and aren't as fragile (lower recharge, less stripping)
* DoT AoEs are no longer complete jokes. Savannah heat/searing heat/Tenai's heat do non-trivial amounts of damage when combined with snares like shadow prison or KDs, and the energy cost and cast times are reasonable as well.
* Mind blast offers good single target nuking as well now. Mind Blast/Smoldering Embers/Fireball/MoR offers a constant stream of high damage + burning (54 dps) that's maintainable forever.
* Fire has FDJ for some much needed utility-this is quite possibly the best speedboost in the game (maybe tied with pious haste).

Zonzai · Mar 17, 2007, 07:42 AM // 07:42

The point was never simply that enchantments could be countered, but that when it did happen it was a 30% energy loss for 45 seconds. And that was also only a minor note in a larger post.

The link to wiki shows only that we are quite likely going to encounter some other forms of enchantment removals once in a while (e.g. when facing a dervish). That is, as opposed to only ever facing two enchantment removals per group on a 20-30 second timer as was used to devalue the idea that enchantment removals could hurt the elementalist. I have already apologized for not making that more clear.

Derailing the discussion would be kind of like arguing that one minor point in an article, quite clearly annotated as an article of opinion to begin with, negates everything else that was said. Which is what I felt was happening when I so rudely responded. For which, I have already said (twice now) that I have previously apologized.

I will consider your argument, simply because you say you haven't experienced enchantment removal in the several dozen times you've played an elementalist (though I don't have a lot of reason to take your word for it). However, in my experience, which is several dozen times as well, I have encountered enchantment removals.

That said, I won't kowtow to you for having my own opinions (and experiences) with enchantment removals. And I'm not going to apologize again. So, keep kicking it or let it die. Up to you.

Patccmoi · Mar 17, 2007, 06:48 PM // 18:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Symbol

I have to wonder how much of this thread is outdated.

* Non-elite energy management is really good now
* Dual attunements are infinite energy and aren't as fragile (lower recharge, less stripping)
* DoT AoEs are no longer complete jokes. Savannah heat/searing heat/Tenai's heat do non-trivial amounts of damage when combined with snares like shadow prison or KDs, and the energy cost and cast times are reasonable as well.
* Mind blast offers good single target nuking as well now. Mind Blast/Smoldering Embers/Fireball/MoR offers a constant stream of high damage + burning (54 dps) that's maintainable forever.
* Fire has FDJ for some much needed utility-this is quite possibly the best speedboost in the game (maybe tied with pious haste).

I kinda agree with that. Honestly right now you DO see Fire Eles doing good pressure damage on their own. Mind Blasters have the ability to do both good nuking pressure and bring valuable utility. Not as good as a warrior on single target, but Searing Heat and Teinai's Heat do very decent pressure when used well. In more or less any map there's 1-2 choke points where you'll fight once in a while that will allow them to really shine. Savannah Heat is powerful too, and Mark of Rodgort's is actually viable now even out of a hex build because of its spammability and AOE and adds very good DPS to fire.

I feel that Eles now offer less maintainable DPS than melee chars, but when they decide to use their cooldown spells (15-30s cool) all at the same time they can create a small window where they will apply huge pressure on the field, and that scores kills. I'm fine with them being this way, good players can maximize the pressure to break a team at a given point while bad players will try to keep the pressure up all the time and will just be subpar for the full length.

Air still feel kinda so-so to me, but the dual attunement Air spiker offers strong damage and BSurgers are still efficient and offer nice spike support, good utility and okish DPS. Full earth still feels kinda weak in general, but wards are definitely very good and Eruption is extremely powerful too. Seems more like a secondary line to me though.

Hydro and Pyro feel fine to me at this point. I'm not saying all the skills in there are fine. But you can make solid bars with both basing yourself on Ele skills and not /X skills and deal decent damage in the process.

Ensign · Mar 17, 2007, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Symbol

I have to wonder how much of this thread is outdated.

The original premise of the article is outdated. A modern Ele can compete with physicals on raw DPS alone. Over the two expansions, Ele DPS has risen steadily, while physical DPS hasn't changed all that much. Spiking for all characters has become much more deadly.

If I wanted to discuss why casters are marginalized now, even moreso than they were a year ago (which is certainly the case in competitive GvG - we've moved from a metagame sporting 3 physicals per build (2 Warriors and a Cripshot) to one sporting 4-5 physicals per build), the discussion would center around how much more utility a physical can sport now than a year ago, how much more durable they have gotten, and how casters have largely failed to keep up on that front. A couple of Elementalist builds have been made that can apply pressure damage, but those are still only really attractive when their melee support or anti-melee tools are strong. Casters are still attractive for spiking (as they always have been), and are very good for hexing (since the game is not well balanced around hexes currently)...otherwise offensive casters are the rare birds in builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

The link to wiki shows only that we are quite likely going to encounter some other forms of enchantment removals once in a while (e.g. when facing a dervish).

No, that link to wiki showed that you have failed to differentiate between the skills that exist, the skills that are good, and the skills that are used. Your comment here only reinforces that. It simply *does not matter* whether or not bad skills exist that could possibly remove an enchantment. What matters is what percentage of the metagame is enchantment removal, what percentage of skills that are *actually being played* could be used to counter attunements. The fact of the matter is that percentage is very, very low. The link to the wiki has nothing to do with anything relevant, unless you wanted to show everyone how weak enchantment removal universally is in this game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

However, in my experience, which is several dozen times as well, I have encountered enchantment removals.

Have you encountered enchantment removals, or removals that have mattered? As I mentioned, I do get hit by shatters and drains when playing an attuned Ele. Those removals have always hit a djinn's haste or a Mystic Regeneration, never an attunement unless it's one that's about to expire and I no longer care about covering it. So have you been targeted by mass removals, or by characters that have multiple single-target strips that they can use to rip through your cover to get an attunement, or are you just playing poorly?

The only matchups that I have encountered on an Ele that made Attunements worthless are the NR/Tranq matchups, but those tend to destroy all casters utterly anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

That said, I won't kowtow to you for having my own opinions (and experiences) with enchantment removals.

I don't expect you to. What I expect to happen with all opinions and experiences is for their bases to be examined and for their details to be correlated with what else is known to see if those opinions are well-founded and useful. In your case, you did a very good job of undermining your own argument with that wiki link, and that undermining makes it difficult to take your conclusions about your experiences at face value. You're entitled to your opinion, but if your opinion doesn't make sense or actively conflicts with practical experience, your opinion does not matter.

Peace,
-CxE

Zonzai · Mar 18, 2007, 12:21 AM // 00:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

The fact of the matter is that percentage is very, very low. The link to the wiki has nothing to do with anything relevant, unless you wanted to show everyone how weak enchantment removal universally is in this game.

I agree that enchantment removal is weak. But my original point was not that enchantment removal was a problem, but that removing a class required 45 second recharge enchantment was. I did not ever mention the frequency with which such a thing happened because I already knew that the frequency was reduced from what it once was. Yet in my attempt to share my experienced opinion on the matter I did not exclude the concept from my post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Have you encountered enchantment removals, or removals that have mattered?

Yes, especially in PvP outside of GvG. I do however conceed (again) the point that at certain levels of PvP it may be a rare occurance. I'm taking your word for that because I do respect your experiences. But even in GvG in the mid to high 100's ranks I encounter dervishes using enchantment removals such as rending sweep. And those dervishes are able to remove elementalist enchantments well enough.

And that may be a more a matter of the difference between game knowledge and level of play than anything else. But it is true nonetheless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

What I expect to happen with all opinions and experiences is for their bases to be examined and for their details to be correlated with what else is known to see if those opinions are well-founded and useful. In your case, you did a very good job of undermining your own argument with that wiki link, and that undermining makes it difficult to take your conclusions about your experiences at face value. You're entitled to your opinion, but if your opinion doesn't make sense or actively conflicts with practical experience, your opinion does not matter.

My argument was never, "OMFG enchantment removal kills the elementalit all the tinme every single fight!" But that it also worked on them. "Also", as in just like it does on everybody else. But never was that the focus of my text.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

Interruption, hexes, enchantment removal, conditions and focused damage shut down the elementalist quite well and quite quickly. It is not that ALL of those things work better on the elementalist than they do on everybody else. It's simply that they all work very well on the elementalist.

Enchantment removals do remove enchantments, thereby insinuating that they can indeed be used to remove a 45 second recharge enchantment. If such a thing is a rarity in the upper echelon of GvG play, I wouldn't really know because I don't play at that level. But I will conceed (again) that such a thing may indeed be true.

I have already seen the error in posting the wiki link the way that I did (before your extrapolation on the issue was ever given). I have already apologized for rudely and simply pasting the wiki link without any other statements in a previous post. And that's all that you're going to get from me on that matter (at least with any sincerity).

And if I'm getting tired of this debate, I'm sure that others are as well. At this point I am going to take the advice in your sig and hope that you do the same because further discussion is utterly pointless.

You'll just either have to ignore me or believe that I have had an elemental attunement stripped often enough to make me consider it a disadvantage to playing an elementalist. Wether or not you consider it a disadvantage yourself doesn't really matter. I didn't ask you to. But, as I have previously stated, I will take your words into consideration. If you expect to get any more out of me that that, you are going to feel quite unfullfilled with the future of our conversation.

Patccmoi · Mar 19, 2007, 02:43 PM // 14:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

The original premise of the article is outdated. A modern Ele can compete with physicals on raw DPS alone. Over the two expansions, Ele DPS has risen steadily, while physical DPS hasn't changed all that much. Spiking for all characters has become much more deadly.

If I wanted to discuss why casters are marginalized now, even moreso than they were a year ago (which is certainly the case in competitive GvG - we've moved from a metagame sporting 3 physicals per build (2 Warriors and a Cripshot) to one sporting 4-5 physicals per build), the discussion would center around how much more utility a physical can sport now than a year ago, how much more durable they have gotten, and how casters have largely failed to keep up on that front. A couple of Elementalist builds have been made that can apply pressure damage, but those are still only really attractive when their melee support or anti-melee tools are strong. Casters are still attractive for spiking (as they always have been), and are very good for hexing (since the game is not well balanced around hexes currently)...otherwise offensive casters are the rare birds in builds.

To be fair though, 3/4 classes added since then are physical, and each brought diffferent utility useful on a physical. Right now 5/10 classes are physical, and 5/9 offensive classes really. Your point is definitely valid though, the support physical classes got is pretty insane and their utility is just getting better and better. When you can just fit something like Mending Touch on your physical and you have something as crazy as Divert on a monk, well suddenly the importance of support chars lowers quite a bit. And then you have skills that allow for skill bar compression (like Natural Stride which covers for 2 critical skill slots (defense + running skill) in one skill, who's the last ranger that didn't carry Natural Stride again?) and allow those physicals to carry more utility. And Paragons which are basically a physical support char. And Rts that got a major buff to their physical support too (Warmonger, WoF...).

But i still think that the situation improved as a whole when it comes to offensive casters. Meaning that they might not be popular atm, but they are at least able to have solid setups. When i face a fire ele now, he's a threat. When i see an hydro with Trident, i know that it's gonna be a pain either to kite their melee or to have our melee doing much (and it DOES come back to melee support/anti-melee, i know).

Dom Mesmers are still the pinacle of offensive casters imo, but at least others are viable options now. But they're all competing for the same 1-2 character slot with the rest being filled by monks or physicals.

Symbol · Mar 19, 2007, 05:30 PM // 17:30

I don't think warriors have gained that much utility, apart from dropping healsig for something else if they're meant to fight 8v8. The big change is mending touch, but you still see a fair amount of /E, /A instead of all /Mo.

Paragons are a big deal though-because they do tons of damage, can spike assist very well, and are great party support rolled into one slot, so it's no surprise that we see more physicals on the team instead of the stuff that used to be there.

Ensign · Mar 19, 2007, 08:31 PM // 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Symbol

I don't think warriors have gained that much utility

They became all the more important with the last balance patch and the neutering of Gale. When you could stash Gales on your midline you were free to be more creative with your physicals, but without Gale it's more important than ever to get those knockdowns out of your Warriors. Shock, Bull's Strike, and hammers in general have a much higher premium on them now than they did a month ago.

Peace,
-CxE

Symbol · Mar 19, 2007, 09:02 PM // 21:02

IMO that doesn't count as more utility per se, just a shift in what warriors are doing with their free slots. And the KD skills you mentioned (shock, bull's strike, pretty much all the good ones in hammer) were all available since Prophecies-in that respect nothing has changed.

It seems that when teams are running more than three physicals (2 melee + mandatory burning arrow ranger) that they're almost always paragons because they buff up your offense hugely with GFTE and Burning Anthem and they do very non-trivial damage by themselves. And having a paragon in turn means that having more physicals is attractive because their buffs are party wide. So it's a self-reinforcing cycle.

There isn't any such mechanism for casters. Imagine if in C4 A.net introduced a paragon analogue with a bunch of global caster buffs (reduced cast times, recharges, energy costs, additional effects, etc). I'd think you'd see a lot more offensive casters then though that would probably be a balance nightmare.

Ensign · Mar 19, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

The difference is that Warriors are awesome on their own and buffing them with a Paragon only makes them even more awesome. Casters kinda suck on their own, for the most part they make your physicals better and their physicals worse. Massed casters is some sort of spike or another fundamentally, with little room for tactics.

You won't ever see a caster buffing profession, not without really radical changes to the game's infrastructure. Caster buffing won't be used to buff a bunch of Elementalists, it will be used to buff Monks and create a really stagnant metagame.

Peace,
-CxE

Patccmoi · Mar 19, 2007, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Problem with caster buffs in general is the fact that they often affect monks too. And monks buff are something that ALWAYS made the game incredibly boring (Energizing Finale anyone?).

The only interesting caster buff i can think of atm that can be used on others is Weapon of Quickening. It's actually extremely good, just hard to fit on any build cause you need a high spec communing and if you don't want to go for spirits, there's not much else interesting in there (Vital Weapon maybe, but if you're using WoQ... ya). Honestly if Weapon of Quickening was in another line (say Channeling), you might actually see much more offensive casters because then you'd have a real support for them.

I'm not sure how it could've been done and what skills could've been designed to buff ally casters without buffing healers significantly (WoQ doesn't really, i mean lowering the recharge of skills on monks is nice, but they already have quite low recharge in general and monks tend to be limited more by energy than recharge). Anything that gives energy management is dangerous, though you could've imagine something like an enchant/shout/chant/weapon spell doing 'whenever/next time/next x..x spells target ally casts a spell that targets a foe, he gains x energy'. Or some extra effect, like 'the next time target ally deals damage to a foe with a spell, that foe loses one enchantment/is blind/is knocked/is crippled/etc.'. I'm sure there's a way to design those skills in a sense that they won't encourage spikes. I mean hell, WoQ doesn't encourage spike in general but significantly buffs pressure casters.

The thing is, there's 15128532 skills that support physical. Attacks deal more damage, have armor penetration, ignore blocks, cause cripple, cause burning, interrupt casters, interrupt attackers, strip enchants, they move faster, etc... Basically, with all the ways available to buff physical and the fact that physicals are more resilient in general (better AL, shields, etc.), it's much more natural to form a team around physicals and bring proper support for them than to build a team around casters which can't really support each other directly. The only kind of support casters get from one another is defense so that they're at best on par with physicals.

Good offensive caster buffs that you can give allies would've likely encouraged offensive casters a lot more in the evolution of metagames.

EDIT : well, i started that post, went to do other things and pressed send after, so it might look a bit like a more detailed post of what Ensign said briefly hehe, didn't read his answer before

Symbol · Mar 19, 2007, 10:16 PM // 22:16

Well I'm not claiming that a caster buff profession would be a good thing, merely that the increased prevalence of physicals in teams is more due to the presence of paragons rather than any big improvements to warrior bars.

Ensign · Mar 20, 2007, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Symbol

Well I'm not claiming that a caster buff profession would be a good thing, merely that the increased prevalence of physicals in teams is more due to the presence of paragons rather than any big improvements to warrior bars.

I don't think it has that much to do with Paragons - certainly not that much when talking about party-support encouraging more physicals. It's more about increases in flexibility that has allowed physicals to perform more of the functions previously reserved for casters, while the new skills for casters, while creating and reinforcing a few roles, have not duplicated any of the core functions or abilities of physicals.

The big advantages of physicals being: natural durability from higher base AL and a favorable defensive equipment selection; natural offense from meaningful autoattacks; much stronger inherent energy/resource management (Soul Reaping engines aside); much stronger time utilization; significantly better skill flexibility. A physical with no skills is durable and deals decent damage, and has very good natural energy from the combination of inherent energy management primary attributes, dual-rail resource systems, and all of his skills being specialized tools that supplement his normal attacks. A caster with no skills does virtually nothing; he needs to cast high value spells with frequency to compete with the natural advantages of a physical. From neccessary casting, he typically needs to devote even more time and skill slots to energy management, which simply requires him to get even more out of his skills. Because he needs to devote skill slots and lots of energy just to core functionality, the flexible tools he does have need to be extremely strong and extremely efficient. Most spells are far too weak in Guild Wars to even evaluate under those criteria.

The casters that you do see played use primarily spells that are flexible *and* deal damage in the process (Water Eles, Illusion Mesmers, Curses Necros, Many Dom Spells), or are absolutely devastating effects under the right circumstances (Diversion, the old Gale). Spells that just deal damage, or only have some moderate effect on the game, are colossal wastes of everyone's time.

Peace,
-CxE

BryanM · Mar 22, 2007, 07:14 PM // 19:14

Rending Sweep is no total joke - adding enchant removal to the largest martial weapon in the game = smart smart smart.

The limited skill slots has done horrible things to non-healer casters as Ensign has mentioned.

Searing Flames isn't a very good tool in PvE due to its damage or area of effect - it's the 2 second recharge time. You can devote a few slots to direct fire damage, and do whatever else you want with the rest of your bar. Desecrate Enchantments + Defile Enchantments add up to the offense value of 1/4 of one Searing Flames slot - that's an example of an elite skill bringing elite value to a build.

Carrying around huge recharge enchant removal would be viable, if we had like 12 slots. Maybe. Probably not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonzai

In my opinion, physical characters are simply easier to play (noobish antics aside). Part of that may be due to familiarity, as Byron mentioned or mechanical design as Ensign just said. But for me I think it's largely just because they are more forgiving in both build and survivability.

It's definitely the mechanics. Pulling out a chain of 80+ hits for ~5 energy each with no aftercast is still something elementalists can not do. Even degen teams carry martial guys to help deal kills, non?

Shadowleaf · Mar 28, 2007, 11:30 PM // 23:30

After seeing Paragons, I think that it would be good if Eles were able to deal more damage than Warriors. Lately, I've been doing Paragon a whole lot in GvG and it is hands down the highest and most reliable DPS character I have played. You've got a permanent 25% IAS and you can spam Spear of Lightning and Harrier's Toss both on recharge thanks to the insane energy management of Leadership for some very nice spike damage and DPS. Also, you buff the other physical guys and perhaps provide some light defense such as "They're on Fire!" in tandem with another Paragon sustaining Blazing Finale on the Monks and Melee. Then when VoD hits, forget about it. You solo people so easily.

Experiencing the raw power of the Paragon, I realized that Warriors are just as worth using as ever. All that offensive utility and dependable Deep Wound skills and great splitting potential.

So, I really think that Elementalists could be buffed up enough to be the primary damage dealers in the same way Paragons are. I don't have the faintest clue how they could compete without a huge rework though. It all comes back to the trouble with Elementalists spending energy to deal damage. Now we've got Paragons who not only have the advantage of free attack damage, but also ranged, heavily armored, resiliant to energy denial on a build that spams energy attack skills and even has access to Deep Wound and Daze (actually one of, if not the most reliable daze skill in the game). Also, the lack of powerful burst DPS as has been said. Paragons, on the other hand, have it.

Anyway, my main point is that there shouldn't be any problem with making Elementalists a viable choice as primary damage dealers because Warriors are still around in the presence of Paragons.

qvtkc · Mar 29, 2007, 10:53 AM // 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowleaf

Anyway, my main point is that there shouldn't be any problem with making Elementalists a viable choice as primary damage dealers because Warriors are still around in the presence of Paragons.

There is always a problem with enabling caster spike.

Patccmoi · Mar 29, 2007, 01:50 PM // 13:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by qvtkc

There is always a problem with enabling caster spike.

*cough* Paragon spike *cough*