Curse

Phades · Jul 18, 2005, 03:55 PM // 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

For me it seems, you played 4v4 and wondering why a team with a monk always beats one without a monk.

Nope its not that simple. Its like i said and you said it yourself, you need a mesmer to really shut down a monk. You arent really going to penetrate through protective spirit via elementalist means or high damage attack skills and things like healing touch easily keep the monk going with low end quantities of people involved. Add a second monk and the scale of agressors dealing damage increases. Sure you could backfire and the target could have someone else fix him or he could just do an organized withrawl, causing your team to lose some functionality within the transition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

It doesn't change much. So not the eles are nuking you, but the Rangers or warriors and all you can do is stand and watch yourself die.

I could say the same about a blackout mesmer, or any of the defenses against a warrior as a warrior. The effect is quite the same, but the stance im taking is the inverse, where what you do doesnt matter, because it doesnt or cant overcome it over time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

I never said nor meant that. It just seems that you have not enough experience with 8v8 PvP, because you would know that a team with 4 or 5 healer is no threat. So a monk can't be overpowered

Redundant and uneccary are other terms id use to describe it. Now imagine a 16 v 16 with ~6 monks running around. To be honest, id wager 4-5 would be enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

Healing Touch is the only reliable self heal of a monk. Just 'Diversion' it, and the monk can't heal himself. If he's using Healing Breeze -> shatter enchantment and look at a dead monk

Im sorry i thought we were talking about the monk's ability to operate, not the mesmer's ability to deny. Again you are receding into the "need mesmer" trend in the same sentence as the word monk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

2 monks in 4v4 is bad. It doesn't really work, because your offense is too bad.

What, in 8v8 you havent seen a healing spec monk get hit with healing touch and word of healing at the same time? Typically in 8v8 if the monks arent shut down they heal as much as they need to, but typically themselves first or was i just dreaming that. Also kinda hard to have 2 eliete skills on the same character without the mesmer profession.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

Every class can be replaced by another. A warrior is not useless. Look at the top guilds. Most of the time they take 2-3 warriors with them... They hurt really bad.

But im prety sure they are using a mesmer and 2-3 monks all the time and at least someone with natures renewal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

What exactly is unbalanced and why?
I suggest we can talk about it. But statements like "a warrior is useless, because every role he can play, can also be played by someone else" doesn't sound very experienced to me.

Hmm, im feeling kinda lazy at the moment, but as far as warriors are concerned.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...583#post197583
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...181#post206181

Not very good for a summary or light reading, but i believe i didnt repeate myself too much between those two posts. I was working on a response to Scaphism in another thread, but after around 2hrs of typing and the forum kicking it back out i didnt bother to re-finish it again, but it was mainly addressing duration and refresh issues while comparing adrenalin buildup to energy buildup and the state of 0 adrenalin vs full energy in the application of skills. I might be bothered to finish it again, if it ends up being relevant here. The summation of a counter argument against the position would consist of time period of operation, but i dont think most matches are rated in time over the span of hours instead of minutes and seconds. That is of course comparing operation times opposed to theoretical lenght of a match.

*Edit*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Third Quarter

Something that's very important to recognize is that a single monk will have little trouble hardening a single target against any amount of damage.

Monks have a much harder time coping with many targets taking sustained damage.

Try playing a monk. You'll learn a lot.

Mostly as a result of heal party being somewhat unwieldy for a monk mana pool id imagine. Then again, its kinda difficult to sustain high damage on many targets at the same time as well, figure around 3 per monk involved.

Scaphism · Jul 18, 2005, 05:50 PM // 17:50

A Boon healer using Healing Touch will heal for around 224 health (at 16 DF and 13 healing prayers). That's the cheapest single-target heal I can think of, and it wouldn't come anywhere close to bringing a monk from the brink of death to full health.

You probably saw heal area or divine healing.
Heal Area (with the same attributes, under boon) would heal around 281 damage, and Divine Healing would heal around 387. I can't think of any other more powerful self-heals, and even those wont take you from zero to full. Add a Life Attunement or Aura of Faith on top of that and you could, but that's supposing a lot.

A few other points:
-I think people are misunderstanding the use of warriors, and are then frustrated trying to play one in a pick up group. They are best suited to prolonged fights where their alternate energy pool (adrenaline) continues to fuel them and their higher armor gives them an advantage. Their damage is not front loaded, it's sustained, and your team needs to play a strategy that takes advantage of your pace.
-The game is most certainly based around 8v8 play, as I tried to explain before. I'm not a tester, but I read the All Call reports (before the NDA clampdown) and I'm friends with a few of the testers. The vast majority of balance testing that occurred was in the 8v8 format. I'm confident the Arena maps were tested for bugs and exploits, but as far as balance? Unlikely at best. It's like playing a game of 3v3 basketball instead of 5v5- the dynamic of the match changes because there are fewer people playing.
The Arenas are a nice way to get involved in PVP for people who aren't part of a group, akin to a pick up game. Guild battles require 8 people, and Tombs is particularly unforgiving to inexperienced groups because of the unseeded tournament format. 4v4 strikes me as a concession to more casual PVP players who can't get a team of 8 together regularly.
If you are trying to find balance in the 4v4 format, you're headed down the wrong path.

Jul 18, 2005, 08:32 PM // 20:32

Remember healing isnt as infinite as damage, and when you put disruption into the equation you see how energy based healing has problems

Ensign · Jul 18, 2005, 08:58 PM // 20:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mhydrian

Necros and mesmers as far as 4 on 4 arena play is concerned are the worst. If a N/me can kill my tank in under 10 seconds, then when the warrior closes melee range he should at the very least be able to return the favor. But many times you will find casters who will sit in melee range and take down a warrior with ease.

There are a a whole slew of reasons why this is the case.

1) Warriors are *easily* the most played class in arena.

I'd guess that no less than 1/3 of arena characters are Warriors, and you're virtually guaranteed to have a Warrior on the opposing team, if not two. As a result, any smart player plans on dealing with opposing Warriors. They're a scary class when played correctly, but there are several options for hating out the steel tanks, and beginning arena veterans learn the tricks quickly. In an organized setting, the Warriors will have Monk support with the tools to keep everyone running in the face of the hate, but you simply do not find that often in arena.

2) The vast majority of Warriors you encounter are absolutely godawful.

Perhaps it's just the default class of a generic newbie, but the vast majority of Warriors I've seen don't have even the slightest clue. They cast Mending on themselves and promptly start attacking the nearest target, usually another Warrior. C-space is not the be-all, end-all of Warrior strategy, but most Warriors watch helplessly if their 'hit whatever's convenient with a sword over and over again while my platemail protects me!' strategy doesn't work. A fighter henchman would be better in many cases - at least those come with decent builds.

3) Warriors never plan on what their opponent is going to do.

Think about it. The Mesmers and Necromancers that are beating up on Warriors so hard have designed their builds to specifically hate out the common, n00b arena Warrior. Have you ever seen a Warrior cast Mend Ailment to pull Cripple off of himself? How about an enchantment removal spell to take care of a defensive buff on a target? Hell, how many Warriors even run Sprint to chase down a Monk running them in circles? This is a game of counters and Warriors simply refuse to play it.

This is not a reflection upon the class. It is a reflection upon the players who refuse to adapt to changing game conditions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mhydrian

I dont mind casters being powerful from range, but in melee they need to die fast, just as fast as they are able to kill a war at range.

Casters do die fast at close range, if you've planned for it. I've rarely seen a Warrior plan for it, though, instead running up to an Elementalist, see Armor of Earth get cast, and promptly concede the match.

It takes a special kind of stupid to lose to that over and over again and never get the hint.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

The problem is scale.

The only time scale really comes into account is when dealing with damage spikes. You don't want things to be on such a large scale that players are instakilled with no chance of survival. Outside of those, efficiency, both on energy and time, become paramount and those scale up or down nicely.

Arenas, to that end, are scaled down enough that spike is not nearly as important and efficiency rules the day. This should effect strategies more than it does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

i dont really see how its neccacary for a single monk to have the heal potential to offset the pve environment with no real tradeoff in terms of spell casting potentcy per spell, like you see in other spell lines.

The tradeoffs are there. The thing about PvE is that it's balanced for the lowest common denominator. Most players, whatever their intentions, are simply awful, but they still need to be able to realize a minimal amount of success in the storyline section of the game. The flip side of that is skilled, experienced players can up and steamroll the PvE section of the game. This is perhaps most obvious when you have a skilled Monk who can take care of a relatively n00b team all by himself, but you could easily replace that n00b team with half as many skilled players and experience the same, if not more success.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

If every job had more of a share in the healing weight then it didnt need to be as potent within the monk profession.

Every job *does* have its share of the healing weight - not in the reactive 'oh I messed up I need a heal' sense, but in preventing damage in the first place. A Warrior deftly collecting aggro and mitigating the damage on himself will save at least a Monk's worth of defense all by himself. A Necromancer with Weakness or Shadow of Fear is going to cut the damage output of every physical mob in half - a skilled Mesmer is going to prevent a dangerous Elementalist pack from doing anything of significance. Rangers have a huge selection of tactics available to greatly enhance a team's chance of survival, from laying traps to cripple a dangerous mob, to blinding, pinning, interrupting, or otherwise debilitating any attackers that happen to break through plan A. Even Elementalists, usually on board as heavy nukers, can help shoulder part of the burden simply by dropping a Ward, blinding or weakening an enemy, or using an Armor on themselves if they start to take fire.

Now how often do you find a team of characters who actually do these things instead of just rushing from mob to mob trying to do as much damage as they can? A team of eight players who understand both party and self defense could complete every mission in the game with no more than one Monk. Instead, you have teams insisting on multiple Monks, because they need that much healing to make up for their own lack of skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kishin

Hexes are only hard to remove in 4v4 arena because no one brings hex removals.

Random arena is its own animal because you pretty much have to assume that you're going to be paired with people with only a minimal grasp on the game. Condition and hex removal are staples of any organized team, but in arena they're virtually nonexistant and piling them on is an excellent strategy. Enchantment removal is even more rare, so stack buffs to your heart's content. You don't even see people running snares very often, and teams will up and lose to one guy running around in circles while the other team chases helplessly.

Or, in simplest terms, Guild Wars is a game of counters and in arena most people don't bring any.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Perhaps im a little jaded, but i find it strange that people think that its fine for 1 character to be able to fend off 3-4 assailants indefinatly based solely around the concepts of healing and protection versus damage.

I play Monk extensively.

Played well, a Monk can hold off two good attackers, though the battle is pretty even and eventually I'll break. Three good attackers can simply overpower the healing. Two attackers with solid disruption will get a kill rather quickly. A Mesmer can shut down a single Monk hard, and get a solid hold on two Monks - he'll need a bit of damage support to win a one on one though, but not much.

But that's against good players.

In arena, I'm usually up against 3-4 attackers, and no more than one of them is any good. When I see that, yeah, I can sit there and outheal their entire team for several minutes if not indefinitely. Does that mean that the classes are unbalanced? Hardly. It's simply a reflection of how bad most players are at dealing damage, even with their damage dealing characters. When you have Warriors attacking other Warriors and Elementalists spamming Flare it's patently dishonest to try and draw conclusions about the actual power of the different professions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

When i see situations like that it reminds me more of a pve balance situation opposed to a pvp balance situation.

As most arena players are about as dumb as bots and run worse skills the analogy is perhaps more apt than you think.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Many of them arent all that useful, but on the flipside there are many skills and combination of skills that id say are probably too useful for a pvp venu.

Such as? There are a few skills that I feel are overpowered at the moment but I doubt that we're thinking of the same skills.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

I am not denying that mesmers can accomplish something unique, but what im saying is that perhaps the focus could stand to shift where instead of needing a mesmer to kill a monk, needing a mesmer as another source of damage diffusal balancing the equasion differently.

You don't need a Mesmer to kill a Monk. You need competent attackers. A team with three attackers against a single Monk has no excuse if they don't get a kill. None. Three attackers should be able to simply run right over a Monk and if they cannot do so that's a reflection on the skill of at least some of them. Two attackers, if they actually disrupted while dealing damage (knockdowns, interrupts, enchantment removal, you name it) can take out a Monk if played correctly. These teams with four attackers and no Monk might be at a disadvantage against a team with a Monk, but it isn't as bad as most think because four attackers should simply blow away a single Monk, with no chance of survival.

They do not because they simply suck. A good Monk can hold off a bit under two good attackers. A typical arena attacker counts as one third to one half of a good attacker. It's no wonder that a good Monk can smash a typical arena team. Average monks? They count for a third to half a Monk and balance is restored, everything goes according to plan.

Nerf healing until you need multiple good defensive characters to hold off the crap that your typical random arena team throws at you? Just go and seriously unbalance the competitive parts of the game why don't you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Imbalanced monk combinations?...What comes to mind is healing touch should be target touched other ally, instead of ally, but there are others available that are potent as well.

You mean a skill that is *only* useful for healing yourself, and really isn't all that special all things considered? It's going to heal for 156 every 5.75 seconds on its own, if you've maxed out healing and divine with a superior rune. That's 27.13 healing per second over time, and 104 healing per second spike - roughly two attackers worth of healing. Other self-heal options are less efficient so you do a bit worse than that in the long run. It's a good spell for arena where you're often the only Monk and have to worry about protecting yourself the most, but it certainly isn't anything too special. I wouldn't run it in any serious PvP, not enough utility.

It used to be target other ally, by the way. Was completely worthless. At least now it's a marginally interesting self-heal only in a line that focuses so heavily upon healing others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Most likely im seeing it in conjuction with aura of faith, which would probably explain why its healing ~50% or more of the health bar in a cast.

Yet another arena-only skill that's good against the predictable patterns of behavior you see there.

Seriously. I know I'm going to be the only Monk, that I'm going to get focused by any half-decent team and might as well pile the defense on myself. As an attacker, you understand that any good Monk you'll see in arena also realizes this, and you plan accordingly.

Right?

Why is it my fault if I beat you because you didn't plan accordingly?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Im sure 2 monks could come up with better using word of healing and aura of faith, but whatever.

Can't stand two Monk teams in arena. You can't kill anything. You win a couple rounds until you run into another team with a half-decent Monk, then you just end up staring at each other for half an hour, unless someone got lucky and pulled a Mesmer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Redundant and uneccary are other terms id use to describe it. Now imagine a 16 v 16 with ~6 monks running around. To be honest, id wager 4-5 would be enough.

I'd run 0 Monks in 16 v 16, if such an environment ever existed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

What, in 8v8 you havent seen a healing spec monk get hit with healing touch and word of healing at the same time?

Not in a really long time, no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Typically in 8v8 if the monks arent shut down they heal as much as they need to

...so shut them down?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaphism

If you are trying to find balance in the 4v4 format, you're headed down the wrong path.

4v4 is surprisingly balanced, I've found. There are a couple significant differences (damage spikes being much less valuable than shutdown and sustainability, Monks needing to be more self-sustained instead of working the cross-heals) but overall it's a fairly balanced format that has all classes well represented. It plays more like GvG than Tombs, for what that's worth, and you can get back into buff stacking because people aren't as willing to sacrifice a character for Nature's Renewal when they only have four slots.

But still a reasonable format overall.

Peace,
-CxE

Schorny · Jul 18, 2005, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Nope its not that simple. Its like i said and you said it yourself, you need a mesmer to really shut down a monk.

Or a ranger with choking gas or a knockdown warrior or to a degree a "fear Me" warrior.

In 4v4 we once run a build where we used iron mist and maelstorm to shut down one caster.

A necro can also be pain in the ass - I don't think he can shutdown a monk, but with all the degen stacking he can drain his energy pretty good.

So every class can 'shutdown' a monk. A mesmer is specialized in it, but you don't need one.

Quote:

Redundant and uneccary are other terms id use to describe it. Now imagine a 16 v 16 with ~6 monks running around. To be honest, id wager 4-5 would be enough.

Imagine 16 smiting E/Mos

Quote:

Im sorry i thought we were talking about the monk's ability to operate, not the mesmer's ability to deny. Again you are receding into the "need mesmer" trend in the same sentence as the word monk.

As I said above - every class can shutdown a monk. And yes, you need to shutdown the monk in some way:
be by energy denial, by shutdown (means: interrupt, prhibit casting) or simple outdamage him. This are just 3 ways to accomplish the same goal.

Quote:

What, in 8v8 you havent seen a healing spec monk get hit with healing touch and word of healing at the same time?

Not really. But what if it'd happen?
Can ist be more than, let's say 4 chain lightnings?

Quote:

Typically in 8v8 if the monks arent shut down they heal as much as they need to, but typically themselves first or was i just dreaming that.

Strange. Most eles do also quite an awful lot of damage, until you shut em down. And a warrior, yes, he does also quite some damage until you shut him down.

You need to do more damage than your enemy: so you have the following options:
1) simple doing more damage (aka air spike)
2) shutting down their healing (for example: mesmer)
3) shutting down their offense (for example: wards)

Quote:

But im prety sure they are using a mesmer and 2-3 monks all the time and at least someone with natures renewal.

Probably. What's the problem? You said warriors are useless and top guilds are using warriors. Of course they are using also other professions. But you won't consider warriors weak because an all warrior team isn't the best team in the game, or?

Quote:

Mostly as a result of heal party being somewhat unwieldy for a monk mana pool id imagine. Then again, its kinda difficult to sustain high damage on many targets at the same time as well, figure around 3 per monk involved.

Chain Lightning, Disease, AoE, degen stacking,... mhm, guess it is possible

Are Cane · Jul 19, 2005, 12:45 AM // 00:45

First of all, As an elementalist as myself. Warriors can easily kill me even if I have all these good air spells including blind. Warriors can (As long as they can get to you) use hamstring of for an W/E earthquake and knock me down. For rangers they can use pin down run away cast Winter Spirit (don't know name) and just apply poison of poison arrow. If the elementalist tries casting a spell use savage shot. Elementalists aren't that great in PvP.

Phades · Jul 19, 2005, 06:41 AM // 06:41

First off, I’d like to say that I respect the individuals that have commented to what I have stated so far. I believe that the majority of what has been said is not a difference in opinion of what works versus what doesn’t work, but more of a difference in perspective in how to quantify what can work in different situations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaphism

A few other points:
-I think people are misunderstanding the use of warriors, and are then frustrated trying to play one in a pick up group. They are best suited to prolonged fights where their alternate energy pool (adrenaline) continues to fuel them and their higher armor gives them an advantage. Their damage is not front loaded, it's sustained, and your team needs to play a strategy that takes advantage of your pace.
-The game is most certainly based around 8v8 play, as I tried to explain before. I'm not a tester, but I read the All Call reports (before the NDA clampdown) and I'm friends with a few of the testers. The vast majority of balance testing that occurred was in the 8v8 format. I'm confident the Arena maps were tested for bugs and exploits, but as far as balance? Unlikely at best. It's like playing a game of 3v3 basketball instead of 5v5- the dynamic of the match changes because there are fewer people playing.
The Arenas are a nice way to get involved in PVP for people who aren't part of a group, akin to a pick up game. Guild battles require 8 people, and Tombs is particularly unforgiving to inexperienced groups because of the unseeded tournament format. 4v4 strikes me as a concession to more casual PVP players who can't get a team of 8 together regularly.
If you are trying to find balance in the 4v4 format, you're headed down the wrong path.

One of the things that bugs me regarding warriors is the need to have the team built around them, while other jobs are either used as is regardless of the overall team or modified slightly to fit the team. I also concede that pickup groups do not try to make such a format work and go down a different path for a team build. From my experiences with a warrior, it has been difficult to keep them going relying solely on outside support. Usually I found myself trying to mix some form of disruption with damage and speed boost, leaving little to no room for enough forms of hitting reliably over time. I ended up being totally dependant on others for conditions, hexes, and damage augmentations. This ended up being a bit too much to ask for from a group of average players.
(Side note, I wonder why there are no beneficial conditions. As hexes are to enchantments, there are no counter conditions… hmm)

Personally, id enjoy the game a bit more as a whole in the pvp realm, if the game was more scalable in parts allowing for equal balance per 4 people involved. It would probably require template formatting for jobs allowed under the current skill format or balance in a different direction for types and quantities of skills allowed. I do agree though that the 4v4 is likely a concession, but I would also extend that concession into the pve game as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

The tradeoffs are there. The thing about PvE is that it's balanced for the lowest common denominator. Most players, whatever their intentions, are simply awful, but they still need to be able to realize a minimal amount of success in the storyline section of the game. The flip side of that is skilled, experienced players can up and steamroll the PvE section of the game. This is perhaps most obvious when you have a skilled Monk who can take care of a relatively n00b team all by himself, but you could easily replace that n00b team with half as many skilled players and experience the same, if not more success.

I have no argument here, but I am more used to environments that would punish mistakes instead of allowing such forgiveness to the lowest common denominator. I think many would agree that the pve portion of the game is introduction given to players before diving into pvp and forcing them to be more precise in builds and coordination would yield a higher standard for pvp. It is akin to giving the lowest common denominator the delusion that they are successful instead of being dead weight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

Every job *does* have its share of the healing weight - not in the reactive 'oh I messed up I need a heal' sense, but in preventing damage in the first place. A Warrior deftly collecting aggro and mitigating the damage on himself will save at least a Monk's worth of defense all by himself. A Necromancer with Weakness or Shadow of Fear is going to cut the damage output of every physical mob in half - a skilled Mesmer is going to prevent a dangerous Elementalist pack from doing anything of significance. Rangers have a huge selection of tactics available to greatly enhance a team's chance of survival, from laying traps to cripple a dangerous mob, to blinding, pinning, interrupting, or otherwise debilitating any attackers that happen to break through plan A. Even Elementalists, usually on board as heavy nukers, can help shoulder part of the burden simply by dropping a Ward, blinding or weakening an enemy, or using an Armor on themselves if they start to take fire.

Now how often do you find a team of characters who actually do these things instead of just rushing from mob to mob trying to do as much damage as they can? A team of eight players who understand both party and self defense could complete every mission in the game with no more than one Monk. Instead, you have teams insisting on multiple Monks, because they need that much healing to make up for their own lack of skill.

Again I have no real argument here, but merely the desire to see more of that type of action occur within the pvp realm that is not an overly one sided tilt against one class or another. The current tilt seems to rest on the monks’ shoulders or in anti-warrior means. Too much of the game on the pvp side is based around overspecialization and there is no real way to prevent it within the current game mechanics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

I play Monk extensively.

Played well, a Monk can hold off two good attackers, though the battle is pretty even and eventually I'll break. Three good attackers can simply overpower the healing. Two attackers with solid disruption will get a kill rather quickly. A Mesmer can shut down a single Monk hard, and get a solid hold on two Monks - he'll need a bit of damage support to win a one on one though, but not much.

But that's against good players.

In arena, I'm usually up against 3-4 attackers, and no more than one of them is any good. When I see that, yeah, I can sit there and outheal their entire team for several minutes if not indefinitely. Does that mean that the classes are unbalanced? Hardly. It's simply a reflection of how bad most players are at dealing damage, even with their damage dealing characters. When you have Warriors attacking other Warriors and Elementalists spamming Flare it's patently dishonest to try and draw conclusions about the actual power of the different professions.

To all the monks that play the job well, it is something to behold as they hold off that many characters without outside assistance in many cases. Assuming larger fights, the number of aggressors stays about the same considering setups that include 3 monks with a mesmer, but the number of monks increase. I do not deny that a mesmer can shut down a monk. Typically though, against a good monk, it usually requires good damage, with disruption and enchantment removal. Remove one of those aspects and the fight can last a very long time, if coming to a conclusion at all. Again I am merely making the suggestion to that would be to shift the focus of where the mesmer attention needs to be for a successful encounter with an opponent.

Fire isn’t a real winner overall by its self, due to the longish cast/recast times on the ranged spells. Trying to avoid that by relying on something like flare isn’t a real winner either. Of course there are casters I’ve hit for less damage as a warrior than other warriors, causing me to change targets again and again, ad nausea, until one side or another finally breaks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

Nerf healing until you need multiple good defensive characters to hold off the crap that your typical random arena team throws at you? Just go and seriously unbalance the competitive parts of the game why don't you.

Nope, just a merely circular desire to see it shared in similar way it is shared in the pve side of the game. It would require different mechanics and skills than are available currently. Scaphism made a better example for healing in general, but I would expect that as I stated before that I haven’t had time to build and test a monk primary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

Yet another arena-only skill that's good against the predictable patterns of behavior you see there.

Seriously. I know I'm going to be the only Monk, that I'm going to get focused by any half-decent team and might as well pile the defense on myself. As an attacker, you understand that any good Monk you'll see in arena also realizes this, and you plan accordingly.

Right?

Why is it my fault if I beat you because you didn't plan accordingly?

Planning for unplanned combinations? One character can only do so much unless you are suggesting only playing mesmers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esign

Such as? There are a few skills that I feel are overpowered at the moment but I doubt that we're thinking of the same skills.

Nature’s renewal ranks up there id imagine, but that is what id qualify as a chicken and egg scenario. Would that need to exist if the enchantments and hexes weren’t as easy and quickly reapplied as they are? A lot of the pve revamping wouldn’t have needed to occur if that were the case as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

Imagine 16 smiting E/Mos

Interesting concept under the current format, but I was thinking something more along the lines of larger maps and open spaces, with multiple objectives required in tandem opposed to small and enclosed spaces with singular objectives. Although smiting is largely without a direct counter compared to other forms of damage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

Not really. But what if it'd happen?
Can ist be more than, let's say 4 chain lightnings?

This requires 4 people and is largely stopped by protective spirit, mantra, and other more proactive means.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

Chain Lightning, Disease, AoE, degen stacking,... mhm, guess it is possible

Sustained chain lighting? The rest can be removed.

Schorny · Jul 19, 2005, 07:54 AM // 07:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

One of the things that bugs me regarding warriors is the need to have the team built around them, while other jobs are either used as is regardless of the overall team or modified slightly to fit the team.

That is false. You don't need to build around a warrior, it is sufficent if the warrior adjusts his build to fit the team.

For example a knockdown warrior can fit in many different builds. A shutdown W/Me can also fit in many different builds. Energy denial needs more coordination and so does damage. But everykind of damage needs coordination. So you always have to adjust your build and the team build. And of course: not every type of warrior fits every build.

Quote:

From my experiences with a warrior, it has been difficult to keep them going relying solely on outside support. Usually I found myself trying to mix some form of disruption with damage and speed boost, leaving little to no room for enough forms of hitting reliably over time. I ended up being totally dependant on others for conditions, hexes, and damage augmentations. This ended up being a bit too much to ask for from a group of average players.

You are not supposed to be self sufficient. That is a problem with warriors. They are depending on the team. That is not a problem, because that is what teams are for. Some Warrior builds rely less on the team, some more. But you are supposed to rely in some kind of way on your team (otherwise: why would you need a team?)

Quote:

(Side note, I wonder why there are no beneficial conditions. As hexes are to enchantments, there are no counter conditions… hmm)

You have stances and shouts. They can be seen in some kind of way as "beneficial conditions". But the whole idea is nonsene. Why aren't there "anti-stances", "anti-shouts", etc.

Quote:

Personally, id enjoy the game a bit more as a whole in the pvp realm, if the game was more scalable in parts allowing for equal balance per 4 people involved.

It really is balanced.

Quote:

Too much of the game on the pvp side is based around overspecialization and there is no real way to prevent it within the current game mechanics.

What do you want? All self sufficient? That won't be balanced.
Or do you mean specialization like "spirit teams", "air spikes", "smiters"? That is no problem - because if you are too specialized you can be countered easily.

Quote:

Typically though, against a good monk, it usually requires good damage, with disruption and enchantment removal. Remove one of those aspects and the fight can last a very long time, if coming to a conclusion at all.

Please explain me how an all smiter team can win if this statement was true.
Or what about an air spike team?

Both have ZERO disruption and ZERO enchantment removal - and nevertheless these builds are competetive.

Quote:

Planning for unplanned combinations? One character can only do so much unless you are suggesting only playing mesmers.

You need to be prepared. And you don't need a mesmer for it. A ranger or warrior can also play shutdown. I gave a few examples. So please stop this "relying on mesmers".

Quote:

Nature’s renewal ranks up there id imagine, but that is what id qualify as a chicken and egg scenario. Would that need to exist if the enchantments and hexes weren’t as easy and quickly reapplied as they are?

Do you need high damage spells if you just reduce healing to zero?

Quote:

Interesting concept under the current format, but I was thinking something more along the lines of larger maps and open spaces, with multiple objectives required in tandem opposed to small and enclosed spaces with singular objectives.

So what? If you need to hold an altar in some way or defend something - 16 or 32 or smiting 128 E/Mos will defeat anything (of course there will be counters, but the current skills are not balanced for that).

Quote:

This requires 4 people and is largely stopped by protective spirit, mantra, and other more proactive means.

What about stripping the enchantment or denying the monk to apply it? Or what about degen? What about constant knockdown? What about energy denial.

I think your 'Problem' is, that you only see things in terms of damage. But there is much more than direct damage in the game. Shutdown Ranger will do hardly any direct damage - but because he has shutdown a monk he increased the effect of his team's offense very high.

Quote:

Sustained chain lighting? The rest can be removed.

Yeah, it _can_. But you need energy. And a monk can't just remove hexes and conditions all the time and still be able to heal everyone.

Please. Start a monk so you know what you are talking about.

Phades · Jul 19, 2005, 04:56 PM // 16:56

A character that must be supported in turn needs the team to be built to help him. Otherwise the warrior is trying to copy something another job specializes in. The difference is the impact of effect used, time till its available and how often it can be repeated. Far easier to cycle gale copied than it is to move, build adrenalin, and keep a knockdown sustained indefinatly. Gale does burnout, but knockdown via hammer cycles slower.

I suppose you never heard of wild blow, one of the few unique warrior skills. I am not surprised you brought up shouts, but they really arent comparable. The duration isnt nearly the same nor does it have the freedom to choose targets of application. A few shouts are self only as well, making them more of an attempt at being more "self sufficient", which appears to be something that inflames a nerve you have.

I also wouldnt describe a long and drawn out fight with a spirit build team something that constitutes a setup that is "easily countered". I am also curious though, are air builds godly or easily countered? You have not quite made up your mind about that one yet. There also seems to be a bit of controversy about that in the healing ball tactic threads. Because, if damage like that was ominpotent, then things like that wouldnt matter.

If you are trying to rely solely on a warrior to produce a reliable drain, never mind hit consistantly, i think you are setting yourself up for alot of other problems down the road. Sure, ranger arrows can land as the spell is being cast, but the projectiles are visible, unlike the near instantaneous mesmer spells. Monk heals are not like the largely unused 4-5 second cast time elementalist spells.

Neat, you cover one of 5 objectives, congrats. The other team has the rest you lose, gg... Multiple objectives at the same time does require spreading out and coordination. The current mechanics and victory conditions reminds me of eve online and how everyone just masses together into one huge blob waiting for the other side to blink first. There are very few that actually require the team to move together and protect something. Actually, only the relic running needs that, any kind of priest or lord situation still falls to the large moves enmass. Actually alot of people dont even consider priests as important anyway, so i suppose that instance is rather moot.

I dunno, i think you are losing perspective here. Deny which monk from applying it after its removed? Stop which monk from cross healing? Also, sustaining chain lightning by, what copying it twice? Even then there is still a break in the spells being cast due to recycle times. The exhaustion alone from doing that is also going to catch up with you even if you kill the first target, people do get ressed occasionally. Im also curious though, have you made up your mind that a monk can support a warrior or that he cant. Either the team with monks can remove them reliably or they cant. If they cant, then you would be in the position that warriors should be self sufficient, but you are against characters being more self sufficient. Also, i was refering to the main source of the constant damage and there are ways to wipe away all hexes or conditions all at once.

Seems to me that i must be raining on your profession's day with the manner of your comments. I find it rather strange since im talking in concepts and you are replying in builds and effect.

Nexx · Jul 19, 2005, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Can some 1337 warrior come in here and school the noob warriors in all of us? I really would like see some videos (like those farming videos) that illustrate how warriors are balanced and just as competitive in high-level arena battles as compared to any other class. I heard War Machine did very well using warrior heavy builds that utilized saving andrenaline for massive focused attacks.

Sounds awesome.