Feedback talk:User/Tha Reckoning/Visions of Regret

Also because SS is a Necromancer skill with 2 second activation and not worth Me/Ning for FC. VoR is powerful. SS is powerful. VoR stacking was nerfed. If someone is killing you with VoR, Backfire and Empathy - you're to blame. Bathory talk 07:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No, SS WAS powerful. Now, damage has gotten so out of hand that taking 30 armor ignoring damage for attacking or casting spells is viewed as low. It's not just that you're getting killed by VoR. It's that you have VoR on, your assassin has empathy on, there's a RtL ele in your face, etc etc etc. You can't just view a skill by itself and say "Oh, that's easy, remove the hex" because your party has 50 hexes and conditions on them, dps is raining everywhere, and so much is going on that no healer can afford to take 90 damage per skill, it's just not balanced to lose almost 1/5-1/6 of your health every time you use a skill. -- Tha Reckoning 09:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

You're right. Pressure is waaaayyyy out of control. We should remove damage from the game. Bathory talk 09:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Nobody said anything about removing damage from the game. I can tell from your posts that you seem to think the state of balance in GW is satisfactory, because you keep making statements like that. However, sooner or later you have to realize that you are wrong, because I can literally grab any assassin build you care to name, put my cat on the keyboard and let him walk around, go to the bathroom, make food and come back, and he may not have wins, but he won't have done half bad. I'm not talking about removing damage from the game, but if you think that a skill that makes you take 90 damage per skill is balanced, I recommend getting yourself checked out. -- Tha Reckoning 09:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't deal 90 per skill if it's stacked with Backfire or Empathy, as you suggested. And for the record, I only made that statement because you're raving like a lunatic of a skill that really isn't too influential outside of low-end PvP. If you're having issues with Hex-Way; Adjust. There are lots of options for you, especially in balanced teams. Bathory talk 09:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No, it does MORE than that, when stacked with backfire on casters, or empathy on melee. How many skills do monks carry that backfire won't trigger? Not many. How many skills do assassins carry, that empathy won't trigger? Not many. My balanced team carries four hex removals, one of them being Divert. What options were you suggesting? We still get hexed away into nothing, hex removal is insufficient, but that is another page. The point being that if the game were balanced, there wouldn't be skills that could single handedly ruin a team, by shutting down the healing. The fact that it is low-end PvP has no relation to the discussion at all. Actually, it influences the game community that much more, because HA/GvG are much harder to break into, and any person can get into RA anytime they want to. When you adjust for hexway, you get rolled by sway. When you adjust for sway, another gimmick comes along. We can have the "well if you're getting knocked down carry balance stance" talk, all day long, but you can't effectively counter everything and get wins. -- Tha Reckoning 10:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I don't think your problem is the teams you're fighting or what they're running. =\ Bathory talk 06:05, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, because gimmicks never beat balanced. I mean, that's not the nature of a gimmick. Nobody runs gimmicks because they consistently win without requiring input or anything. Think before you speak, mate. -- Tha Reckoning 13:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Logic fail. You're complaining these gimmicks are making running balanced almost impossible, but now you claim they can never beat balanced. I think I'm done here, there's nothing I can say that would get a sensible reaction from you. Just more insults and circular logic. Good luck getting this read, although they way you react to criticism and concern you're going to need a lot more than just good luck. Bathory talk 18:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Holy shite, are you serious? I think even someone with no experience in society could tell that all that was sarcasm, I can't believe you thought I was serious. Everyone in their right mind knows that gimmicks almost always stomp the hell out of balanced, unless it is extremely experienced balanced. If you can't even use common sense to pick that up, you shouldn't be discussing anything at all. -- Tha Reckoning 21:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Jumping in, Now I could tell that that was sarcasm...after a couple seconds...regardless type does not carry sarcasm well. So I'm not surprised that Bathory got confused. Weaponmaster 04:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Not going to bother to read all but bathory "if you die while under VoR,empathy and backfire its your own fault" This is a wrong statement.Not only does this prove the opposing mesmer was retarded it also proves that a mesmer should be able to shut you down atleast half the time without any actual input this is wrong and bad for the game imo Lilondra *poke* 06:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I still stand by it. If you're Hexed with them and you're letting it kill you... It just makes it seem like they've chosen to retardedly stack hexes on someone retarded enough to trigger them all. Bathory talk 14:59, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

That may be but that doesn't mean the combo isn't OP >>.Look it forces you to choose between taking impossible amounts of damage or actually *doing* something.So either you can't contribute to the team or you take tons of damage and risk dying.Saying that is a balanced scenario is just dumb.I'd say VoR is the epitome bad balance Lilondra *poke* 16:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

If VoR is really being that much of a problem, have you thought of bringing more hex prevention and removal? If you're worried about it in places like GvG and HA more than one person has Hex removal, so putting VoR on one of them doesn't kill both of them. If you're just letting their mesmer complete every cast and then failing to remove the hexes, I don't feel sorry for you. VoR is a strong skill, yes, but I don't even see it everywhere anymore. I think in the last week I've seen more PBlock mesmers than I have VoR mesmers. The novelty has died down, stacking has been hit and this really isn't as influential anymore. Nerfing it further is just un-necessary. Bathory talk 16:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Your missing the point completely.Thats like saying that if Cripshot crippled for 300 seconds you should just bring condition removal.Yes there are counters to hexes but as it stand those are just not powerfull enough.If you think its ok that 25 % of a monks bar + some skills on midline every now and then is devoted to just hex removal.Since hexes aren't run on every team (or atleast not stacks of tem,on regular balanced 1-2 hex removal skills can already suffice on a 8 man team) this means you are forced to gimp yourself.You should feel it if you didn't bring hexremoval or not enough I agree but you shouldn't die.You know whats the difference between Power Block and VoR ? If you fail at Pblock you have little output,If you fail at VoR you are a retard.Its almost impossible and if you do fail like stacking all hexes on one target you STILL GET A SHUTDOWN.You know why Pblock is ran so much ? Because monks are almost forced to run all prot or allhealing bars and hybrids are getting less common.People used to multyspec but right now multyspec is getting close to being exstinct.This means its easier to shut peeps down using Pblock.Bottomline : If you think shutdown with this little imput is ok you need to start playing the game.Having a counter does not make something balanced,VoR is all but a exeption to that rule.Lilondra *poke* 17:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I never said counters made them balanced, Lilondra. I said that if it bother you as much as you act like it does, then maybe you should bring more removal. It doesn't bother me as much as other Mesmer spells, so I don't see the need to do that. Your problem with this spell seems to be more personal than its actual function. It's some damage. Stacking it with shit spells like Backfire isn't that big of a problem. Diversion, Shame and Interrupts are infinitely more effective on shut down then this, which is not only weak to removal but damage prevention. This isn't "rampant", this isn't "broken" it's just fucking damage and I'm shocked that there are people still rabid over this skill. Bathory talk 17:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

1st your assuming I don't run hex removal wich is retarded,everyone does.2nd your assuming I'm the only one thinking its a problem ? Thats just as dumb as most PvP players think its a serious issue.3rd its not just some damage its 1/6th of your health atleast.Then to continue I'd like to mention the problem is that its rly mindless shutdown that leads to really mindless gimmicks.Now I could assume that you are just a retard that abuses the skill like you assumed that I was just a retard that kept getting "owned" by the skill and therefor decided to rant.But I won't,I'll ask you nicely what part of mindless shutdown is balanced to you ? Lilondra *poke* 17:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I've said neither of those assumptions. I'm assumed you're not running enough removal because you're complaining about how strong hex stacking with this spell is. And since I've been having a similar argument with Tha Reckoning I don't know why you'd assume the second. This isn't really shut-down. The only thing this does is damage on skills, which only "influences" people not to use skills. It's damage and you can continue to call it "mindless" all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that there's really nothing further that needs to be done to this skill. And since you've boiled your argument down to nothing but insulting me, I'm done talking to you. Have a nice day trolling. Bathory talk 17:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Lol,Just LoL.First of all I'm not a troll and I've never been one.Second of all Iffuencing the use of skills is shutdown.Then ofcourse the fact that you think its ok to force people to invest more then 2 skill slots a monk in hex removal and where is the boiling ? Lilondra *poke* 17:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Bathory, this skill after the nerf does not need changing again. It took a year for them to finally change it to its current form. Sure VoR was really powerful when stacked with similar 'punishment' ( not shutdown = diversion and disabling skills is shutdown) hexes proved to be too good, so they nerfed that aspect of the skill. Whilst I agree that VoR is a good elite (not many mesmer elites are good only a few are actually used) diversion, shame and powerblock prove to have much stronger effects upon players, damage can be healed, once a skill is diverted or powerblocked you can not get it back until the duration is over. In short this skill does not need another change and it makes me laugh that some people out there still QQ about this skill lol (Surging regrets 15:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC))

So, because Anet is slow to respond, the skill is fine? It's okay to be able to die within casting 4 spells? Yeah, great thinking, that makes sense. -- Tha Reckoning 19:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Spiteful Spirit is a pretty stupid skill, just like many other Hexes. There are examples of Hexes not being retarded, though. These include Water Hexes (when not abused by Mesmers and Domination Magic Hexes (excluding Empathy, Backfire and Visions of Regret). A pattern in these skills is that almost every one of them has a low duration and a lot have a high recharge as well. This works because they are allowed to have power, but aren't allowed to perma keep up the effects. I think that's exactly what should be done to fix Hexes, giving them power but also downsides. Dark Morphon 13:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

FFS

Nerfed =/= balanced. Try to get that through your thick skulls. NuVII 09:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

How is balancing a skill according to the way a balanced skill is balanced, nerfing it? Nerfing = Smiter's Booning. It would face a cutdown in power, but that's exactly what it needs, it's overpowered. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 21:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

My comment was mainly directed at stuff like this "Agree with Bathory, this skill after the nerf does not need changing again". But gg being ultra defensive! NuVII 21:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Countering silly statements like that isn't being defensive. If you don't have something constructive to say, just don't say it. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 22:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. My statement is very silly. You are a great judge of balance. I should stop posting it if I don't have anything constructive to say. In fact, I should stop posting in favor of your arguments, because they are obviously not constructive. NuVII 22:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, you're very smart. In future, if it looks like what you just posted, take your own advice. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 22:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Great! I'm so happy that we reached an agreement! NuVII 22:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what the big deal is. It does like 70-80ish if it's the only hex on them (easy removal) and only like 30-40 damage if they have another hex. So with stacking it isn't as powerful already. 64.222.106.112 01:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a big deal because you take a lot of damage for playing the game, which isn't really a useful mechanic. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 02:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

And that is what Mesmers do. Previously Unsigned 03:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Break the game? -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 03:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Lol Tha Reckoning, you just embarrassed yourself with your ignorant comments. Nerfing is the act of reducing the power of skills or game mechanics in general. Anet did nerf VoR, but it wasn't nearly enough of a nerf. You know, just because it's "not enough" doesn't mean it "isn't there at all". Please, take up a few courses in game design or even better, brush up on your knowledge of these game balance related terms before you get behind of yourself. Thanks. Pika Fan 03:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and just in case you decide to pull the silly and obviously wrong "nerfing = smiter's booning" argument, here's the definition taken from wikipedia: [1]. Pika Fan 03:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you should read that, because VoR isn't any less effective or desirable now, than it was before. Either way, the definition of a nerf has nothing to do with the fact that the skill needs a serious toning-down. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 08:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Reckoning, why are you so defensive? If I can be serious for a moment here, you're not going to be listened by many people if you keep trying to respond everything with "You're bad, stop posting you failure". It usually works 90% of the time, but it doesn't work when you're obviously wrong.

Though personally, I think your aggressiveness makes for delicious trollbait. NuVII 09:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

You guys call it nerf. Imo, it just another lazy way trying to convience themselves they've done about this OP retard-ish skill, as well as another brainless elite.

Worst update ever, made this game much more friendly to skill-less lamers. The guy who did this update might go to ruin GW2 now. Most of problems still unsolved until today.--TeaCat._. 14:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Or you and Tha Reckoning could actually exercise some intelligence in your posts; read and realize that we are saying the skill isn't nerfed enough. The actual definition of "nerf" goes beyond your presumptuous and ignorant attempts to justify the obvious incorrect usage of the term. Pika Fan 14:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

@ Nuclear, every time I post something, you think it's defensive, why not try stepping back and watching? I countered Pika's argument with one of my own, in no way is that defensive, discussion is taking place. @ TeaCat, schyeah. @ Pika, I agree with you that it needs a nerf far beyond the way it was tweaked. I disagree that it was nerfed by that definition, because it removed players from the game before, just as effectively as it does now. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 15:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Whether you disagree or not does not change the fact that the definition of "nerf" of so many people more substantial and proficient than you is simply a reduction in power(of game mechanics), no matter how much, how little, how insignificant or insufficient it is. When you decide to realize logic and facts mean so much more than your fantasies, tell everyone so people can actually take you seriously. Or don't, since most people who are initially incapable of logic remain thus so for the rest of their life, better for them to not die from a splitting headache. Pika Fan 20:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I see, someone like you, who is so much more "substantial and proficient" isn't living in a fantasy. Someone like you who deludes themselves into thinking they're better than everyone else is the only one who doesn't get taken seriously, pika. I'd be willing to bet you even walk with a strut, you're so full of yourself. You'd do well to pull your head out of your ass and stop talking down to people like that, you aren't better than anyone here. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 20:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

At least I care to back up my points with accepted facts and truth. Pray tell me do you? Or do you seriously consider your "thoughts" and "feelings" to be acceptable arguments in a bid to decide what the word "nerf" actually means in a gaming context? I can be as full of myself as I want, it's part of being truthful to myself, and I don't need someone who mixes subjective emotions and views with fact telling me about it. If humans using <10% of their brains are capable of this level of claptrap, I shudder to think what they are capable with 100%. Pika Fan 20:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

You're the only one here troubling over what nerf means, which is kind of funny. You threw down a definition and claimed that you were right, by fiat. Also, you can be as full of yourself if you want, that's true, but don't expect people to lay down in front of you, like you think they will, just because you claim some almighty unbiased intelligence. Subjective emotions are part of humanity, get a spine and deal with it, stop whining that people make decisions based on how they feel, you do it just as much as anyone does. You just can't handle being disagreed with, and that's all this boils down to. If you're so truthful to yourself, and I'm just spouting claptrap, why does it bother you that I disagree? You can point out things that you don't like about me all day long, but that doesn't make you right. You can point out that I'm a nobody, but that doesn't make you right either. The whole problem here is that you're a filthy hypocrite, and you are just as guilty of what you accuse other people of. Take it someplace else, this discussion is over, since you can't even handle being disagreed with, without going off into left field. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 20:46, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. If you weren't troubled, what was that just above my reply? :) I didn't throw down a definition, I even linked you to wikipedia, of course, you tl;dred it like all selective readers do when they handle a losing argument. If you call wikipedia a dubious source, which I can't and won't deny to a certain extent, I have contacts with much, more experienced and professional people working in the gaming industry who would gladly tell you the same thing I am telling you about "nerf".

Subjective emotions are part of humanity, but not related in the least to logic and facts. Nice try at red herrings.

Being truthful to myself has nothing stopping me from being bothered over the fact that you are lamblasting people over your sad misconceptions. Or maybe in your book the notion of "truth" is extremely related to "being annoyed"; I don't know, much of what you are saying thus far doesn't make sense in the least, so that may be a plausible reason.

You have never even refuted my argument once, just ad hominem (not that I really care, as long as it is somewhat related to the issue), off-topic content which you try to pass off as a pathetic excuse for a rebuttal; no links, no sources, no testimonials. Only vague "feelings" over how you think a word should be used. Pika Fan 22:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

"Take it someplace else, this discussion is over..."

Reread thoroughly. -- Tha Reckoning File:User Tha Reckoning Sig2.jpg 22:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

This is between you and me, and it's, albeit tangential to the topic, still related to the topic. This is the correct place to post about it. Also, you can just ignore me and do your own stuff, you know. Pika Fan 22:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)