User talk:Shard/Literal Changes

So you propose to kill Ritualists by making any good skills they had dead? Dark Morphon(contribs) 15:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

You obviously forgot to check the Proposed Buffs to Underpowered Skills. ~Shard (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

You really don't like damage, do you... and despite agreeing that shadowsteps need a change, I don't think an outright -1 to all attributes is the way to go. A limit on maintainability range for AoD would stop range abuse to some extent (make it harder to use on splits in GvG, would still work as an in and out skill, but wouldn't be able to get you back to the frontline as quickly. I have to ask for one consideration when you're arguing/planning these- take more than GvG and HA into account. Pay attention to AB, RA, etc- those areas matter too, despite what most people around here think. Thanks for your time. --Kalas Silvern 07:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Aggreed. If we do all your changes, no1 would ever be able to kill the other guy again. Dark Morphon(contribs) 10:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Nobody good. Many of these changes put skills better than how they were in prophs. ~Shard (talk) 19:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

By the way, the changes to Ranger interrupts you suggested are unneeded, they aren't overpowered. At all. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Dark_Morphon (talk).

Which is why interrupt mesmers are everywhere, right? ~Shard (talk) 19:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No they are not, but Physical Distraction mezzes are used a lot. Ranger interrupts are NOT overpowered. Dark Morphon(contribs) 09:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind Mesmers are more for shutdown and Rangers more for interruption+utility. But of course, you don't play the game. Dark Morphon(contribs) 13:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

And what amazing top guild are you in if I don't play the game? I never see you in observe for gvg, I never see you in halls or even UW for that matter. You play the game less than I do. GTFO hypocrite. This is a talk page, not a baseless accusation page. ~Shard (talk) 01:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

By saying I'd stop with trolling I expected you to do the same. Apparently I thought wrong. Dark Morphon(contribs) 11:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

If you start like this I see no reason not to troll. Dark Morphon(contribs) 11:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't troll. I punish people who make baseless claims. Stop making them and we can hold hands and be friends. ~Shard (talk) 21:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

soul barbs change is good, now go find a way to maek recurring insecurity good too as it was baed cuz of soul barbs --Frozen Archer 23:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Look at the date, look at when I said I'd stop trolling. Makes sense to you now? Anyway. Gonna look through this again. Dark Morphon(contribs) 15:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Alrite, let's go. Why do you suggest killing every good bow attack a Ranger has? Do you really think they are OP? Dark Morphon(contribs) 15:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

No, but expertise is. 2 energy for a +50 damage attack skill is a joke. Ranger spike is too abusive because of skills like Keen and Sloth Hunter's because they do big damage for very little energy and recharge too quickly. ~Shard (talk) 07:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Which is why you suggest killing Dshot? Dark Morphon(contribs) 11:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

And Savage shot? Dark Morphon(contribs) 11:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not killing them at all. In fact, good rangers won't even tell the difference. I'm trying to stop mindless interrupt spamming and promote more skilled or timed interrupting. As long as you interrupt something, the recharges are exactly the ssame as they are now. ~Shard (talk) 03:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Meh, I agree with many of the changes but I have 2 say the changes to the ranger skills are a bit....harsh. Honestly, there are VERY few ranger builds played outside of gimmicks like the r/d. Yeah magebane is good but it used to be ALOT better. Remember it already got nerfed. I admit stopping people from spamming interrupts is good but sometimes u just miss. You weren't spamming and you used d-shot and whether through lag or bad timing u miss. Do you really want to punish rangers for missing an interrupt occasionally as well as spamming. As far as burning arrow goes....it's honestly not op. Burning arrow allows a ranger to add a bit of damage to their utility. I mean honestly bows do such little damage anyway and most bow attacks suck so bad that having an elite skill that adds a good bit of pressure for a cheap energy cost is okay...because it's elite. The +damage is necessary because bows are the exact opposite of scythes in terms of raw power. R-spike is powerful, but do you seriously want 2 kill the only NON-GIMMICK ranger build along with all the gimmick builds. Finally, your proposed changes to expertise are.....stupid. You basically want to make expertise a ranger's version of spawning power which arguably the worst primary attribute in the game.Unless you want to make all their skills one energy with that kind of primary rangers would suck so bad because of the excessive energy costs of their skills that you would be lucky to see one in arenas let alone High-end pvp like GvG. 02:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)Psychiatric Consultant 17:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the feedback. Spawning power is bad because summoned creatures already suck balls and because an extra 2% duration per point on weapon spells, most of which last 10 seconds, is unnoticeable. Stances have much longer durations. Preperations have much longer durations. Ranger skill costs would be toned down if it was changed, of course, so energy wouldn't be a problem for them anymore.

I'll agree BA is fine.

If you miss with an interrupt, chances are, there's one or two left on your bar. All the mesmer interrupts have 20ish second recharges. They're easier to use, but do you really want people interrupting one thing every 4 seconds on average? That's why Choking Gas and Warmonger's Weapon are broken. ~Shard (talk) 02:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Back to my points. With 0 activation you mean normal attack speed right? Cause that's the thing that would kill the interrupts, them being slow. If, however, you meant it to be as it is now I fully aggree with you about the changes for some of them. Dark Morphon(contribs) 09:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The template I use for those icons requires a number. 0 recharge means regular activation for attack skills, instant activation on everything else. ~Shard (talk) 02:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

But then they are nerfed to death :/. Perhaps they should keep their fast activation time? Dark Morphon(contribs) 12:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Ohh, until now I hadn't noticed I did that. Yes they should keep their interrupt speeds. I was a little confused about what you were talking about until I checked it. ~Shard (talk) 22:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Then they are all right ;). Dark Morphon(contribs) 07:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Your "nerf" to expertise only causes new ways of abuse. I can already see a few stuff like permaEscape and other skills being abused. Better reconsider that "nerf" of yours.220.255.7.235 19:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Because it's not possible to change multiple things in a single update, right? Some people are so narrowminded... ~Shard (talk) 22:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL narrow minded? I suppose its the other way round, ya? You are so narrow minded that you fail to consider the problems your "solutions" will cause. P.S Don't ask for discussions if you can't handle neutral critique, and rebut them with personal attacks. P.P.S Ever heard of "Out of the frying pan into the fire"? P.P.P.S Hmm, I am sure I have disabled my proxies before posting. Ah well.220.255.7.222 03:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I made an assumption that the people reading this would be smart enough to infer that changing PA's might possibly affect skills. I didn't think I would have to spell it out to the less intelligent people. But, just for you 220, I'll post a disclaimer.

OMG WAIT I DONT HAVE TO, QUOTE=MY PAGE "Adjust length of ranger stances and preps, and lower cost of high cost ranger skills to compensate."

Maybe you should finish reading each line of ideas before criticizing me. Was there another PA that I changed without fixing its skills? ~Shard (talk) 05:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Which probably explains why there aren't many skills and primary attributes reworked to have a totally different effect, since they affect so many other skills ya? Use some sense and, instead of choosing the most troublesome solution, use effective and efficient solutions. Why solve problems when you just create more? Assuming that skills will be reworked after the change doesn't change the fact that it hasn't change, hassle or not.220.255.7.241 12:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Resorting to personal attacks doesn't change the fact that you clearly have not thought it through properly. Do remember this. Calling other narrow-minded only serves to deck the signboard "I am not right in the head" which you are carrying with neon lights.220.255.7.244 13:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and disclaimers do not disclaim you from being shallow.220.255.7.241 13:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Read my "how to lose an argument" thing on my main page. You just fell under two of those.

Saying "I made an assumption that people would be smart" is not a personal attack. If you're defensive enough to think I meant you're an idiot, good for you, but that's not what I said. Get off my talk page until you can bring up a good argument.

Also, lol @ someone calling me shallow, and they couldn't finish reading the first line of my article. ~Shard (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL Kindly quote where I said "I made an assumption that people would be smart" was a personal attack. To enlighten you, calling people who gave a neutral comment "narrow-minded" is trolling AND making personal attacks. Pot calling the kettle black. And a person who phails at giving arguments now preaches to others how to make good arguments is just sad. Really. FYI: Shallow people are people who just just mentally immature. Scroll up and see how exactly you break the "rules to arguing". Since it is justified by you to label others as "narrow-minded simply because they ask you to reconsider the nerf to Expertise, don't set double standards and expect differently from others what you give to them.152.226.7.213 09:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Quote from me: Your "nerf" to expertise only causes new ways of abuse. I can already see a few stuff like permaEscape and other skills being abused. Better reconsider that "nerf" of yours.220.255.7.235 19:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Quoted from Shard: Because it's not possible to change multiple things in a single update, right? Some people are so narrowminded... ~Shard (talk)

Also, you adjust ranger stances and totally neglect stances from other professions. That's smart really. And before you start making comments like "Duh we should assume that other professions get their stance durations changed", basically that will affect other professions negatively. Was it really so offensive to ask you to reconsider your "nerf" that it warrants such a sarcastic reply? Know who is the perpetrator of this flame war.152.226.6.203 09:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't mention changing other profession's stances. That discussion is on the bottom half of this page. ~Shard 17:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't have brought it to your attention to the possible abuses of other profession's stances if you have mentioned it already! Furthermore, I brought this up before the discussion at the end of the page was there >_>152.226.6.203 03:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Warmonger's

10 ¾ 6 "For 6 seconds, the next time target ally attacks a foe using a skill, that skill is interrupted." Adjust recharge as appropriate, maybe 15e. Good? -- Armond Warblade 02:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The uptime would still be 100%, which is bad. It doesn't matter how much you make something cost, there will always be ways of lowering it, especially for rits. ~Shard (talk) 10:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Sudden image of an expel rit with GoLE. 3s duration, 18s recharge? -- Armond Warblade 01:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather say 5e 1/4c 8 recharge 5 seconds duration. Only 1 interrupt of course, don't kill the skill, make it balanced. Dark Morphon(contribs) 10:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It either needs to have a set amount of interrupts or an extremely short duration. 15+ seconds is outrageous. ~Shard (talk) 06:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's why I think mine is good, only 1 interrupt making it a lot less imba. At 5e 1/4c 8r it should be ok. Dark Morphon(contribs) 14:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

At one interrupt it would take extreme coordination to actually interrupt something important. You can't see a depravity going up, tell your frontline to attack it, then give him a weapon. It has to have multiple interrupts, or a duration, but right now it's simply too long. ~Shard (talk) 06:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Scalable interrupts 1...3...3? That combined with, let's say 15 recharge and 1...4...5 seconds duration? Dark Morphon(contribs) 10:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Expel rit with gole? I suppose its GW's new feature. Rt/Me/E. I wonder why I haven't seen one.220.255.7.235 19:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

He obviously got Expel by using Arcane Mimicry on the real expel rit. ~Shard (talk) 22:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

5 ¼ 12 "For 6 seconds, the next time target ally uses an attack skill it takes half the normal time to activate and interrupts the foe." makes the ally able to time an interrupt --Cursed Angel 23:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes the skill with 20 secs and 60 recharge. Lasts very long if I might add. Great energy management too.220.255.7.226 03:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh I didn't know Rt/Me could use GoLE. Or a Rt/E using arcane mimicry. Kindly read my reply and read the part about what I replied to, instead of blind-trolling. Armond Warblade"Sudden image of an expel rit with GoLE. 3s duration, 18s recharge?"220.255.7.221 03:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It was a joke you moron. I apologize for not using [/obvious sarcasm] tags. ~Shard (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Same here it was a joke you douchebag. I also apologize for not using [/obvious sarcasm] tags.152.226.6.203 09:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Moral of the story. Kindly not use sarcasm as an excuse for not reading properly/thinking clearly.152.226.6.203 09:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice joke, but you never posted here before. Register an account. ~Shard 17:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's a rule that specifically states that I can't use different computers to post. Funny that you can't tell that the person who said "Oh I didn't know Rt/Me could use GoLE. Or a Rt/E using arcane mimicry. Kindly read my reply and read the part about what I replied to, instead of blind-trolling. Armond Warblade"Sudden image of an expel rit with GoLE. 3s duration, 18s recharge?" was me. I am too lazy to create an account, but I do make it obvious who I am.152.226.6.203 03:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

After pondering a while, I think I agree that I should create an account to post. Please look out for Lala Lalalala Lala or an IGN along that line. And no, I am not trying to be funny, that's my PvP Character's IGN.152.226.6.203 03:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Quite obviously I wasn't serious about an expel rit carrying gole, nor was Shard serious about a gole rit carrying arcane mimicry. That was more of a comment on how gole is the ultimate solution to caster energy problems than anything else. -- Armond Warblade 15:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, my dear, the meta is Expel rits, as you so mentioned. Yes, GoLE is a good energy management skill, BUT it certainly doesn't apply to expel rits. Hence, your argument(or comment or whatever it was you meant) that GoLE is the ultimate solution to caster energy problems are redundant. Unless, that is you run Rt/E. It is obvious that you weren't serious about an expel rit carrying GoLE; however, whatever your intention was, it wasn't impacted. Since your intention and point wasn't impacted, clearly it looked, I repeat, it looked like it was lacking on your part. You can start to avoid misunderstandings such as that by being a tad bit more obvious in your intentions. Jesting about Expel rits with GoLE merely gives me the impression you weren't thinking about one primary one secondary profession. Not what you may or may not have originally intended. Hope this makes it clear.152.226.7.211 08:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

A long-winded reflection

Your proposed change to Expertise here could potentially allow for Dervish, Warrior, Mesmer, and Assassin stance abuse. A Ranger/Warrior with 15 ranks Expertise and 10 ranks Tactics, for example, would end up with a 14 second Auspicious Parry (3 seconds longer than a rank 15 Tactics Warrior would have), a 25 second Balanced Stance (5 seconds longer than a 15 Tactics Warrior), a 14 second Gladiator's Defense (3 seconds longer than 15 Tactics Warrior), and 6 second Wary Stance (equal to rank 15 Tactics). Considering that Strength attribute stances are at rank 0 on a secondary, I find it somewhat unnerving that a R/W (using your solution) might end up with an 8 second Bull's Charge (equal to a Warrior with at least 7 in Strength).

I'd also like to point out that with that setup, a R/A would end up with a nearly 5 second long Dash, a R/Me would end up with a likewise nearly 5 second Distortion (which would be basically maintainable), a R/D would end up with a maintainable Conviction at 3 Earth Prayers....

While none of these particular skills seem all that daunting of an issue, if at all, you also need to remember that the EotN Dwarven Rank skills like Dwarven Stability can potentially double the duration, making it even easier to abuse secondary stances.

A long-time Ranger myself, I do believe that Expertise is one of the more powerful PA's, and I do think that something should be done to balance it a bit more. Granted, ANet has nerfed it in the past by making it effect only certain non-ranger skills, but I think something more needs to be done. However, I don't believe your particular solution, at face value, is a viable one mainly because it would take more than simply rebalancing the Ranger skills to make it work; it would require potentially nerfing every profession in the game because of one class that may or may not even use certain skills to begin with.

I agree with you in that Soul Reaping is due for another rebalance, but I also believe that removing energy regain from summoned creatures completely actually harms minion masters in PvE (where in certain situations it may become difficult to properly maintain a sizeable force). Because of this, I think that each summoned minion should return 1/3 of the energy the Necromancer would receive otherwise, rounded down to a minimum of 1. That way, at 15-16 Soul Reaping a Necromancer would only receive 5 energy in return, and would gain 0 for spirits. Something else to consider.

Dervish skills in general seem fairly balanced to me, but tweaking Mysticism may be a good idea now that I'm thinking about it. I actually think that Scythes are a bigger problem than the skills and attributes themselves though, and IIRC you already mentioned Scythes somewhere else.

Looking back at your Ranger suggestions though, I am curious as to why you would want to limit the functionality of the Beast Mastery skills, mainly Comfort Animal. Disabling your skills for 20 seconds almost guarantees that your pet will die again, and shutting down a BM Ranger will become retardedly simple. By shutting down all of the other BM skills for that long, you basically guarantee that the Ranger will remain in lockdown for the remainder of the fight. I see where you are coming from with the skill change, but at the same time... once the pet dies, it loses all shouts, calls, etc. on it, and resurrecting it with your proposed Comfort Animal will prevent the pet from getting re-buffed... and will make it extremely difficult for the Ranger to do anything other than use Troll Unguent and heal the pet. With your current Expertise suggestion, it would cost roughly 1/3-1/5th of the Ranger's energy bar to maintain the pet's health, making for a possible 6-7 max heals. If an opponent understands the game (which most do), they can essentially pressure the pet repeatedly until the Ranger bombs his energy and the pet dies, entering him into lockdown again. A Beast Master relying on his pet will probably have 5-6 BM skills on his bar, so in reality you're doing severe harm instead of good. Thumpers and Enraged Lunge builds need looking at, sure, but this definitely is not the answer.

Also regarding Ritualists, I actually agree that Spawning Power and Restoration magic are very overpowered and that Communing is pretty bad, but I think that your nerfs to Resto Magic are a little bit harsh. In my opinion they remove Resto Ritualists as a main-heal option all together, and should be re-examined. A nice balance between the current skills and what you have suggested would be ideal. This applies to everything except Weapon of Remedy.

Overall, they look pretty good. I just think that, especially in the case of Rangers, you need to remember your changes to Primary Attributes before changing the other skills. The lack of energy reduction in Expertise will make some of your current skill setups somewhat unwieldy with the proposed nerfs.

Sorry for writing a long, long feedback, but I feel that you've got your head mainly in the right place and thought I'd add a few suggestions of my own. 67.167.55.69 01:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Which was exactly what I had brought up, in a nutshell. Apparently, I got a reply "People are so narrowminded these days". Charming isn't it?220.255.7.228 03:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and the post. Long isnt always bad, as youve proven.

The main reasons I want to nerf comfort are to prevent abuse from rangers who have a pet because it's a requirement for a skill, not because they want to use the pet. Comfort will not shut itself down, it shuts down other BM skills. The idea is to give all builds a counter to RaO. Classic Beast Masters will still be able to run their builds, given that they keep their pet alive, which is easy to do.

It took me a long time to decide to post the expertise change, based on the reasons you listed. However, there aren't many stances that would really benefit from, say, double duration. Stances are uniquely balanced in that they provide a very weak effect over a long period of time, so they aren't that OP.

Soul Reaping would be fine without minions giving back energy. My necro has no problems in pve and I dont run any energy management. In reality, the minions pay for themselves by the things they kill.

Here's the thing about resto rits: They allow rit secondaries to heal better than monk secondaries, which is not ok. N/Rts, aside from having a bottomless energy pool, use rit heals because they're plain-out better than monk heals. Monks need to invest twice as many attribute points for divine favor to meet the healing pwoer of rits, minus the elites. Rits as a whole need to be reworked, probably more than any other prof.

Dervish skills are a little on the weak side, and the problem is with scythes, not the profession itself. Mysticism, however, fuels near limitless energy for scythe attacks on dervish primaries, where it shouldn't. Mysticism is like soul reaping - it's random and passive energy management.

Tweaking skills based on changed primary attributes is a given, I assumed people would infer that. I'm almost positive I stated that somewhere. This isn't really a "If I could do one game balance, what would it look like," it's more of a collection of ideas. There are even a few things in this list that other people suggested on izzys skill feedback pages. Not everything on this list (and the others) will work perfectly with everything else, because they all depend on different states of the game, it was made as a source of inspiration in case izzy ever wanted to ask the community what to do. ~Shard (talk) 05:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Again thanks for the feedback, long posts tell me you thought it through. ~Shard (talk) 05:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with you on the Expertise change still only because it would cause a massive reworking of the Ranger profession. While I did like some things, such as the interrupt nerf/buff (I can't decide which it is), I don't believe a 25-38 base energy pool (assuming only Radiant Insignia and a +5e bow are used) with three regen pips is enough to fuel the energy costs on the skills. While they're not supposed to be spammable, I would hate to see all Ranger builds require Prepared Shot + Expert's Focus to run smoothly. If you insist on taking out the energy reduction aspect, then I would like to see an extra energy regen pip added to help compensate. As it is, most Ranger bow attacks cost 10e (take a glance down the list of bow attacks and see what I'm talking about: Bow Attack it's 17 out of 41 attacks) and most of the more-popular/useful preparations cost between 10e and 15e. I can already foresee Rangers becoming extremely vulnerable to E-denial or having longevity problems. A monk can function effectively with only 5e plus regeneration, but I don't think a Ranger could even begin to do so with some of the more useful skills costing 10e each and only three regeneration. I would suggest making the skills and energy look a little bit more like the Assassin's do if you want to take Ranger energy management out. The reason Rangers have Expertise and a high number of expensive skills is to attempt to enforce the fact that Ranger primaries are supposed to be using the skills, not Critsins (who lose all effectiveness with a bow) or Monks/Ritualists/Elementalists with too much free time.

Other than that, you do make some sense with everything else. Admittedly I've got very little MM experience myself, I was under the assumption (via reading other peoples' comments on the SR matter) that energy costs become a large matter in certain missions and dungeons, but you can correct me if I'm wrong there. Mysticism I do agree needs tweaks, and I'm actually not sure if your changes are enough tbh. Also, I love Ritualists like no other, and I do believe they need major reworking all across the board, but I think there are better ways to manage how effective Ritualist healing is on a secondary. For example, Ritualists still cannot prevent a spike like a Monk can, and although the heals are very strong they mean nothing if the party is dead. I think that a different method can be reached, such as making the skills heal for slightly less and adding a bit longer recharge time, making them dependent on Spawning Power only spirits/spells/etc, or changing both Monk and Rit heals to do specific tasks; in other words making Rits the powerhouse healers and having Monks focus more on Protection or something like that. I would love Rits to retain the ability to be support/backup/utility healers without underpowering them because a Necromancer can abuse the skills.

Last thing: keeping pets alive is easy with bond builds, yes, but once the pet dies (it happens, unfortunately) your skills still are subjected to a small shutdown period as-is, and I don't believe resurrecting your pet should triple that penalty. Crenel 06:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, just thought of two more things (apologies): With 15 Expertise and Dwarven Stability, Dash would last longer than 8 seconds and would be maintainable, potentially making running a joke. Also, why not add a modifier to Restoration Magic stating that since other professions are not as (literally) spiritual as Ritualists are, they suffer -25% to their healing potential while using Ritualist healing spells? That would make it possible for Primary Ritualist healers to reap the full benefits of their abilities while making it more difficult for N/Rt's to abuse the spells. Crenel 07:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

My considerations are for pvp balance. Besides, running isn't a joke yet?. I'm not at all worried about stance durations ruining pve.

Yes, Shadow Form is a problem, but Shadow Form makes everything a joke, not just running. Using Shadow Form and Dash with a perpetual duration seems like you're trying too hard to make it too easy to do things that ANet would like to keep somewhat difficult. Crenel 06:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I said it on the other overpowered skills that need nerf page of yours, and I have no choice but to ask it again. You really don't like rangers, do you? 71.131.19.250 16:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll be honest, based on their primary attribute, rangers are the most broken class in the game. I'd like to see them become RANGErs someday. ~Shard 17:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I can tell you right now, the only way to make a Ranger into a "RANGEr" is to discourage them from using secondary weapon skills such as hammers or axes in favor of bow attacks. Give all bow attacks a base energy cost of 10e and make them all extremely useful depending on Expertise level and pretty worthless without it. For example, the energy cost alone should discourage people, but having Expertise add 1-16% longer conditions or damage or flight/attack speed to bow attacks would be a MUCH better way to make Rangers use bow attacks over melee attacks than turning Expertise something that will encourage them to ONLY participate in melee via stance duration buffs. 67.167.55.69 20:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't think nerfing dshot, savage, burning arrow, sloth hunters, and forked arrow will help with that objective. I agree that RaO is pretty f#@%ing stupid though. You're propsed change to comfort will kill ALL beast mastery builds except HaO, however. I acknowledge that that would not be too many builds, but I think they've already f@#$ed w/ enough s#$% to deal with RaO. I have no idea why you want to nerf keen arrow, since its bad. Smoke trap isnt great either (like most skills that can be countered by wanding). Sword.wind. 19:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

A 5 energy ranged attack skill that does +60 damage is bad? Keen Arrow is one of the best attack skills in the game.

Comfort blackouts won't kill beast master builds. Stop letting your pet die. 72.253.129.142 20:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Personally I think you're missing the point I tried to make with Comfort Animal. Giving it a 20 second knockout of your skills is three times the standard downtime you already get when your pet dies... so not only do you need to wait the 10 seconds to even use Comfort Animal, you need to wait another 21 total seconds (including cast time to res your pet) to even attempt to rebuff him/her? That seems extremely retarded imo, considering you're more than tripling the already existing penalty. Yes, no duh you should not let your pet die, but I don't feel that punishing you into oblivion because of it is a fair OR balanced approach. In fact, why don't you just change RaO to end as soon as your pet dies, and all other skills that interact like that while you're at it? That would be a MUCH easier/better approach to the situation than saying, "Let's screw over everyone because I don't like RaO much." You're all over-thinking and missing obvious solutions while creating even more problems while you're at it. 67.167.55.69 20:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Your OTHER Beast Mastery skills are disabled..."

"Other" is an exclusive adjective meaning "not this one, but everything else" ~Shard 21:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to say this again. Just one more time, so you understand where I'm coming from. I do in fact understand that it says your "OTHER" beast mastery skills are shut down, I do. However, I do not believe that putting a Ranger into Comfort Animal lock-down mode is a viable way to solve the problems with one build. RaO can easily be modified on its own to solve your problem by making it end when your pet dies, and giving the 20 second cooldown to RaO (if your pet dies while it is active) is a much more appropriate approach to balancing the skill. How you currently have it set up is this: Pet dies, skills are disabled for 10 seconds. Res pet (one second, total 11). All Beast Mastery skills except Comfort Animal are shut down for 20 seconds. Seems okay, right? The only problem then would be... what happens if your pet dies before those twenty seconds are up? The skills would become disabled for another 20 seconds. Since stacking shutdowns are unlikely, it would only reset the shutdown to a new instance of 20 seconds, but does forcing a Ranger to do nothing but resurrect his pet seem like a fair way to nerf RaO? What happens to the poor sap in AB who happens to be running an Enraged Lunge build and his pet dies then? Is he supposed to sit there with nothing but Comfort Animal, Charm Animal (useless) and Troll Unguent on his bar for 20 seconds, hoping that his pet doesn't die again, unable to do anything but use one of the worst heals in the game to support his pet? He's unable to re-bond his pet (because the skills are shut down), and his pet is almost guaranteed to die again upon resurrection. In fact, all you are doing is promoting the idea that once a pet dies you should leave it dead, regardless of any type of circumstance or details. Do you really, truly, honestly feel that you are BALANCING the game with your proposed solution? You don't need to sass me for finding a legitimate problem with one of your proposed skill "balances" that you refuse to acknowledge or even address as an issue. Crenel 06:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I believe I also said that pets dying wouldn't cause a blackout anymore, so you'd be able to start ressing/healing your pet immediately.

I realize this would be troublesome for people who run pets for a real reason, and any player hell-bent on keeping someone's pet dead could do so indefinitely. However, there are many Beast Mastery skills that aid in keeping pets alive, and there are other methods of keeping them alive as well. Pet's aren't a one-shot deal; you don't use them, wait for them to die, then use them again. Pets are a member of your party and should be treated like one. When a pet dies, you should lose something valuable, just like you would if a party member died. If you want your pet to live longer, heal it, prot it, make it retreat when needed.

Please also realize that comfort will only shutdown beast mastery skills, so you wouldn't even be "shut down" if your pet needs to be ressed. You res them, use some attack skills, maybe d shot something important, see if the pet lives, then you can be a beast master again. If not, bring more healing.

There are easier ways of shutting down RaO, but RaO is not the only build that abuses pets. Smiting, Enraged Lunge, IWAY (before it was changed) all used pets for one shot effects, and they will always be able to until there is a penalty for letting your pet die. ~Shard 22:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand exactly what you are saying, however you are failing to grasp what I am getting at. Because of this, I am going to stop trying. Sorry for the inconvenience and the long posts, but be glad that I will be out of your way now. Happy hunting! 67.167.55.69 21:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

To 72: Yes, an attack skill that does +20 dmg 85% percent of the time is bad. You might get the +60 rarely, but thats not worth it. It is def not "one of the best attack skills in the game". And comfort blackouts will severely hamper already beastmaster builds (which are already very weak). Pet heals are inefficient, and having to have the your team's healers consistantly heal them is an energy drain, espeacilly when you consider the pet's reluctance or complete failure to avoid AoE and other issues. Sword.wind. 23:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

That was me, and keen always does +20 damage. The other +35 only happens 50% of the time, which makes it still a very powerful skill for 5(2 after expertise). The biggest concern is ranger spikes. Paragons can push your chance to critical to 90%, which means keen strikes for over 120 practically every time.

Almost every damage skill on this list would be fine if diminishing skill damage were implemented. Its a pity it isn't yet.

How will comfort weaken beast master builds? Oh, no, it's losing health. Use comfort, it's healed. O noes my pet died, use comfort, it has 200+ health now. Keeping pets alive is a joke. This will only make it easier. ~Shard 23:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In order to get a 5 energy cost skill down to 2 energy with Expertise, you need at least 13 ranks of Expertise. Most PvP Rangers focusing on bow attacks (specifically Marksmanship) only have 9-12 ranks, rarely hitting 13. There are much better ways to allocate skill points, so I'm going to throw that argument out the window. At 15 Marksmanship, Keen Arrow always does +20 damage, yes... but at 15 Marksmanship, Crossfire also always does +20 damage and can be unblockable. Keen Arrow has conditional damage, yes, but the only way to actually control how the conditional damage will turn out is by taking an Assassin Primary with a Ranger secondary, making the maximum damage at 12 Marksmanship +17 (+29). Considering that A/R's aren't common at all outside of AB and RA (and even then, using a bow?) I would then assume that the only way to control the conditional damage would be to cross your fingers and pray for a lucky shot, correct? I don't actually see your argument with Keen Arrow. If you really don't like the skill, just give it a 15 second cooldown and increase it to 10e and call it a day. You're thinking too heavily into it. Using "Go for the Eyes!" with the skill would be bad, yes, but so would be using "Go for the Eyes!" with a Warrior or really ANY profession with a skill that will already hit for a high amount of damage. Just because this skill has a unique conditional modifier doesn't mean it's a major problem... perhaps "Go for the Eyes!" is the problem here? Take a look at that one, perhaps?

Also, Resurrecting your pet and Healing your pet are completely different. Sure, your pet comes back to life with over 200 health at at least 12 ranks Beast Mastery, but at 12 ranks it only heals for 87 and costs 10e. How do you propose you prevent your pet from dying (and future shutdowns) if you cannot bond your pet? If you assume that the point is to allow the pet to die again, you need to understand that you are only taking a small handful of builds into account. You plan on nerfing more builds into oblivion by changing Comfort Animal than you are intending to, but the point is that you're still doing it. Crenel 06:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Let Me clarify: I ment to say that it would do +20 85% of the time, and +35 and +20 the other 15% or so, so yes, the +20 is always there(My probabilities are a little off, 15 Marks gives about 21% of critical hitting [where are you getting the 50% stat?]) I had only really seen this skill used by A/R douche bags, but, to be fair, I haven't HA'd all that much recently. After reviewing the skill a little more, however, I have to agree that it is quite strong (especially w/, as you noted, a paragon). I also have to note that you're proposed change wouldn't really do much against ranger spike, as they have room for two "lead" spike skills: they can just alternate. I guess every little bit helps. On comfort animal: healing a living pet with the skill isn't cost effective, and waiting after it has died to res it is already a considerable penalty. Plus, since they get dp now, you end up spending more and more time resurrecting them or trying to heal them (so you don't have to resurrect them). 71.131.19.250 03:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC) Sorry, last post was mine again. Sword.wind. 03:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Nerfed to fix ranger spike, not because the skill is inherently powerful, which is the case anyway. ~Shard 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you're getting what I'm trying to say. I'm agreeing with you that keen arrow is,in fact, overpowered. I also agree that it can be abused in Ranger Spike. I however, do not believe that you're proposed nerf will damage it that much for Ranger spikes, but knock it out of the game for other (more balanced/attribute spread) rangers. Unfortuantly, I can not think of a viable way for it to hurt one without hurting the other. I'll have to think on it. Sword.wind. 00:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC) I agree with your proposed changes to Forked arrow and glass arrows. I have a few questions, however. With your change to magebane shot, by "skill" do you mean none-spell specfically or are you using the more general discription of, well, everything on the skillbar? Also, why do you feel smoke trap needs a nerf? Sword.wind. 01:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Skill as in anything you put on a skill bar.

Keen would be balanced at 10 energy, meaning it wouldn't be killed. It would still be better than most other 10e bow attacks, damage wise.

AoE unconditional daze is bad for the game. Smoke Trap is usually a breaking point in matches against iway/sway or anything with trappers in general. ~Shard 03:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, its an AoE daze that can be countered by wanding or walking away, but I see your point. I do disagree with it, but I see it. I'll /sign on you're proposed change to magebane then. And most 10e bow attacks that revolve around damage aren't that great (sloth hunters and burning arrow are the current exceptions). I'll also /sign for you're savage shot proposal. However, I think the dshot change is overly harsh. Maybe 15 sec recharge w/ ur new 1/2 recharge effect if it intrupts? Sword.wind. 05:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Dshot has a very powerful effect for practically no cost. IF it interrupts and comes back 7 seconds later, that would make it better than diversion. Right now 10s recharge if it interrupts something is the same as 10 second recharge if it interrupts something with my change. With the interrupt changes, I'm trying to punish people who mindlessly spam interrupts all over the place hoping to hit something, and motivating those interrupters to actually be awake. A positive sideeffect of this (or negative depending on how you look at it) is that it will discourage poison spreading via dshot and savage. ~Shard 06:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Last posts

What's with the IP range of postings? Backsword 04:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't realize I hadn't logged in and didn't bother to clarify who made the "A long-winded reflection" post earlier. Well, now you know. Crenel 04:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Rending touch

A new way to consider nerfing that skill is to increase the recharge to 16 seconds then recharge twice as fast if an enchantment is removed from the user.152.226.6.203 09:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Or we could make it work the way it's supposed to. ~Shard 17:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It may not have been supposed to work that way anyway, until it is confirmed to be not working the way it should, I feel that the way above is an alternative to your solution. This way, it rewards players who remove their own enchants to remove other's enchants, and at the same time "preserve" and balance the current function of rending touch. And yes, I was the one who posted the suggestion.152.226.6.203 03:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I do agree that your proposed solution is a good one, but we can't assume that the skill is not working the way it should until it is confirmed.152.226.6.203 03:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Rending touch: You and target touched foe lose 1 Enchantment." (Most)Enchant removals still can be used on foes without enchantments, so like-wise it could, I repeat, it could be intended to be the same for the converse. I agree the skill, however, is a tad unbalanced with its current state, and should be rebalanced according to what the skill should actually do.152.226.6.203 03:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

When you've seen as many game balance mechanisms as me, you pick up on it. This is supposed to remove an enchantment from both. ~Shard 06:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Balancing is supposed to reduce functionality of OP skills to that of other skills of that level. Not kill them. And as I have said, enchant removals on the opponent still "works", as in it is castable, but no effect reaped. Likewise, the converse may hold for self-enchant removals. Referring to skills like Signet of Pious Light implies that the skill(rending touch) was meant to work like that. It is overpowered, yes. But changing the intended functionality of the skill when there are better alternatives is not very good.Pika Fan 08:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Skill balance comments

Instead of posting my views on individual skills one-by-one and clogging up the discussion page, lets do it all in one shot.

Glass arrows: May I assume that one of the reasons for the nerf is that other elite preparations are underpowered compared to this? Please enlighten me if this is not true/complete.

Scavenger's focus requires twice the energy for a much lower conditional damage and lasts a much lesser time, abeit the fact that it can apply to other non-bow weapons.

Suggestion: I feel that glass arrows is currently balanced at this point of time, save for a slightly longer-than-usual duration than most preparations(your reduction to its duration seems fair and needed). A recharge increase is not really needed, since, after the reduce in duration, it would make it on par with melandru's arrows.

Glass arrows was meant to punish blockfests slightly, as well as to increase dps of rangers. With the increase in recharge, even normal preps like Read the Wind would be comparable to this skill.

Rampage as One: The problem with this skill is, the energy cost is currently a bit low. In what way? Pets are annoying distractions when coupled with the ranger spamming interrupts/thumping bla bla bla; giving both the user and the pet increased IMS and IAS with a measly 25 energy(not even counting expertise in!) negates the use of snares and further increases the annoyance to others. Healers/prots, for the most part are most affected by this. They have to heal and constantly kite to avoid interrupts from the ranger, run away from the pet which is attacking and chasing the poor supporter.

Suggestion: Rampage merely requires a nerf to its IAS(25%?) and IMS(15%), which will slow down interrupts and its current state of imbalance. Increasing its recharge to 60secs and increasing its duration by around 10 seconds is too punishing for a skill of elite status.

Paragons Go For The Eyes! Paragons were meant to be support to offense(Eg. Increase average DPS of the party etc). GFTE offers support for the next attack, and increases the dps of all allies slightly. However, 4 adrenaline would allow that increase in DPS to be used/spammed too often. Changing GFTE to affect only 1 ally would result in one less viable support skill for paragons(who already lack those).

Suggestion: Change the amount of adrenaline needed to 6-8.

More to be posted later.

Disclaimer: These are merely suggestions, and should not be taken personally.

@Shard: I leave you the right to remove my suggestions at any time, I will not mind you doing that. All I ask of you is to at least consider certain changes that could result in a backfire (from possibly overpowered to possibly underbuffed and vice-versa etc).

Problem solving requires large amount of careful thought, such as cause and effect over a large scale. I sincerely hope you take some time and think hard whether certain solutions may or may not cause other resulting problems.

Problem solving should not result in more/bigger problems being created rather than solved.

Cheers,Lala~Lalalala~Lala 05:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't remove people's suggestions.

Anything that fuels ranger spike needs to be shut down. Rangers doing damage is fine, but spiking is not. That's why I want to weaken glass arrows and GFTE. GFTE is a great skill, I wouldn't mind putting it down to 2 adrenaline if it hit one target, but adding +30 damage to 5 different people in the party is a bit much for a 4 adrenaline nonelite.

RaO, oh RaO. This skill, like shadow prison, will always, ALWAYS be overpowered because it's a combination of two things that should never be combined. The only solution is to remove one. Aside from making it one of two skills rangers already have, the best way to deal with it is to make it non-permanent. That's what the minute recharge is about. It's so powerful, I wanted to avatarize it. ~Shard 22:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You meant, you wanted to kill it. Dark Morphon(contribs) 08:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

People use avatars at 33% uptime, they would use rao as well. ~Shard 03:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem with Paragons is that they have very little viable skills and builds alike. Naturally, giving them an ally-wide skill that is OP is acceptable. Therefore, the multi-target part of the skill should be left alone, and perhaps increase the adrenaline cost.152.226.7.211 08:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem with ranger spike is actually forked arrow. Glass arrows need a nerf to its duration to bring it down to the level of other elites such as melandru's arrows, but as an elite, it does not warrant a recharge nerf to it.152.226.7.211 08:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

RaO is a buff to the otherwise less viable beastmaster. Similar to the paragon argument, it is natural to provide a much better skill to compensate for those builds that aren't so viable. However, that does not mean a clearly IMBA skill should compensate for a profession's lackings. Therefore, a reduction in it's benefits should do.152.226.7.213 08:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Lastly, I am Lala~Lalalala~lala, been very busy at school nowadays so I don't really have the time to look through. Sorry for the late reply.152.226.7.213 08:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Having 90% of its skills suck is NOT an excuse for a profession to have some broken ones. You're saying "X is fine because unrelated skill Y is bad." It's better to have a balanced game with less professions than a broken game with all of them. ~Shard 21:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It IS an excuse for a profession to have some broken skills. Why? How else would such professions be viable? We may as well trash the whole profession altogether. Furthermore, GFTE isn't as broken as the most broken skills. The skill itself is just better than most skills. Nerfing skills that redeem the profession is just wrong. You may as well nerf the other professions to meet the level of paragons. GFTE doesn't make or break a game like most other broken skills does. Admit that.Pika Fan 08:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

That wasn't my opinion. Being underpowered as a class is not an excuse for a profession to have broken skills. Fact. It doesn't matter if a profession is viable, or even if people only use that profession for one skill. Balance is about quality, not quantity.

GFTE. Let me explain what it does, without beating around the bush.

4 0 4 - "You gain 8 energy. Each member in your party does an additional ++15-20 damage with his or her next attack." I think that's a drastic effect for the low low price of hitting someone 4 times.

It's not possible to nerf every other profession to the level of paragons. You could buff 6 of them to the level of paragons. Paragons are the second or third most powerful profession, right in the "infinite energy club" with necros and rangers, except necros and rangers, dont, you know, have 106 armor vs everything.

Basically, raise the adrenaline cost to balance with the damage increase.Pika Fan 05:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You forgot to nerf Pious Assault. IMO that is one of the biggest problems with sway, it is an energy-based unconditional deep wound in a non-elite skill.

So I herd you liek Nerfing?

//killallskill

=O

Phill Gaston 10:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

So I herd nerfing overpowered skills doesn't mean you're killing them. ~Shard 00:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently Phill believes you ARE killing them with these nerfs. Dark Morphon(contribs) 14:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently Phill doesn't want his gimmick GvG and HA builds ruined. -- euphoracle | talk 21:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't nerf rangers any more

Most ranger bow attacks already suck, if you make those changes we may as well delete our rangers as they will be good for nothing but sway and RaO.

It's the other way around. You do not fix problems by ignoring them. ~Shard 05:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Buff bows for rangers, 25/90 sway and RaO, eliminate fast activation bow attacks or make them slower(to prevent range spike), fixed. Also, dshot is perfectly balanced as it is, except the skill disable needs to scale with expertise to prevent it from being effective ad disabling skills on Rt/R nightmare spikers. Ranger interrupts are all balanced EXCEPT for the quick activation that makes them good for range spike. Instead of punishing rangers with higher recharge I would suggest making interrupts to "50% less damage" and greatly increasing the condition damage if they interrupt a skill/spell/whatever. Oh, and comfort animal is balanced.

The problem isn't the damage on ranger spikes. The problem is that they recharge too quickly. ~Shard 23:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a better idea to nerf the damage than to nerf the recharge. If you increase the recharge, you damage conventional rangers, if you nerf the damage, only the R-spikes. Yes, the recharge is a problem but it is only a problem because the spikes itself are strong. Dark Morphon(contribs) 12:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Dark hit the nail on the head. DAMAGE is what makes spiking lame. Spike builds are NOT AFFECTED by increased recharge. It just means that they can't spike as often. When they spike, watch out though as the damage is still overpowered. The basic spike build strategy is that you have a group of spike build characters and a few defensive characters to "stall" the game, particularly with blockway, while the spike skills recharge. So this slows down spike builds but doesn't make them any worse. However, any other use is punished as the overall DPS of the skill is decreased. The skills just do a crapload of damage once and you can forget about ever using them again in the same instance. So much for nerfing spike builds.

• • • • • The recent (retarded) skill balance imbalance is a perfect example of this. Instead of throwing weird conditionals on Vampiric Gaze/Spirit to get rid of blood spike, they just increased the recharge of the spike to 8 seconds. You can still run blood spike, you just spike every 9 seconds instead of every 6 seconds. How is that a nerf? In the meantime, let's salvage our PvE necros' blood magic runes off their Ragged Scar Patterns as blood magic is offically useless in PvE, and we are going to be reduced to echo-spamming Spiteful forever.

Anet's (or Izzy's) biggest problem is that they just don't know WHY people run those skills/builds. All they do is see an overused (maybe not even overpowered) skill or build, and change some arbitrary cost in the hopes that it's the right one. Unfortunately, it almost never is. ~Shard 06:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Tru dat. Dark Morphon(contribs) 16:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Why...

...do you want to nerf Steady Stance, Expose Defenses and Comfort Animal (lol)? It's just stupid and D-Shot nerf is sad because its one of the last skills that requre skill to play and you want to destroy it? Stop trolling my skill update page your is in no way better. Oh and you stole my SoH idea. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 13:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Dshot requires skill to play? You're funny. Vili 14:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure it does! You're funny. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 20:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm one of the people who use D-Shot properly (Ranger by heart) but i also use it to interupt attacks. For example, you see an ally on 20% hp and an axe war about to hit him. I usually interupt his attacks as much so he doesnt kill my ally, i'd hate to be punished for that. yet those retards who spam do need to be stopped, so i cant think of a fair sollution (i dont think yours is fair no offence XD) --Silven 01:10 24 Feburary 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes keeping a teammate alive by sacrificing extra recharge is worth it. Games should (and some do) work like that. See StarCraft's pimpest plays videos, most of them involve sacrifices, and many of them win the match. ~Shard 23:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Soul Reaping

Why would you want to change it? The fact is that this change would affect not only PvP but PvE too. So you're practically removing MMs from PvE meta. - Reanimated X 13:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you need to do in order to summon minions? You need to kill things. Killing things gives you soul reaping. Hey, that problem solved itself! Pretty cool huh? ~Shard 21:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Imagine there aren't any 'things' around to kill? You still have to maintain your army somehow, right? Another example, you're at Thunderhead Keep, the last wave left you without minions so you use all your Energy on summoning new minions and then a new wave comes. Tell me how exactly would you keep those minions alive considering the fact that minions suffer accelerating health degeneration and they are several levels below any normal monster you would be fighting. - Reanimated X 05:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

If only Guild Wars had a mechanic where you regain energy over time...

It would like totally suck if like, you had to actively manage your energy, wouldn't it?

Sorry but I'm still not seeing how MMs would be "killed" by something like this. They would go from OP to Less OP, but they would still be a potent DPS factory to bring on missions. ~Shard 05:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Minions are hard enough to maintain during battle as they are atm, so a change like would harden things too much. - Reanimated X 05:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what game you're playing. Minions are not only effortless to keep alive, they also fuel more energy than one can possibly spend when spamming all his or her other skills on recharge. ~Shard 20:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I quote: "maintain during battle". So while you're fighting you have to keep your minions alive, keep yourself alive, enchant the minions with Death Nova and/or Jagged Bones and try to replace the dead minions with live ones. Pretty easy, huh?

P.S You still didn't answer me why you wanted to change Soul Reaping. - Reanimated X 05:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I want to change Soul Reaping because it's broken. ~Shard 06:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

In PvP might be, but not in PvE. I bet you want to change it because it's abused in some PvP gimmick build or something. - Reanimated X 06:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's also broken in PvE. Minion masters have too much synergy with primary necromancers and too little synergy with others, rewarding profession stacking and making it hard to balance the profession in both diverse and profession-stacked parties. Elementalists and paragons have similar issues. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 11:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I want to change it for (almost) exactly that reason. ~Shard 21:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Wounding Strike

I was just looking over your suggested nerfs again (i was bored =P) and i noticed wounding strike was still on 3 second recharge. Doesn't that just make WS end up being "Your Reversal of Fortune ends. You still cause permanent deal deep wound and bleeding to 3 foes." Sorry if it doesn't seem that way to you, but to me it doesn't look like you've stopped it. --Silven 04:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That is correct. To keep up the deep wounds, you also need to cast enchantments on yourself constantly, since it now REALLY requires one for the DW. The energy (which could be just 5, depending on your mysticism) and other skills required to maintain deep wound would be much greater than it is now. ~Shard 21:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I see your point, but I'm going to make a suggestion myself. Wounding Strike -

5 N/A 3 - "If this attack hits, it inflicts bleeding and deep wound for 5...17...20 seconds. You have -40 armor while using this Skill. No effect unless Enchanted." This would stop people from spamming this skill constantly, when well placed damage can take a sizable chunk out of your health. You probably dont like that idea but I would think it counters the problem fairly well.--Silven 09:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Spiking them shouldn't be the counter to a spammable skill. Skills should be the counter to a spammable skill. ~Shard 22:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Strength of Honor

Don't reintroduce 100 damage autoattacks into GvG(or any form of PvP). Thanks. Pika Fan 22:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

It won't stack with conjures if it's holy damage. ~Shard 22:37, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

People didn't stack conjures with SoH in GvG. They stacked JI(Judge's Insight) with SoH. That was the reason why SoH was nerfed. Just make SoH unstackable with JI in PvP, and I don't really care if you revert the damage. Boy, spirit bonding on recharge just for autoattacking was dumb. Pika Fan 22:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

No, it was because they stacked conjures with it. Conjures add much more damage than Judge's, except when you get criticals (which isn't often). I used to run warrior and dervish frontliners with soh judges and I used to monk against it, and it wasn't really a problem. Conjures and SoH weren't even that big a deal once the recharge was upped and you could strip them, and even then, people only ran it on scythes, which are a completely different problem. ~Shard 22:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

They nerfed SoH in response to nH running JI+SoH on the smiter bar, together with castigation etc. That update was directed at GvG, not HA. Pika Fan 23:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I was in cow when we were running that, and it was only really useful on scythes. Once SoH got a recharge, it wasn't so bad. Part of the problem is that you could run it on a signet memser, so the high cost of maintaining 2 or 3 of them didn't matter to them. Judge's Insight, contrary to popular belief, isn't that good. The damage it adds to low armor targets is tiny compared to conjure. You really need scythe crits to make it do a significant amount of damage for you. ~Shard 01:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Life Sheath

That would be a good idea for Mark of Protection.--Underwood 00:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

It could apply to any of the prot elites, but LS is just a better copy of RC right now, and there's no real reason it needs to be. I tried to get close to its old functionality without making it lame or useless. ~Shard 01:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, LS and RC see uses in different areas, being HA and GvG respectively. The only thing LS has over RC is self-targeting, which isn't an issue when you have teammates.--Underwood 01:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Life Sheath is much more annoying. A skill with no cast time shouldn't be able to remove multiple conditions from the user with no recharge. It makes splitting much easier for the LS monk. ~Shard 01:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Morphy's Opinion

>_>

• Expertise: Expertise is fine. It is required to run a bar full of Ranger skills, making it hard to abuse with other professions. It's only a problem because this balance isn't present for the broken professions. Fix them, don't fuck over Ranger balance. Other than that, this would be extremely abusable with Dash. Simply put, this fixes about as much as it breaks.
• Soul Reaping: Again, decrease Minion cost to compensate.
• Mysticism: Good idea, increase the energy gain and introduce more skills that synergise with this and you have yourself a potentially working profession.
• Blocking: I assume this is to stop block webs? No objections.
• Offensive Shadow Stepping: Deleting stuff from the game =/= fixing it.
• Zero damage: I'm sorry, what's the reson for this?
• Ganking: HA change? Don't care.
• Steady Stance: Why? This skill isn't used anywhere.
• Burning Arrow: Fair enough. Still doesn't fixes the fact that this is epic spike support, though.
• Choking Gas: Include blocking to making it not have an effect.
• Comfort Animal: Beastmasters suck, both power-wise and balance-wise. Go on ahead, wouldn't miss it.
• Distracting Shot: Makes cancelcasting, blocking, missing etc overpowered and makes the skill less flexible in general. Don't like. The random interrupting argument is pathetic as dumb people will still randomly interrupt with it, bad recharge or not.
• Forked Arrow: A definitive no. Making skills have a random effect or making them fail at random is bad. If everything would do such a thing, the game would revolve around luck. Other than that, this is a nuke. Don't kill skills.
• Glass Arrows: It's still maintainable and abusable for R-spike. Oh and another funny thing, your change to Expertise actually makes it more easily maintainable. Fail.
• Magebane Shot: Don't nuke skills. Even with the downside you give Dshot it's far superior to this.
• Rampage as One: See other page.
• Savage Shot: This skill is commonly used for other things besides interrupting. Other than that, same arguments apply to this skill as it does for Dshot. This change wouldn't prevent people from randomly interrupting. If random interruption is the only reason you want to buttrape this skill, please think up something that makes more sense.
• Smoke Trap: Uhm, ok.
• Strength of Honor: Don't. This skill is extremely passive. I'd rather see this stay dead.
• Life Sheath: Yay?
• Barbs: Number change. Still a distasteful skill.
• Depravity: Is this some kind of fucking joke? Inferior to Energy Surge in every single way.
• Faintheartedness: Number change. This puts it roughly where it should be at.
• Gaze of Contempt: Ok.
• Order of Apostasy: I'd reduce the recharge to 8 or even 5. Still, looks good.
• Rend Enchantments: Unnecessarily harsh changes.
• Rip Enchantment: Have you lost your mind? That's inferior to, hmm, every Enchantment removal skill in existance. Stop exaggerating.
• Shadow of Fear: More like 15 recharge. Adjacent is a small amount of range, 22 more recharge than Faint makes no sense.
• Soul Barbs: Fair enough.
• Soul Bind: Number change. Still a distasteful skill.
• Vampiric Spirit: It's a nerf, but it's still a distasteful skill.
• Signet of Midnight: Fair enough change.
• Wastrel's Worry: I don't like the idea of this skill. I suggest a rework.
• Mind Blast: Do we really want to see Mind Blast spikes? Elementalists can easily boost their energy to more than 100 energy. This is like Obsidian Flame without Exhaustion and with a favorable cast time. I'd say you could even abuse this with Arcane Echo. Honestly, no. Terrible change.
• Freezing Gust: Fair enough, comparing it to Shard Storm it's roughly equal.
• Mirror of Ice: Yes, this needs a rework. I don't like the functions you suggest, though.
• Expose Defenses: The point being?
• Bloodsong: You... Increased the energy cost by 5 points. Who cares, to be honest?
• Painful Bond: Ok.
• Mend Body and Soul and other Ritualist heals: You really have to compensate in one way or another, unless your goal is to nuke Ritualists. Remember that Monks have Divine Favor.
• Vengeful Weapon: Add this to every one of these skills. Fixed.
• Paragon changes: Paragons need a complete rework.
• Armor of Sanctity: Just remove the weakness and revert the recharge.
• Avatar of Melandru: Still a super Assassin's Remedy.
• Ebon Dust Aura: Fair enough.
• Watchful Intervention: Does this skill even see use? Not necessary.
• Chilling Victory: Fair enough.
• Other changes: Can't be arsed to comment on them. Dervishes need a complete overhaul anyway.

That's it. Dark Morphon 17:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)