Nerah.8235

Thanks for all comments! There is a diverse range of opinion on the use of tactics, with some merit on all sides. I think, after a few days of not playing, and just considering the issue, that I have decided just to square the circle here: I just won’t defend structures, which I don’t really enjoy doing anyway, and will allow me to avoid tactics altogether. Then it’s someone else’s problem to figure out when the optimal time to use that stuff might be. ~I’ll just stick to roaming around the BLs.~ Update: received an official warning about the formatting (?!?) for the original post. I think that is the final straw for me, and rubs some added salt in on the way out. If you want any of my stuff, I'll be in Caledon Forest tonight on Solitaire Island at about 7:00P CST, then it's curtains for my toon. See ya there!

Kind of a bizarre response. Increasing the amount of time it takes for a wall or gate to be breached allows for a small defending group to attrition away the attacker's siege and supply so you always want to maximize that time. Invulnerability at 10-20% gives defenders more wall/gate to repair than invulnerability at 80% and the time to do it. Saying that it shouldn't matter because of the number difference between defenders and attackers, that the tower is just going to fall anyway, totally invalidates the point you're trying to make of using tactics at all. If it doesn't or shouldn't matter, why use tactics? I'm saying that it looks mathematically the same? There is the time before the pull (time a), the time of the Invuln (1 minute), and the time to run down the structure after the pull (time b). So, time to breach = time a + 1 minute + time b. In the best case, time a = time b, that is to say, you can totally fix the wall to 100%, probably while under invuln. What i am saying is that for small defending groups, you can't maximize this, cause you are limited by manpower: you will get less fixing done in invuln periods. You use the tactics to guarantee at least 1 minute of additional time (let's assume low or no supply/low man defending). The more dudes defending/more supply, the longer you can run the attrition. Same with shield gens (which we did not have). If you know something I don't, then I'd be happy to hear it. @Jilora.9524 said:Why would I be in the no tactics section. You didn't give a percent or tier of tower when pulled. I don't know which tower. You called out in map not team.You had 8 defending and saying it don't matter what percent you pull it is wrong. It was 1 treb. That is slow. How slow again t0-t1 vs t2-t3 is different. So with 8 even if all 8 stayed in tower you could repair it back to full. Obviously destroying the treb is what you did. Then they built rams w/o clearing oil. That's on them. You pull chilling fog even in towers to thin the back end. I can easily pull 3 or 4 with help and kill as they run up waiting for the zerg. First I thought it was EBG now you say BL so again Idk which BL tower or if you had t3 bay / hills to shorten the zergs walk or was it an enemy BL etc. There's just so much info missing. 8 vs 30 with no help coming is a loss. You delayed them. I could've delayed them longer but still a loss. I said I wouldn't yell at you cause you tried, not perfectly but not horrendously so blame the players that are mad on your server not our replys Here are the facts:At least one treb (they were building other siege, but they didn't finish)Don't remember the T0/T1 status, and yes, this will slow things down a bit if highly upgraded6-8 Defending (initial number was about 5, we gained a few over time)Attackers 20-30 (probably on higher end, was busy at the time, so you'll have to just take my estimate)Roamers destroyed the treb(s), we couldn't siege it, and the blob repositioned/regrouped/Plan B after I pulled invulnThis was on EBG in a tower, not castle or keep; my reference to BL was because I mostly roam around there: EBG too many zergs/you get run overI agree on the loss part (you must have reinforcement to clear a larger group): ironically we were in a tower directly off spawn for our side, but no helpBasically, I don't think i'm nuts, but I think that it is nuts to complain after the fact for a loss because someone had the temerity to try and use some tactics.

I am sick of people that complain about the deployment of tactics in WvW. The tactics are there TO BE USED. Sit right back, and I'll tell you a tale: I was involved in a tower defense last night, against a group of about 30 players (so about 300 supply), with about 6-8 defending. I called out the blob moving in on the tower after they flipped a nearby camp and supplied up. They built a treb (120 supply) in an unconventional spot to siege the tower. We had a supply trap set up in the main approach. As they were clouding and trebbing, I pulled an invuln tactic (figuring that they were getting ready to augment the treb with some closer siege). They (the clouders) hit the supply trap. Again, called the attack on mapchat, since a small group cannot defend against that sort of blob alone. Seeing that the trebbing was getting nowhere fast, the group proceeds to cloud en masse. We pepper them with siege for a bit as they try and figure out what to do: some roamers show up and begin to eat away at the fringes of the cloud (they also destroyed the treb). I am manning the oil pot on the gate--possibly the worst and most dangerous job in the siege. The invluns wear off, so they rush the gate to do rams, and are met by....flaming oil and guards...and are repulsed. They begin to build two cats on the west side wall (50 each). We don't have any siege capably of destroying them. Figuring that we can slow them a bit more, I hit the chilling fog, which will apply chill near the wall base where they are building the siege. We buy another minute. No tag shows up, though we are right outside of spawn on EBG. Figuring the tower is lost anyway at this point--the assaulting group is still pretty large--I start fighting outside the walls, and get killed. I relay in chat that someone should probably use the Dragon Banner as a last stand tactic once they get through the wall. I am actually very pleased that the tower held out for so long: a group that large should have rolled the tower fast. While moving back to tower from spawn, I start getting a bunch of crap that I was trolling the tactics in the tower, and that it was somehow my fault that the tower fell. I may only be a Bronze in WvW, but I gained each of those levels through solo play and roaming for objectives. I have seen structures fall repeatedly, and have captured my fair share. I have low manned (i.e. 3-5) towers, keeps, and SMC. I have a decent idea of how long something can hold out against 20-30 enemies. That structure was toast once the tactics wore off, and would have been toast faster had they not been used. I have seen a ton of towers fall with ALL TACTICS UNUSED. What a waste. Anyway, back to my main point: TACTICS ARE THERE TO USE. At best, they delay a bit. If no tag shows up to help, the structure is probably lost to any reasonably large enemy group. Also worth mentioning that, despite what the interwebz may relay, NOT EVERYONE IS OUT TROLLING TACTICS IN A CONSPIRACY TO MAKE YOUR SIDE LOSE. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

Also like that lifesteal from minions/wells and the dagger 2 channel heal are both OVERPOWERED! Jeebus. I remember fighting elementalists not two months ago, getting them to 5% HP, and having them heal back to 100%--repeatedly--like a yo-yo. Damn near unkillable. That is OP! The lifesteal has crap coefficients and the channel forces you to use dagger, which has poor range and poor cleave for a power weapon set.

Wait a minute. Isn't the entire necro design based around the LF pool and shroud tanking? Hasn't this been stable for the entire game (excepting Scourge, which finds innovative uses for LF, but is hated for other reasons). So, everything BUT shroud is powercreeped--making shroud grossly underperform--then the powercreep is nerfed a bit--and now the shroud (which has been stable) is "overperforming"? Bear in mind that core shroud access has already been cut by the SoS nerf, and Reaper shroud by the degeneration nerf. Perhaps the current iteration is the profession's designed intent: shroud tank plus debuffing/boon conversion. Am not sure that any fix is necessary? The class appear to fulfill its designed role. If people don't like this role, then simply walk away from the necro, or stun it: necro has zero movement skills, and little stab/stunbreaks. In sPvP: rotate around it, or get a +1 on it (hello teef!). In WvW: run away from it. Either way, if it gives chase, it gets out of position, and becomes farmable. So easy. This is as a necro main.

Unholy Sanctuary is not that great. Its 1% heal in shroud in pvp modes. It's OKish for core, maybe (?) scourge. Reaper shroud decays so fast that it will do max 20% heal, if you are not being hit for 20 seconds, and have full shroud available. So for Reaper: big burst on you ---> shroud panic! ---> heal ~20% ---> drop out of shroud ---> hit heal skill for maybe another 20% heal ---> other class has most CDs back up ---> big burst on you ---> downstate (you). That is if you don't get hit while in shroud. It can prevent 1HKOs, but you would still need a well placed wurm or be using spectral walk when HIT to really have a chance to recover. If you are really, really good, it is theoretically possible to shroud bait people into bursting you --> unholy sanct prevent death --> counterburst them to downstate with procced shroud, BUT you will only ever get a single shot at this, as if you miss your counterburst, you will be low shroud/locked out of shroud AND low health. So it's a ballsy move.

Yes, power coefficient is essentially zero now (~0.10). You can, however still do damage on CC: run "Curses" --> Insidious Disruption. This option actually got a lot better with the lower power coefficients and lower corrupt output/lower number of cleanses on enemy classes. It makes all our hard CCs hit a bit harder than on other classes, and the damage output is not affected by target toughness. Plus, usually, people will break stun, and then move away from you: the torment punishes them a bit for that.

Not sure I get it. There is plenty of solo end game? You can try and solo any fractal or dungeon, which is a significant challenge, BTW. You can also play WvW and roam, which is a dying art, and greatly needed in most maps (a lot of maps need scouts and camp flippers). You can also solo bandits champions in the core maps, or possibly bounties in the new POF maps. You can also drive map meta events. You would be surprised at how far a single person can push these things (Orr, especially). While none of these are designed for solo play, per se, the above are how i normally play the game. I almost never group up or join squads for anything. I may make my own solo squad for things that require a squad....such as raid training.

Nah, I made the mistake of picking a class that sounded like fun to play, and the further mistake of assuming that it would have a fair shot in a PvP mode: that is "on me". Turns out, ANET decided they didn't need need mobility for "reasons": "purity of purpose", "feel", etc. I wasn't consulted. ANET will never grant this class (or any class in the same boat) more mobility. Historically, I can find no examples of this behavior. They could, however, adhere to the original design goal, which would be nice, and likely would work. As a bonus, it should require almost zero effort, since you would be giving the affected conditions "simpler" behavior, with fewer exceptions. @Bazsi.2734 said: Also, I think it is feasible to simply nerf mobility. Think about it. If a specific case is nerfed (thief), the mobility problem just jumps to whatever case has the next best mobility, because mobility in this game as it is currently implemented is simply too powerful a force multiplier. It increases BOTH offensive power (choosing where and when to fight, being able to hit and run) and defensive abilities (being able to dodge close threats, reposition instantly to avoid hits, or simply flee if things go south). Mobility needs to be a good option, but NOT the most powerful one. ANETs problem is that, up to now, they allow a few incredibly (mechanically) powerful abilities to exist, but spread them very unevenly across classes for ultimately "thematic" reasons. In PvE, this is somewhat dissapointing, but in PvP modes, it strips the agency from the guy on the other side of the dagger, and makes the whole mode suck. ANET tried to "balance" this disparity with the conquest "win" mechanic chicanery, although a lot of people just play "death-match" at this point in the game's life and just go for thrills and kills. If you have ever had a good thief player decide to farm you, then the whole facade crumbles and becomes a huge suck experience, and you realize you never had a chance.

Speaking as a player that mains a class with no real movement ability: I say nerf the teleports, shadowsteps, and leaps. However, I think that the nerf should be rework of all of these abilities so that they are fully affected by soft CC: cripple, slow, immobilize, and most especially chill. Remember that several classes were constructed with the idea of soft conditions dictating/limiting enemy movements. This change would make these slow classes MUCH more viable, and would make hit and runs by faster classes much riskier.

PvE: Need Hard Mode? OK. The open world should certainly be harder, and they should just consider making that baseline. Currently, there is nearly zero threat in most open world zones. Don't like idea of no down state for "hard mode" raids: this would further pigeon-hole borderline support/classes (ex: core necro/scourge) builds to pure DPS only. Besides, some people enjoy playing support, but their playstyle would be gutted under this fix. Also, some classes, (necro particularly) are balanced around the idea of playing around with the downstate. An unintended consequence of the fix would also be to make raids even more toxic/elitist, since there would be no downstate carry, and "hard-mode" players would likely lord it over everyone else. No comment on the rest. WvW: No comment on pips. I don't play for rewards, I play for combat. Balance clearly SUCKS at both small and large scale. The stealth mechanic is terrible for WvW when stacked with big damage, should have been fixed years ago, and is a travesty. I also think that stealth as a whole is not healthy AT ALL, thus strongly disagree with Vallun on a basic level. Playing against a stealth character SUCKS, regardless of the length of the stealths. The warclaw should be a movement tool that introduces some small utility (some amount of cc mitigation), but nothing else. As is, the warclaw adds another health bar, more dodges, stomps, etc. Necro: Core necro shroud fear needs nerfed? WOW! Too strong! It is literally the only set up skill for core shroud. You gotta be kidding me! Also, reaper isn't that strong. It has okay-ish burst, but I find that the burst is not that strong compared to most other classes (any type of thief, any type of memser, any type of rev, holo), and has NO sustain. Reaper lacks set up and movement tools, so most players can easily counter your burst, as it is super easy to see coming.

BTW something like the above would allow ANET to tailor the stealth ability to their vision of the profession. If stealths are for escape or reposition, do the damage debuff and slow effect. If they are for damage set up, do the no stack, plus partially visible on hit, etc.

Stealth would be fair if (pick 2): Stealth de-buffed speed (i.e. non-cleansable cripple) Stealth de-buffed damage (i.e. non-cleansable -x%, where x>20%) Stealth cannot stack, duration increased by at most ONE trait in a profession’s traitlines, and no more than 20% total increase. Stealth applies non-cleansable slow de-buff for entire application period (regardless of source). Damage application causes a 1-2 second effect that causes the stealthed character to be transparent, but not invisible in PvP modes ONLY.