I don't like this. The whole point of PvP is winning, not participating. Of course, it's not very relevant compared to cross server ranked WZs, which this game sadly needs BADLY.

Nevertheless, OP is correct. Cleansing bastards are the hardest to put down. Don't forget we PTs quickly run into heat issues having to reapply burn (which btw doesn't get to tick when cleansed, ie. is doing little damage by itself).

3 seconds eh? Troll fails at trolling.

At launch, my guild had about 35 players, about half of whom I've played with a ton in other games. Now, we're at 3; the rest have unsubbed. Mind you, they didn't go back to the dead horse that is WoW. Personally, I just unsubbed also. I would stay / come back for Ranked PvP and more WZs. Also, server xfers are critical, as well as cross server queues for aforementioned ranked pvp. GW2 is doing a lot of things right. Public Quests, insta travel etc are must-haves nowadays, but they won't keep us subbed alone. Great core gameplay will (PvP for my part). It remains to be seen...

They implemented it? I hadn't noticed. Seriously, calling Legacy even remotely significant is ridiculous. Significant = something that keeps you subbed Server Xfers = significant Ranked PvP = significant Legacy != significant

Amazing artwork! And Dulfy, you rock!

They realised ranked PvP can only work with cross server WZs. And btw, won't work for solo queuing very well due to the high amount of "underserved" losses and the QQ that'll cause. So, we must wait.

IMO BM defense cube is clearly a better option. The expertise is very valuable, and defense doesn't hurt. Defensive and offensive relics don't share cooldowns, for those that didn't know, so you can pop both in 1v1s. On a side note, I keep two offensive relics i rotation. You can have them both on your bars, and swap them out between fights via the hotbar (1st slot only, 2nd also possible but not via hotbar).

I agree with OP. Since pursuing top PvP gear costs a lot of credits, we are forced to grind PvE content we have no interest in. Remove the credits cost for top pvp gear, or solve the problem somehow. Please.

Fail troll. You're supposed to ask for things you actually don't want that are not implemented yet.

You know what's sad about this? The team is 2-4 people, also tasked with PvE balance etc. See the Bioware studio tour recently released.

I'm a fully geared, solid PvP player getting top DPS 95% of the time. Short TTK is a boon to my class, but I also feel it is too short vs geared players. Needs some rebalancing.

My 2 cents: I much prefer 15 days of grinding to get maxed out, compared to 15 hours! We need that carrot to urge us to play

It's definately part of the balance equation, and DoTs are definately weaker in 1.2 with the lower TTK (Time To Kill).

You're right about that, because the first one is lolz. Pyro's have a 58% weaker (1.2) Death From Above AoE, that's about it. The Flamethrower isn't worth using unless you're specced the other talent tree (not a Pyro), in which case your AoE goes way up, but overall DPS still down. There are more than twice as many Marauders as Powertechs (source) But I agree with OP. I'm a Pyro, and I don't understand why people don't whine about my DPS

Nice Guide, good work. I'm curious about the numbers - is anyone solid putting up anything near what they can with Pyro?

Response is correct. I am one.

So I guess my bumping question is: Who do you think the game should be balanced around?

PvP balance is obviously a complex issue. Even with a plan, it's hard to get right. Add to that that it's a matter of opinion how it should be balanced. Consider the following options: Balance the classes so that the average user of each class does equally well. Balance the classes so that the top user of each class does equally well. * please note I mean nothing derogatory about average users, which is by definition the largest component of players on a skill-based bell curve. It's extremely hard to do both at the same time without creating a very boring game where the classes are basically mirrors of eachother. The problem is the following: Assuming you want a non-trivial game, if you balance around the average users, the game typically breaks at high level, with some classes/spec being clearly superior, eg. abuse of certain abilities that become OP when mastered (anaology: certain units in Realtime Strategy games). This is obviously undesirable, as the worst thing that can happen is when a game breaks after you finally master it. If you balance around the top user, it may be harder to reach the full potential on some classes, due to the variation on how things like utility is balanced (eg. a certain maneuvre or combo is very hard to pull off). Then you get average users QQ'ing on forums about things like "Tracer spam is too strong and btw it's super stupid," even tho it is subpar to other classes/spec that are controlled by a top user, and therefore not what the users should (imo) really be whining about - they just don't experience the abuse a top user lays on them with the (actual) strongest spec, compared to how often they see an average user tracer spam them. Personally, I'm a big advocate for a game being balanced at the highest level of play, for reasons stated. This leaves the average user to figure out on his/her own how to get there. Unfortunately, this invariably results in a lot of frustration, because the average user percieves imbalances at his/her level, and doesn't know how to deal with it. This goes for all games - RTS games in particular, but definately also MMO PvP. So, assuming the developers know best, and are balancing the game at top level play, that's why we see an extreme amount of complaining on forums after most balance changes. To further amplify the issue, the developers are kind of hand tied in regards to replying openly about percieved imbalances, because it risks alienating the average users (they can't exactly say l2p). The most obvious current example of this is the healer nerf. Yes, healers were nerfed. Yes, they needed nerfing. Was it too much? This is a matter of opinion. If you ask me, as long as a premade should be wanting to include 1+ healers on the team, they are by definition not underpowered or broken - otherwise none would be included. It just feels that they are after you get hit hard by a nerf bat. Without ranked premades, it remains to be seen whether any healers belong on a team or not. The same goes for tanks, and many other flavours of specs, but that's a different QQ. Anyhoo, there's nothing new in my post here. I just wish people would think it thru a little harder before insta-flaming /unsub and suchlike. Signed, - Gnug315, gaming vet. PS. If you're interested in game balance and the concept of playing to win, I can strongly recommend the book Playing to Win and most of his articles along with the blog in general. Oh, and his games.

"Perception is reality." & "Rock is OP. Paper is okay." - Scissors

I consider this a herp derp troll post. If not, a lot of it is opinion, and I do not agree with most of it.

SWTOR is the best. And Huttball is brilliant.

That's funny (no pun intended), I never noticed a laugh in the first place. So, I'm not missing it. I just use the RS refreshing on my hotbar to clue me in.

What derdark said. Yes, after a proc'ed rail shot (your second RS in your example) you have 3 secs (2 abilities) to do something else before trying to re-proc. As someone else stated, unload is quite decent, tho you can obviously do things like stun/aoe stun/grapple/DFA/TD/IM and rapid shot etc, depending on the situation and heat. I'm not feeling much of a DPS decrease in 1.2 (DFA itself is very noticable), but we're all a lot squishier, that's for sure.

I think healing is in a better place post 1.2, overall. Give it some time to sort out.