[Partially implemented] Anger drives me swap with feeding on pain (swap only)

[Ninepaces]

Im not sure why we discuss or even care about "alternate styles of play". A player can not run two builds at the same time, and a class that has one excellent build is far more useful than a class that has two or three below average builds. So, we're wasting our time trying to buff a mid tree that doesnt offer anything more than malice/anguish.

@Gobtar: I would argue that taking the parry tactic, even if its the lowest tactic in the mid tree, is not worth the loss of outgoing healdebuff or crimson death. And because I acknowledge that it is a partially subjective opinion, I'd also point out that even if I was wrong and it WAS worth it, BG would still be **** garbage compared to BO/Chosen. In other words, we're looking at the wrong part of black guard to buff.

[Azarael]

Direct quote from rules:

We also seek to achieve internal balance. This means that the class's internal options are balanced as well as they can be, and that a range of specs are viable instead of just one or two. It means that useless or underperforming elements of a class or archetype are improved, and that overperforming ones are toned down. It means considering the effectiveness of an ability, tactic or morale with respect to its mastery point cost. It means dealing with components of a particular mastery path or tree which are out of place for that tree, and if required, reworking any elements which were too idealistic and have no place within the game.

In respect to the above, I wish to state that we will not consider the current power of a class when dealing with underpowered or useless abilities, and we will not allow discussions regarding underperforming aspects of a viable class to be blocked by players pointing out that the class is already viable.

Please drop the "other aspects already viable" line of attack.

[Ninepaces]

You didnt understand my post clearly. The other aspects ARE NOT viable, which is why bringing the mid tree inline with malice/anguish just means we have a third below average setup, which means we have to go back and buff all 3 again. The logical course of action would be to buff at least 1 setup to competitive level, and then bring up the other trees to match it. We are just wasting our time right now. The problems of BG are way deeper than the order of the abilities in the middle tree.l

[Gobtar]

You didnt understand my post clearly. The other aspects ARE NOT viable, which is why bringing the mid tree inline with malice/anguish just means we have a third below average setup, which means we have to go back and buff all 3 again. The logical course of action would be to buff at least 1 setup to competitive level, and then bring up the other trees to match it. We are just wasting our time right now. The problems of BG are way deeper than the order of the abilities in the middle tree.l

The point of this conversation adresses Anger Drives me, it's viability as tactic and how it effects the Black Guard at large. If you feel that there is another element of the BG that needs to be buffed, make a Balance Proposal following them scheme used by the Devs

[Ninepaces]

Spoiler:

I did. The response was exemplary.

Dont dodge what Im saying please. Why look at one tactic in a vacuum when the whole class as a whole needs to be looked at?

If you have issues with moderation, contact Azarael or Natherul about it. This is the last time I say this. As for "looking at one tactic in a vacuum", this proposal is looking at pretty much the whole mid tree - Penril.

[Bozzax]

This isn't a bg discussion thread please stick to subject /rules

[Gobtar]

Applying buffs to bring the Black Guard more in line with other tanks, does not hurt attempts to buff other elements of the class. My point is that EVEN if other elements of the BG are improved, this tactic/tree modification would still need to come down to allow the BG to have even footing with other tanks.

Your current desire of having the BG be a functional part of the meta is not in anyway impeded by this proposal. Saying that we cannot discuss this tactic because there are other problems does not make what I had said any less true.

When I am able to discuss a wider buff on black guard functionality then I will assist where I will offer my aid to that cause. This thread is for this tactic.

[Bozzax]

Seriosly read the rules

[Penril]

Let me moderate these threads Bozzax. If you think a post is breaking the rules, report it or send me a PM. Thanks.

[Tesq]

well my line of thinking was that tough % buff it's the coevalent of the IB damage reduction tactic, which for that should be taken earlier, also toughnes reduces all damages and it's way more efficent in lower tiers; then sticky to the viable options, having the parry not on 3p dosen't mean less option, The build are pretty 2 for support and 1 to be offensive and none have problem even if the parry tactic stay on 7 pt.
What are limits the build are the snares in mid path, the crit debuff on 1rst path and the regen on the 3rd. These are some crucial aspect in which direction you wanna go with the BG, That's why lowering the snare will subsequentialy make all the builds more viable.
The only diff in all these 3 build would be with parry on 3 pt take regen from 3rd path in addition to the parry tactic instead the tough tactic.

a 2h bg with parry tactic, 2x tough tactic, malekith bulwark, + crit debuff, snares, defense debuff fell pretty solid as force multiple for rvr

and the same will be the s+b build from 3rd path which gain a probable snare; couple with the m2 aoe KB can take the place of a BO and a BO if 1 warbellowe get fix can take the place of a chosen.

it's more important decide where put the armor buff and the block channeling, which will make better or worst the 2h build imo.