ArenaNet talk:Skill feedback/Monk/Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Note: As of September 2, 2009 this page is no longer active. If you have suggestions for Guild Wars skills please go to Feedback:Main to learn how to submit suggestions that ArenaNet can use.

WTF???

THIS IS LIKE THE ONLY DAMN GOOD SKILL FOR SMITER SUPPORT AND THEY FRIGGIN NERF IT! WTF IZZY?! YOU GOT PISSED AT A SMITER SUPPORTER OR WHAT?

Izzy needs to fucking resign, or be shot. 80.193.1.106 20:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You guys are dumb, this is much better that it was before. Or do you ENJOY playing against builds with 4 smiters and no real monks? 88.110.196.105 20:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

From what I understood, it was only a problem faced in TA, and nerfing a skill to such a large degree is surpising when it may have only be affecting a small portion of PvP. 75.146.48.190 20:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Its like they took one of their April Fool suggestions into consideration. Not that it didn't need a nerf, but they might as well remove the skill completely. Only a griever will use this skill now. (Terra Xin 20:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC))

Thanks to a person who doesn't know what he was doing, this skill now has a RIDICULOUS recharge time, and a really short time for it to last. Thanks to IZZY this skill will be completely useless, who would want to use a skill every 90 odd seconds? --Matt The P. 20:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Just think of it like a Form spell from a dervish...except for just 5 seconds...and not doing anything cool...and able to disappear from enchant-removal...and costing more energy...but it's not elite! - Elder Angelus 19:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was the whole point of nerfing it so hard apparently, to remove it from play. But in my honest opinion, thats a total lack of competence from Izzy. So yes, he should resign. --Treasure Boy Talk 03:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It may have been overpowered but that doesn't justify deleting a skill. Izzy is just trying to ruin Guild Wars so that Anet won't have to maintain the servers when Guild Wars 2 launches.

Thank you, this was ruining ta

lmaowtfhaxlolroflcoptorhamburger YES smiter boon is now a COMPLETELY useless skill and just prevented the three smiter 1 r/w s**t from infesting ta, lamers good bye! And while you're at it nerf syncing somehow, theres a guild that has 3 dervish 1 monk and continually syncs ra with a full team, it gets extremely frustrating...make it so guildies can't be on the same team or something, anything to prevent it THANK YOU!!!! Mistha.

No it wasn't. If you don't suck balls you can kill this shit. 80.193.1.106 20:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course you could get a bunch of rank 10 and glad 6's together you can beat it. But that is not the point. The point is that if a bunch of noobs can run a build that will pretty much dominate TA, then that build is not balanced, and should be nerfed. Granted, I think everyone can agree that this was overkill, but I beleive Izzy and all of the other skill balancers are trying to make a statement. That is: if a gimmick build becomes too powerful, they are going to hit it with the nerf stick. Like the IWAY of old, and more recently what they did to VoD. This is the same thing, and I think that the game will be better for it in the long run Jonas 01:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually Mistha, I'm pretty sure that was my 3 derv 1 monk team that beat you, and none of was even in the same alliance or had previously met, we just got lucky. Besides, its hard enough to sync 2 people, nearly impossible to sync all 4. On the topic of the nerf: making a skill so bad that it becomes completely unusable in any possible pvp application is one of the stupidest things I've seen ANet do, and I don't think this will stop the overpowered shove/smite build in TA at all. Kirbman 04:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Why did they nerf this skill but not Word of Healing? Try fighting a team with 3 monks using it!!! ...oh wait, maybe we can't kill them BECAUSE THEY HAVE 3 MONKS... prot, healing, smite, 3 monks is 3 monks...so why nerf this specific spell? Are you saying the monk on the other team couldn't out-heal one warrior and 3 smites? Were they doing chain knockdown with their leet Signet of Judgement from half-range? - Elder Angelus 18:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

What the fuck?

No, really... what in the bloody hell? Could someone explain this to me? I always thought this skill was underpowered. --Jette 20:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It's izzy being a fucking idiot, that's what. 80.193.1.106 20:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Obviously it's an overnerf... a hilarious overnerf. But if you've ever played as or against one of these with a decent skillbar you'd know it was overpowered, easy to play and bad for the game. 88.110.196.105 20:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I find it hilarious since it shows how professional Anet's skill balancing is. Although the skill may have been OP, it is called skill balancing for a reason. More finetuning, less ridiculous updates please. SniperFox 20:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with SniperFox. Kirbman 04:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

lol lets say you cast 3 spells i those 5-6 secs, you get ~45 healing at decent divine favor attribute. so 45*3=~130. 130... You expect us to waste 25 energy for 130 heal? and every 90 secs? :DDDD

this is such a good skill, blessed aura with enchant mod and glyph of renewal and u can almost keep it up!!!78.20.153.111 20:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyone have a bar that people (ab)used with this skill, pre-nerf. --Spartiatai 20:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

They just played 2 or 3 smiting monks in TA + 1 mele char. It was hard to kill em because the were 3 monks there and ppl hardly know how to kill one silly monk, so they obliterated this skill to extinction. --SkyHiRider 20:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

(EC) GvG build. Erasculio 20:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok then it make some sense about the nerf, but just making it not constantly maintainable would have worked. Oh well it seems like a knee jerk reaction to solve the problem and will probably be rebuffed once they put more thought into a solution.--Spartiatai 20:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Any personal attacks from this point will be met with a ban without further warning -- this includes attacks against Izzy. Personal attacks are unacceptable. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Then please, for the love of god, tell anet hire someone who knows how to do it right. The lack of changes to skills like Wounding Strike which drastically need it, and the nerfs like this are ridiculous.--65.185.121.217 21:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Took out the rude comment RE: Smiter's Boon. 63.64.26.142 21:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Stating that he doesn't do his job properly is not a personal attack... --Treasure Boy Talk 03:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

25e, 90 sec recharge, 5 sec duration...Oo"

I'd expect something like this to justify those stats: "This skill makes you absolutely invincible for 5 seconds, you cant suffer from conditions or hexes for this period of time" LunarEffect 20:52, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Been here, done that : P Erasculio 20:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually thought this was just a bad joke. I didn't realise he actually made the change O_o I mean, this severe of an over-nerf seemed less likely than the April Fools updates. Dejh 20:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

For 5 seconds, you divide by zero and the world implodes. When this enchantment ends, you wonder why you wasted 25e on that. SniperFox 20:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, Ive never expected to hear it from their own team, so they do purposely nerf skills to discourage the use of certain ones, so the nerf to other skills(we know what are the skills) were the same answer too but like this one they will never get around to fix it, they will keep killing skills. I smell Fury death to Guild Wars, like a certain website by the name Kotaku said:"...they forgot to make the game fun.", my own add: challenging and creative.--ShadowFog 23:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

hmm, for these stats i expect "your smiting prayers cure cancer and summon the messiah" --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:90.240.121.59 (talk).

Nah, I expect "You are immune to all damage and cannot lose energy. All spells against you fail, your skills cast and recharge 90% faster and do 30...102...120 damage against all adjacent foes." --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.208.3 (talk).

Let's get one thing streight

This isn't a balance change. This skills was INTENTIONALLY killed to stop certain builds, probably because of lack of time or lack of testing. I can see this skill getting changed in the future, but please stop with the "Izzy you suck at balancing" comments, when something is CLEARLY a change directed at killing a skill instead of changing it. — Poki#3 20:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You just justified it yourself-any change intended to kill a skill indicates that he does not know how to balance the skill properly in time. No matter what, this shows that he screwed up somewhere. Dejh 20:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow that's the stupidest defensive statement I've read yet. His job is not to kill builds. It's to balanced the game. There is nothing balanced about this. It's completely uncalled for, and quite frankly shows his lack of skill at his job.--65.185.121.217 20:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah! Izzy is the only skill balancer for GW, THE ONLY ONE!!! There are no other skill balancers at all! Just because they don't exist on the wiki, doesn't mean they don't exist! Plus, really, I think its funny that you people get all uppity when a skill you use gets changed. "Omg, what will I do now? How am I supposed to play anymore? The only thing I ever did was nerfed, and I don't have what it takes to make another build because I am fatally stupid and mortally vanilla!" This message brought to you by FleshAndFaith, who isn't signed in. Love ya. 71.123.227.65 21:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Izzy is not the only one, but he is the one responsible for all the skillchanges in the game. --Treasure Boy Talk 03:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

They could've done a more subjective change for example, increasing the casting time to two and increasing the energy cost to ten. Looks far more professional and gives the skill balancer his time to test stuff out without creating much controversy. SniperFox 21:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

"We recognize that the changes to this skill will essentially remove it from play", as seen here. Poki is right. Erasculio 21:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I understand why this change was neccesary, but could have given it the same effect as Brutal Mauling and it would be more useful than it is now. 145.94.74.23 21:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Izzy, I know you are busy with Guild Wars 2 but....WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING????? YOU JUST TOOK ANY RESPECT THAT YOU STILL HAD AND THREW IT OUT THE WINDOW. IF YOU CHANGE A SKILL YOU CHANGE IT...YOU DON'T FREAKING DELETE IT FROM THE DAMN GAME. Psychiatric Consultant 21:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Mantra of Celerity. Cry about it, it was just one skill and removing it will cause people to actually think about their builds for a change. 71.123.227.65 21:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly there is no use complaining about it, this skill was so good it should've been an elite skill before it was nerfed since it was so centric to the smiting builds and gave monks great damage output and healing at the same time it's stupid if it wasn't nerfed this much until Izzy decides to change it's effect or make it a little more balanced. Heck I think this was more abused than "Victory is Mine!" on trapping rangers before it was nerfed.(Marsc 21:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC))

Poki#3:"This skills was INTENTIONALLY killed to stop certain builds, probably because of lack of time or lack of testing.".Dejh:"You just justified it yourself-any change intended to kill a skill indicates that he does not know how to balance the skill properly in time.". 65.185.121.217:"His job is not to kill builds. It's to balanced the game. There is nothing balanced about this. It's completely uncalled for, and quite frankly shows his lack of skill at his job.". Psychiatric Consultant:"IF YOU CHANGE A SKILL YOU CHANGE IT...YOU DON'T FREAKING DELETE IT FROM THE DAMN GAME.". Well you guys certainly know how to called it. You just called as you see it. I dont know how NC condone this behaviour, maybe to move people from this game to another. Ive never expected to hear it from their own mouth, you can see it at the developers notes, it says:"We recognize that the changes to this skill will essentially remove it from play. In the future, we may consider whether or not there is an incarnation of this skill that would be viable but balanced. For now, we do not expect it to see serious use. ". I can understand the synergy and problem with this skill but why not make a sever check while fixing the skill? Plus not putting a date,"we may consider whether or not there is an incarnation of this skill that would be viable but balanced." to say when its going to be fixed and with their behaviour to "...remove it from play."(nerf) and not fixing any other skills that are ridiculous nerf, it's certain to create panic for your GW players and get bad reaction to newbs from veterans players. We bought the game for a lot of reasons, just by removing one skill, this is what happens. Of course you would have expected seeing that this some "wikians" are reacting to statement in less than 30 seconds.--ShadowFog 23:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow.

You're kidding, right? Look if people are 'exploiting' a skill or build and you want to nerf it, that's fine. But can't you do better than this? I mean if you want to change it for PvP to make it harder to exploit in certain arenas, just do what you did to Unyielding Aura and Aura of Faith and give it a completely different function in PvP. But seriously, 5 seconds with an 85 second wait time and 25 energy? I've had RA matches get won or lost in 90 seconds. This is really butchering the skill.

Here's my thought. Make it function like Glyph of Elemental Power. Make it raise your smiting prayers attribute by 2 for x.....y..z seconds in PvP and end whenever you use a non-smiting skill. Or just put in some numeric variables. Or it can have a Selfless Spirit effect in that it ends if you cast a spell that targets yourself. Or instead of doubling the divine favor healing bonus, just have it heal for 1 extra health for each rank in Divine Favor. That way instead of getting 98 health, the target will gain 63. Or make it punish energy by making it an upkeep enchantment, but only work for your next x.....y..z smiting spells. Or something along those lines. Heck anything would be better than what you've got.

Making a skill completely impractical in all forms of PvP by raising the numbers on it to ridiculous values, all because some people exploit it in a certain area, is pretty ridiculous. Not to mention unimaginative. I hope (and truly believe) this is intended to serve as a 'quick fix' while you guys brainstorm to come up with a better solution. Because this is a terrible way to address the problem. Please come up with something better. Painted Bird 21:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok to quote myself.: "*cough* stop letting beast mastery and smiting prayers suck *cough*." Obviously Izzy wasnt reading that. Izzy please do me a favor. Go ahead and Nerf the following: Hammer Warriors, Beast Masters, Blood Necromancers, Illusion mesmers, Water Eles and Paragons, so I can quit this game.-- Media Control talk 21:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Nerf

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon

Completely bullshit and fucking stupid, as well as pointless. Izzy needs to resign, NOW. 80.193.1.106 20:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I'd say its an overkill but I don't play PvP that much, so what do I know. --SkyHiRider 20:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't even broken. 80.193.1.106 20:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There's probably a build that used it too effectively and it is a know fact that they fear a damage dealing healer (but not a Ritualist?). Yet this is just killing the skill, running over it with your Hummer, burying it and running over it again just to make sure. 145.94.74.23 20:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

three smiter teams rly was annoying, but couldn't something like 10-15 energy, 20-30 recharge and 1..8..10 sec duration done the same without making izzy look like a total retard..? --Cursed Angel 21:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It's the duration time and the 90 second recharge that gets me, it has now become useless. He could have atleast made the recharge to a lower value.... --Matt The P. 21:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Nerf was needed obviously, but there were hundreds of possible ways to nerf it without doing something absuridiculous. How about a simple add of "Ends after you cast 5 spells" so it becomes energy-heavy, almost like Divine Boon. Or give it 2 seconds casting time to make it easily interruptable, and a 30 or even 45 sec recharge on top of it, so interrupt or strip = ownage. Or make it half efficient, for example by giving it only 50% chance of doubling DF... Or make it punish the user in a way when it ends, for example "End effect: Lose all energy". Be creative.--Yawg 22:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello America; my name is Faer, and I approve of this nerf. -Faer 21:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the most epic update of all time. ~~ frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 22:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Learn a new bar. Simple as that. You cry because Izzy is totally wrecking your fun, when all he is doing is putting an immediate stop on a heavily overused skill that takes creativity and learning out of the gameplay. The skill was broken. It combined good healing with good damage for almost no price. Why don't you all just go... LEARN ANOTHER BAR. If you had half a brain you'd realize that thats what this is all about. Game Devs are forcing you to think, and all you can do is cry about it. Shows how much brilliant thinkers we have with us here. Furthermore, this isn't permanent, obviously. Just wait and a solution will be put into place, then you can all go back to crying about how it was so much better when you didn't have to think about anything. FleshAndFaith 22:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for assuming I use it. However, I don't. I said it was epic because this is the probably the largest nerf in the history of all MMOs. Maybe not, but it shows Izzy's incompetence at balancing. Simply giving this a 10e cost and a recharge of 30 would balance this, as then enchantment removal could DO something. ~~ frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 00:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Not to be a suckup, we ALL support your statement, short sweet and to the pt. Almost a great staple.--ShadowFog 01:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

that's not how it work (get outside random arena and I'll show u), that's what u'd do in pve and yeh, in ra; brainstorm ur own little bar made of skills u enjoy casting around for fun. there's a reason ppl use the same shit as everyone else, its the same reason it gets nerfed. No one cares if it's a gimmick or doesn't take skill, nothing in gw takes skill anyway, it's 8 buttons and two teams playing similar or builds everyone knows, get over it. this skill have been the same since EoTN came out.... and now they spit out a sort of emergency update like if they encountered a minute ago. something less hilarious could've been enough and it'd be dead, this is just very stupid to come from a guy who get's payed for doing just this. --Cursed Angel 01:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I can see their reasoning to change this skill somehow, even if I don't agree it was over-powered...but what I saw on the update page is what happens when somebody springs for the laster-guided explosive nuclear-payload surface-to-air nerf bat. With an an orbital strike thrown in, 'for insurance'. - Elder Angelus 19:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

@FleshAndFaith. You are missing one VERY important point (which is what everyone is crying about). The point is that Izzy don't do his job properly. This is not balance, this is americas way of solving everything: Nuke the shit and problem is solved (do i have to remind you about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?). Joke aside but still. Izzy's job is to balance the game, not nuking skills totally and then think its all good. We are not crying about this skill being totally useless now (it was overpowered and broken yes, there is no denying about that), but the fact remains that this way of solving the problem is not OK by the definitions of what Izzys job is. --Treasure Boy Talk 13:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

If Isaiah's job is to balance the game, removing skills from the game in order to make it more balanced falls within his job description. Erasculio 13:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. But the point a lot of people are trying very hard to make clear is, he didn't remove it from the game. And he didn't actually "balance" the skill. Instead, he grabbed the skill, picked "duration" and "recharge", and mashed his hand down on the numberpad. Make it PvE-only? Unorthodox, but it works. Make it harder to use? Also works. But this is just a joke. I think he expects players to get a laugh out of it, but he forgets that not everybody shares his sense of humor. (or lack thereof.)

Besides, it would have been so easy to give this a real nerf instead of this excuse! Ask on any forum and you'll get decent suggestions. Ask on the wiki and you'll get decent suggestions. Walk into Shing Jea and ask new players, you'll still get better ideas then this one. In a minute, I thought up these options: higher cost; less duration; longer recharge; limit of only Smiting skills or it turns off; lower the healing boost to 150% Divine Favor instead of 200%; give it a longer casting time so it's interruptable; and so on. It took me longer to write that then to think it up. One would assume Izzy can do at least a little better then me. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 21:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with you if we knew it were possible to turn a common skill into a PvE only. So far that has never been done (in either direction), so we don't know if it's possible at all or not. And besides, there was a discussion along these lines and it was often said that, instead of literally removing a skill from the PvP game, nerfing it to death would be better. While I don't agree, there are people out there with that opinion. Erasculio 23:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Unorthodox to make it PvE-only? Then what the hell is this?? --Treasure Boy Talk 11:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Ways to actually use this skill now.

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Enchantment extension or glyph of renewal. Umm, right. Anything else? Aro 23:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't? -- Armond Warblade 23:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

They intentionally kill it. As much we expect in the future to other skills, making this game one less skill fun, Fury death is coming.--ShadowFog 23:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It was broken as hell. I'm glad it's gone. That's the problem with introducing over a thousand skills to the game and refusing to delete any of them: many of them are going to be worthless so as to preserve game balance, and a chunk of them are going to be broken as hell by their very nature (such as Ineptitude and any shadow step). -- Armond Warblade 00:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleting the skill after making a purchase of a game is a awful approach by Izzy and NC for letting him with his ineptitude change skills and not even making then viable again. Lets use a slang term, theres a "buttload" of "nerf" which hasn't see daylight yet,quote:"In the future, we may consider whether or not there is an incarnation of this skill that would be viable but balanced."-end quote. I would like to hear the same thing for another skills that cant be used for the same reason they have stated:"We recognize that the changes to this skill will essentially remove it from play.". But of course I see that you dont care if they keep removing skills and not fixing it, let them revome one, this not the only one you know, its the same behaviour over and over again.--ShadowFog 00:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

You trying to tell me that removing skills isn't a good balancing factor? Please tell me that's what you're saying so I can have a good laugh; WoW just did that to turn Curse of Elements from a weak skill into a powerful one, removing Curse of Shadows from the game in the process. -- Armond Warblade 01:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

ditto:"I see that you dont care if they keep removing skills and not fixing it, let them revome one, this not the only one you know, its the same behaviour over and over again."--ShadowFog 01:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

What part of "there's eight hundred too many skills in the game" didn't you understand? -- Armond Warblade 01:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

ditto:"Deleting the(a) skill after making a purchase of a game is a awful approach by Izzy and NC for letting him with his ineptitude change skills and not even making then viable again." ditto from Let's get one thing streight :"We bought the game for a lot of reasons, just by removing one skill, this is what happens.".--ShadowFog 01:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

(RI) I'm amused that they really decided to remove one skill from the game (IMO that's great - I even suggested it a while ago, and while of course this change has nothing to do with my suggestion, it's a step in the right direction). I wish Isaiah would remove plenty of other skills from the game, and then, when a state of balance is achieved (as it would be a lot easier to balance the game with less skills around), slowly buff skills back (and rework all the ones that need to be reworked). Erasculio 17:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Its not useless: Cast Smiter's boon before battle (to regain the 25 energy) and use Deny Hexes to remove 2 hexes for the next 90 seconds. As you don't even need to be a primary monk to do this, it is just a slightly weaker version of Expel Hexes which is elite and ought to be better than this combo. Eth 10:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you have a use for it...but isn't it strange that the only use for it is to basically have it act as one big old empty skill slot!!!!?????? (that takes 25 energy) - Elder Angelus 14:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Because Deny Hexes is awesome enough to warrant two skill slots, amirite? Just bring Expel on someone if you need that much hex removal. -- Armond Warblade 14:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I think they should delete skills one by one until there's none left, just weapons, wandings, QQing and laughter! --Ulterion 06:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

What happened?

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Yes, Is there a developer note or reaction as to why this was increased to 90 seconds? I dont get it? Why not cancel the skill for PvP or just make a PvP only function? Where are the developers notes?--ShadowFog 23:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It is at the same place where it always is.. ArenaNet:Developer updates. poke | talk 23:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You're all dumb

— Skakid 00:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

— Try again. This time without trolling.--ShadowFog 00:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree, thank you Anet. Most of you complaining about the nerf and yelling at the admin have no clue what is going on and have certainly not been to TA. (Narziss 02:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC))

Still doesn't justify removing the entire skill from the game without effort to balance it to some point. If they just did weekly finetunes to certain skills, things like these wouldn't have to happen. Now its one skill removed, whats next? SniperFox 11:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

If the right skills keep getting removed, a potentially balancable game. -- Armond Warblade 21:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

GVG

On the update page they said that they did this to remove it in GvG because it was overpowered there. So why not disable it for GvG like the PVE skills are for all types of PVP and change it again to its old discription for AB,TA,HA,RA and HB?Robertjanvaneijk1988 07:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

According to the developer update it was also overpowered in Team Arenas. -- Gordon Ecker 07:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

HEY IZZY

YOU FORGOT TO UP THE CASTING TIME TO 5 SEC /resign plz Balashi 09:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Rofl! and you have my support on that statement. --Treasure Boy Talk 13:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Why not "Smiter's Boon (PvP), 25 Energy, 5 second cast, 90 second recharge, Enchantment Spell, Remove all enchantments placed on you except for this one, for 90 seconds, you can no longer be the target of other enchantments, and this enchantment cannot be removed. Your Signets now cost 10 energy to use and recharge twice as slow. You get double the Divine Favor Bonus for smiting skills and signets cast on enemies. You do not gain energy from Castigation Signet, Signet of Judgment and Bane Signet do not cause Knockdown, Smite Condition no longer removes conditions, Smite Hex no longer removes Hexes, and you are incapable of dealing Holy Damage." What do you think? PowerGamer 09:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I think I'd hate to see the concise description. Vili 09:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

It's probably something like this: Smiter's Boon (PvP) - 25/5/90: Enchantment. For 90 seconds, you're fucked. Kirenne Starfire [Kw] 01:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL! Smiter's Boon (PvP) - 25/5/90: Enchantment. For 90 seconds Izzy laughs at you and you become dazed, blinded, weakened, suffer from cracked armor, deep wound and take 100 damage each second for the duration of this enchantment This enchantment and it's inflicted conditions cannot be removed. --Ulterion 02:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Funny Username's Issue

→ moved from ArenaNet:Skill feedback/Monk/Smiter's Boon (PvP)

This was going to be my suggestion word for word. It will make the smite healer build do primarily damage, but have the ability to toggle itself into a healing build with limited damage ability. The upkeep will also make it difficult to mantain both Smiter's Boon and Divine Boon, and we could finally see more frequent use of Defender's Zeal. Discomb 10:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

→ moved from ArenaNet:Skill feedback/Monk/Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Yes, but if this were to happen there wouldn't be any point to play anything than a normal healer. Secksy 12:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Fools' Day is now in August?

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Man? 90 seconds recharge and just last 5 seconds? 25 energy cost? what a joke, hahahaha! thanks for the big laugh! I love you ArenaNet! this is maybe the biggest nerf in GW history? anyone knows a worst one? --NeHoMaR 02:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

They should have given it exhaustion, too. --Jette 02:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll put in a vote for instagib. Divide by zero was a nice idea too imo. I think this actually is the hardest hit single skill in GW history. Certainly meant to stop its use and just a hairs breadth short of flat out removal from the game. 98.219.48.111 03:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Lol I seriously thought this was April Fools. I don't get it? I've never seen anything like this..... Anyone have any idea why? 122.104.161.96 03:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

You really should check out the Developer's Update more often. --Underwood 03:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

^ You go to the game updates talk page for QQing, the developer's pages for insight. --70.118.65.182 04:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

But why don't they change the functionality rather than intensively completely killing this skill? —ZerphaThe Improver 09:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

the Dev updates page doesnt give insight....its just blatantly ridiculous, and i dont even monk. i agree, hardest nerfbat in history.--220.245.178.136 09:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

99% sacrifice tbh to balance it. Its way OPed :p 217.69.10.65 12:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

100% sacrifice is more realistic. Because anyone who uses this skill should just kill themselves. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:24.124.126.196 (talk).

GVG

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon (PvP)

On the update page they said that they did this to remove it in GvG because it was overpowered there. So why not disable it for GvG like the PVE skills are for all types of PVP and change it again to its old discription for AB,TA,HA,RA and HB?Robertjanvaneijk1988 07:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It was bad in RA and TA too. 3 smiters + 1 rao axe tard would kill everything. -Auron 09:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible balance changes

→ moved from Talk:Smiter's Boon (PvP)

I don't get why he really made this kind of change, so why not try to help Izzy and come up with some sort of update for the skill. I think that a change to something like Divine Spirit could work. The 60s 1/4 10 is a good change, or even switch it to a 30s 1/4 10.. Why kill the skill, when you could balance it? --Hiddius 10:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, if this skill was anywhere near Divine Favor in terms of recharge it still wouldn't see use. To be honest, Izzy, just use the tried-and-true method of 10e 1/2 (or 1/4) 30r, and the duration set to 20 seconds. That way it can only be maintained by those serious about it, while also allowing a boost when needed for more casual usage. I also saw a really good suggestion in some of the rants that have gone on about this skill, where instead of doubling the divine favour bonus your target is healed for an extra +1 health for each rank of divine favour. Not totally useless, but it doesn't turn smiters into Domination Monks either (which is essentially what they were before). Silavor 10:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Tell me it aint so Sam :( RA smite support was alot of fun. GG HF K thnx bye —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spacey (talk • contribs) at 13:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC).

I think this skill will remain Imbalanced unless it's impossible to maintain unless you have 2 skills dedicated to maintaining it or it gets a similar effect to Divine Boon, maybe -5...3 energy each time you cast a smiting spell(to factor in that the heal is pretty substantial).(Marsc 20:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC))

This is not a balance.

It's not supposed to be. As has been stated, this skill was intentionally killed. I can't claim to know why, but I'd wager that it's being made an example of. "See what happened to Smiter's Boon? SEE IT?! Well, then, Backbreaker, I'm not going to warn you again, because you clearly already know: you could end up like that."

As this skill change is NOT a balance, nor was it intended to be, we'd do well to stop treating it like one.

I'm not trying to say "haha QQ more u noob"; I simply mean to say that we should treat this change as what it is, rather than what we'd like it to be. You can drink Mountain Dew all day and complain about how terrible of a wine it is, IMO.

As far as my personal views on the situation go, as if anyone cares... I think that Smiter's Boon wasn't the worst 4-man team. There's always the four RtL E/Mo team that (1) doesn't die and (2) quickly kills your members with hard-hitting air magic. There's the Backbreaker-> Holy/Stonesoul Strike group, with one W/A that shadow steps in, floors you, and beats on you while the three smiters that stepped in spam Holy/Stonesoul on you for 100+ armor-ignoring damage a pop. And as far as killing them, GL, because one monk's probably a bonder, one's a generic prot. monk, and one's blowing WoH out of his ass. I'm sure you can think of more teams like that, all of whom require little skill to play and, pretty much, almost always result in victory against balanced teams. I wouldn't be surprised if all these teams took a few blows from the nerf hammer.

I smiled when Ursan got nerfed (OMG blasphemous sadist!). I frowned when I saw the "Post-Nerf Ursanway" team that uses Oath Shot to keep it up. It's incredible to me how, instead of finding new ways to do things, people find ways to avoid change.

As far as that comment about "always fighting people with the same builds" or some such, I agree wholeheartedly. I do wish people would try new things, maybe put a bit of personality on their bar (STFU noob, anyone?). There are plenty of viable builds that don't see play because a lot of common ones fill our skill bars. Go try something new (D/N anti-melee build FTW!).

That is all. Let the flaming begin. (Raine Valen 00:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC))

A) Izzy is a skill balancer by job title, NOT skill deleter. He could have EASILY done ANYTHING else to fix this skill. It only takes a couple seconds of thought in my brain to come up with something better then he did. NOT doing so was absolutely lazy and unacceptable.

B) If he truely wanted to remove this skill from the game HE WOULD HAVE DONE IT. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Smiter's boon is STILL usable in PvP as a skill. Unless the encoding of this skill in the game would have massively broke something by removing it, Izzy should have flat out removed the skill from play in PvP only.

Either way you look at it there's only one conclusion: Izzy really REALLY did a half assed job. Axel Zinfandel 09:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure, but I think (looking at ANet's track record and what I know of coding) that simply deleting the PvP version of the skill would cause the PvE version to take effect in both PvE and PvP. There doesn't seem to be a way to remove a skill from PvP without removing it from the game entirely. (It's also something that's not been done since the beta.) -- Armond Warblade 14:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

PvE only? Remove Selfless Spirit from the game and put smiter boon as the allegiance rank skill for monks. Selfless Spirit is useless anyway. --MageMontu 14:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Like I say, deleting things hasn't taken place since the beta. And I bet the people who designed and coded Selfless would absolutely love that suggestion. -- Armond Warblade 21:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone mentioned another good argument: by making Smiter's Boon PvE only, it would be part of the cap of "only 3 PvE only skills at any given time", a change that does not make much sense for the skill. Plus it's likely that heroes would be unable to use it as well. Erasculio 22:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

WTB Game Design course

Everyone is happily pointing out that this is not a balance change and wasn't intended to be one. That doesn't excuse Anet. The fact that they had to put this skill out of play just shows that they already screwed up in game design phase, when they were making the skill. It seems to be happening a lot to Anet(see: paragons, ritualist spirits, and dozen smaller cases). They still have a long way to go before they will be as good game designers as blizzard. So yes, it's not a balance change, it's a fix, that wouldn't be needed if they did the design of a skill properly in the first place. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:89.142.136.128 (talk).

I've thought this over lately, and I've come to the conclusion that many of the issues in the game's design took root during Factions' design phase. The game designers simply created more skills and threw them into the game, when they probably should have made sure every one of the existing skills was usable, and spent their efforts on balancing the game rather than throwing more skills at meta issues with every campaign. I would even go so far as to say that adding new professions may have been a mistake, and I bought Guild Wars because it allowed me to dual-wield daggers. Campaigns should have been sold for new PvP game types and new PvE campaigns, not for meta subscription skills and professions. At least, that is my view on the issue. --Kite 00:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Or, all new skills and professions introduced could have been PvE only. PvP would then still be balanced, and PvE would have the variety (and "cool factor") is has today. Erasculio 01:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I've been saying for how long that everything not-core outside of faction skills for the core 6 professions should be banned in PvP? :P -- Armond Warblade 14:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, I would like to offer the opinion that the skill was balanced by removing it from viable play. -- Armond Warblade 21:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

That's a lame fix. It's like saying "I don't know how to fix it, even with all the obvious suggestions, so instead of spending 10 minutes figuring it out I'll just ban the skill." It shows laziness and lack of dedication on Izzy's part. And don't even mention "no personal attacks". How would you like it if you gave someone an assignment and they handed it in with a boatload of scribbles and writing that says "you suck. not worth my effort"? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.215.11 (talk).

Completely ignoring the unnecessary comment on NPA (as insults aren't the same as personal attacks, and no one cares anyway), devil's advocate says "there's way too many skills anyway, it's time to remove a chunk of them". -- Armond Warblade 01:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

That's why i'm iffy about getting GW2 imagine the mess in that O.O24.56.247.13 02:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I think they shouldn't have introduced any professions at all in GW1, right? They should've just threw in a little blonde kid with a green shirt skirt, a fairy, sword, shield and a princess to save, right? --Ulterion 04:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

(partly) right way, wrong skill

really. - Y0_ich_halt 11:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No, he can't 'just delete it'

Just a guess, here, but he really can't 'just delete' the skill. I'm not sure he can just delete the PvP version and keep the PvE version there. It would require the two being remerged, and the new universal version would (for the sake of balance) be the 25e/90r it is currently, thus removing Smiter's Boon from PvE usage as well, which wasn't the idea of the nerf. Diva 12:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

He could have made it PvE only skill. Would be the first attribute PvE only skill. --Treasure Boy Talk 13:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No PvP skill has ever been made into a PvE skill; like you said, no "attribute" skill has ever been made into a PvE skill. We don't know if that's possible at all. Erasculio 13:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Ofc its possible. What im saying is that instead of splitting Smiter's Boon, he could have made it PvE-only. That way it would have been locked away from PvP enteirely (Which was what the aim with this nerf was to do). But anyway, thats not balance so ppl would still cry about it. --Treasure Boy Talk 13:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

"Ofc its possible" - spoken without any knowledge of Guild Wars programing. Erasculio 13:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

They made Ursan useable in PvP during 1 april so why wouldn't they be able to make Smiter's Boon PvE-Only?--Treasure Boy Talk 13:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Those Update Notes were a joke - they were never implemented in game. In other words, Ursan was never useable in PvP. Although I aplaud you for trying to find evidence that your proposed change could work. Erasculio 13:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Instead of deleting it he does at least keep the skill, brainstorm something for it, and in a month or something we got something new that isn't as annoying as this was before, I'm all for this change. --Blood Anthem 14:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Great plan, except with the small problem that Izzy's focusing on GW2 and won't get around to this. (And maybe a bit of that real life thing, too.) The best we can hope for is that GW2's skill system won't be as retarded as the PvE team made GW's. -- Armond Warblade 14:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge

not this should be merged into the PvE skill's discussion but the PvP comments there should be moved here. - Y0_ich_halt 14:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I second the above notion. Don't merge the whole Smiter's Boon talk page tho I have some GREAT ideas for a pve version of smiter's boon. Psychiatric Consultant 18:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions

I applaud the community on their many, creative suggestions but there is one problem. The point of smiter's boon was to allow smiter's to deal supportive damage without completely foreiting their healing power. What smiter's boon did was give each smiting prayers spell~37-45 healing on each of their spells which made them just slightly worse then orison on the healing level. If you take the suggestions to make smiter's boon deal +whatever damage you are ruining its original purpose. I think that the suggestions should be focused on making smiter's boon able to add that tiny bit of healing but with a reasonable cost associated so as it should not be imbalanced. Many suggestions such as making it maintained, increasing the recharge so it is only partially maintainable, and making it elite are in the right direction, but plz, no more +25 damage or smiting prayers will stay as it is now...almost completely unused. Psychiatric Consultant 18:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I take "ruining its original purpose" anyday over removing it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.57.248.210 (talk).

This skill is unfixable, it was broken from conception which is why it was removed. Smiters were never meant to effectively prot, heal, and deal damage at the same time. Smiting is already a gimmick attribute for spikes (or more recently, nuking). It cannot give a bonus to damage or it will be abused. It cannot give a bonus to healing or it will be abused. It cannot do anything without being abused. <>Sparky, the Tainted 00:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Imbalanced

I admit that in TA smiter's boon was imbalanced and in GvG it was stupid. But it was not specifically imbalanced in GvG..just really dumb. It was imbalanced in TA because TA is based on overwhelming pressure which smiter's deal very well with. I know this is no excuse but TA is still so subject to gimmicks and unfair, stupid, overpowered hex builds that smiter's weren't any different even if they were op. In GvG, yeah it sucked to have to fight a 4/5 smiter 3 axe ranger teams but they weren't unbeatable with a decent team. Because, there is no infuse in smiting prayers and so they can't deal with spikes so smiting fell into the BORDERLINE op area with hexway and sfway. Where it is stupid but not nearly unbeatable. So for people who say it was op....it was....a little. However, just making it 10 1/4 45 would have balanced it. It didn't deserve to be killed. Psychiatric Consultant 18:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having to put in a shitload more effort to beat players who are being carried by Dunkor.

Right... — Skakid 00:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

More effort than fighting a good, balanced, team......? Besides, that's not my point. In GvG it was a gimmick but it was beatable with decent players. Annoying, but not much more so than any other team with more than 2 monks. In TA it was imbalanced because the weakness that balanced smiting (spiking) wasn't present there. Honestly, I don't see how you can say making it 10 1/4 45 wouldn't have balanced it. Psychiatric Consultant 14:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Even if you were making sense, NO ONE CARES. -- Armond Warblade 14:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

@ PC

If people are using it as a crutch, it's imbalanced. If it beats people of the same skill level without using any skill it is overpowered. Sure, rawr and dV can go in and roll a bunch of tards running smiters, but average players facing average players with smiters are going to lose almost every time.

And stop forgetting; izzy didn't care how balanced it was. He disliked the entire skill design, which is why he removed it from play until such a time where they can redesign it to be more in line with his goal of game balance in its entirety.

I feel like I've typed this a hundred times already, but remember Divine Boon? How it allowed prot builds to redbar efficiently? Yeah, that was bad for balance (in their opinion). It's the same here; smiting builds having great redbar ability is bad design.

If you'd read the developer notes, you'd know they weren't trying to balance the skill. They stated quite plainly that they were removing it from the game until they have a chance to redesign it. If they never get around to it, oh well; Guild Wars without smiter's boon is better than Guild Wars with it. -Auron 14:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Guild Wars without about 900 of the current skills is better than current Guild Wars, imo. -- Armond Warblade 17:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

He disliked the entire skill design of the skill he probably had a hand in designing. --Spura 17:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, he doesn't get any say into how skills are designed, or how they're changed for PvE - he's just expected to deal with problems post-release. That was the entire reason behind the PvE-PvP split, by the way - the PvE team was fucking skills up so hard and BAAAAWing so much when he tried to fix it, they had to split them so he could do some semblance of a job. -- Armond Warblade 17:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually... he is a designer. He's been in charge of game balance since before release. That includes designing skills before they come out. Remember some skills like Anthem of Disruption? They were super imba before release, but because he saw the response from everyone, he toned it down. -Auron 17:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Not what I recall Ensign telling me. That said, my hard drive crashed last week, so I've no way of checking. -- Armond Warblade 17:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I know they were trying to remove it. That isn't their job however. Izzy's job is to balance it not take the easy road of removing it from the game. As for GW being better without smiter's boon....yes it might be for balance. It annoys me though that every single time a class gets an effective way to do more than one job at once they are nerfed. Smiter's weren't even that good at redbarring or doing damage by themselves in the first place. It only got overpowered when you had 3-5 smiter's on a team much like with paragons. Psychiatric Consultant 20:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

"It annoys me though that every single time a class gets... overpowered... much like paragons" they get nerfed. Amirite? -- Armond Warblade 22:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

To PC, I don't think Isaiah's job is to balance Smiter's Boon, rather it's to balance Guild Wars. If to balance the latter the former has to be removed, so be it. I'm hoping at least 100 skills are removed from PvP next (ideally 750 skills), then we get a balanced game. Erasculio 23:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, let's definitely go that route. Just change the game's name to "Super Dragon Arena" and delete every skill that isn't Dragon Blast or Resurrection Signet. Then see how long we go before Izzy has to nerf one of them because it's overpowered.

Lots of other games have proven that more skills/spells/whatever doesn't mean instant imbalance; as a matter of fact, more choices generally ends up with a more diverse metagame. Perhaps, instead of nerfing skills continually, or making tons of "skill functionally changed to:" updates, Izzy should just start designing new skills. Say, on a monthly- or quarterly-basis, design a skill for each profession. Is the current meta plagued by tons of melee? Maybe some classes need a new anti-melee skill to add to the choices. How about enchantment removal that also disables the removed enchantment for a set duration. "Distract Enchantment". I realize things like this will never happen in Guild War's lifetime, but it's fun to think of what could be. Maybe Guild Wars 2 will see some balance changes, we don't know yet how skills will work in that game.

I still have my fingers crossed for a real nerf to Smiter's Boon, not this removal-pretending-to-be-an-intelligent-update. Being able to use a Smiting Monk as a viable support/healer was fun, and I'd love to see the healing simply powered-down... force teams to bring a "real" Monk along to keep everyone at full health, but leave them the option to bring along a support smiter as a backup/extra damage. Divine Favor provides decent healing as it is! You could lower Boon's bonus heal by a lot, and as long as it was still there, it could see a little use. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 06:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the game was rather balanced right before the release of Factions (hence 750 skills - that's the number of skills introduced since then), so it is possible to have a balanced version of Guild Wars with more than two skills. The idea of continually introducing new skills, however, is bad for many different reasons, the most obvious one being that if a skill is added to solve a problem in the metagame, it would therefore become a required skill, and so players would end with less options. That's the irony in the complains against removing skills from the game - instead of having more than one thousand skills, with only one hundred being viable, it would be far wiser to have 500 skills, with all of them being viable. That's how we could have multiple choices in how to play the game. Removing Smiter's Boon is one step in the right direction, but just one step. Erasculio 06:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong smiters boon was imbalanced especially in GvG and TA. It deserved to be nerfed. I just get annoyed that some people think that all gimmicks are bad for the game without exception. I've actually tried defending three gimmicks on this wiki smiters boon, sfway, and sway without much success. I've just been subject to the tried and true balance arguments against gimmicks in general. Now I'm not saying leave every gimmick as is....in fact smiters boon was probably one of the ones that needed to be nerfed the most from a certain perspective. I'm not stupid even though I may look like it when I post defending over-powered gimmicks. I just don't think all gimmicks are bad for the game like some people. One of the primary arguments against sway is that the players are actually becoming WORSE when they learn to play just spamming skills. I would have to disagree. When I played my first HA match I was playing as an old thumper....remember irresistible blow anyone? All I did as a thumper was spam skills on recharge. But, learning the HA map rotations and the game types and how to work in a coordinated 8 man team was invaluable for me later on. I also saw how balanced teams countered our build again and again and learned from it. That was what that gimmick accomplished for me even though I didn't play on a balanced team. Gimmicks are ways for new players to learn how to play in higher level guild wars arenas without having to go through the tremendous learning curve of balanced first. Tbh, if you are new to GW balanced is the WORST possible build you can play because you don't know how to play it. I think gimmicks have a place in Guild Wars to SOME extent and I don't think we should eliminate every skill in the game besides eviscerate and diversion because of them. Psychiatric Consultant 14:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I think gimmicks are good for the game, too...Within some limits. If players said "hey, let's get gimmick build X and play around HA a bit, we'll have fun and maybe we'll win some matches" or "enough with the serious builds for now, let's just have some fun with gimmick build Y", I would be very happy - we would have room for diversity within the game while the balanced builds (in other words, builds that don't rely on a single gimmick to win) would still be better than the others. The problem comes, IMO, when a gimmick build is seen as "ok, let's go win Halls fifteen times in a row, get gimmick build Z everyone".

I think Isaiah thinks more or less like PC, too. Most of his nerfs to things big in the metagame are small things (thumpers, assacasters, etc) or nothing at all (Wounding Strike, etc), and some times he has defended some builds claiming they're "fun" (such as seen here). Erasculio 14:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I remember something about i-blow. It was a bad skill. There were always better options, whether it was bull's strike, prot strike or dblow.

Your argument in support of gimmicks is bad. If people only ran shitway until they were familiar with the map types, then why do r9+ shitway teams exist? Are they still unfamiliar with the maps? Hell no. They're terrible players that never get better because they never play balanced. If you let people play shitway with no drawbacks, are they going to get better? No, they're going to remain terrible fucking players, they're just going to get glad point/hero points.

Don't believe me? Here's my proof; I was in Thousend Tigers Apund Ur Head. We rocked at gimmicks. We got top 10 on the ladder (back when the ladder actually mattered) with SBRI, and top 20 (more recently) with Searing Flames. We were all bad players. I've played balanced (or what's left of balanced anymore) since then, trying to learn how to actually play, and let me tell you; my time in Ttgr didn't help me one bit. Sure, I know the maps a little better. That didn't make up for not knowing how to play the game. I would have done better to just play balanced, even at lower rank, simply to learn how to play classes well. Overall, knowledge of skills/professions and their interaction with each other helps more in terms of "Guild Wars" play than knowledge of basic shit like where to run at the start of the map. Even Heroes' Ascent map types are simple. Are you saying scrubs have to run a gimmicky bullshit build to insta kill entire teams (searing flames) or to outpressure them via cspacing (shitway), simply so they can learn a map type? How does brainlessly rolling a team help you learn how to run relics? How does blowing two teams up at once with Searing Flames help you learn to do cap points or king of the hill? It doesn't.

This is a game of personal skill over skills picked. No skill should exist that is simply the best at what it does, and some skills shouldn't exist at all. RaO, for example, is like Frenzy combined with Sprint, except with no drawback. 25energy? Oh, that's no problem, I have expertise and energizing wind. RaO spam commence, without absolutely no worries about being spiked. Do I have to learn to time my knockdowns? No, I just spam hammer bash on recharge. Do I have to learn to call on vent for enchantments to be removed? No, my N/Rt who has unlimited energy can throw OoA up whenever he damn well pleases and my every swing removes an enchant. Do I have to rely on my teammates on midline to shut down their casters? No, I can just use bestial mauling on recharge, chances are I'll apply daze at some point, since I'm spamming hammer bash every five seconds. How am I learning to play the game?

Please don't use that terrible argument. It really holds no water. Go to HA ID1 and try to convince r9 shitwayers to play balanced because they know the map types already. They'll just laugh at you. They are incapable of playing anything else, and since shitway is so convenient (no skill or effort put into the build still equals lots of pressure put out), it's all they'll ever play.

@Erasc; I agree. Shitway should not be capable of winning halls, ever. Unranked (bad) players shouldn't be able to cspace and mash buttons and win one of the ultimate "challenges" of PvP. If they want to play around with friends and lose in the second or third HA map a bunch, I'd be okay with that, but mindless builds shouldn't exist past there. If they do, they're imbalanced, since the build and not player skill is doing the winning. -Auron 15:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It's a catch 22 though. Gimmicks are only fun to use when they win. When they win they are imbalanced. If SF got nerfed to single target and 2 seconds of burning nobody would play SFway anymore. However, when you can roll teams by spamming a single skill it is imbalanced. So the problem is how do you have good gimmicks that aren't overpowered? Psychiatric Consultant 16:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Guild wars is only fun to play when you win. Balanced isn't any more fun to lose with than shitway or any other gimmick is. However, that isn't a good argument in support of keeping gimmicks overpowered.

If SF got nerfed to single target and 2 seconds of burning, Guild Wars would be a drastically better game. Isn't that funny, coming from a guy who got all his champ points running it? I know from experience it's imbalanced. There is simply no counter in the entire game to reliably beat Searing Flames with. Some people theorycraft with "oh just use spirit bond lol" except that SF recharges in 2 seconds, and any caller who isn't inept is going to change targets immediately when a target gets protted. Long story short - monk prots are drawn out to keep a target alive, except the target is now something else entirely, so the new target drops. If the monk panics and spends energy healing that second guy, he'll be out by the time SF gets to the third target.

The only feasible caster counter in the game is the mesmer profession. However, mesmers are designed for single target shutdown. In other words, they're useless for shutting down 5 or 6 fire eles at once. Sure, they can maybe diversion one copy of searing flames. Sure, maybe they can interrupt one or two eles with Cry. But does it ultimately matter? No. Searing Flames recharges in two seconds, and with the built in management of Glowing Gaze, Glyph Lesser and Fire Attune, SF spike isn't going to run out of energy. Ask the monks in peace and harmony, flying liberaces, battery powered best friend, dei victorae, mostly harmless, etc - there's nothing you can do against it. It is a gimmick that simply needs to stop existing. In its current form, it will always be bad for the game. That poor design combined with the incredibly poor design of Heroes' Ascent makes it ridiculously overpowered.

How do you have good gimmicks that aren't overpowered? Easy. Make them require skill.

Mirror of ice spike, for example, is a good gimmick that isn't overpowered. It's a rather recent Me/E spike build using mirror to coordinate water magic spikes, and just 5 mesmers can do over 1000 damage. Each mesmer has shutdown skills from both mesmer and ele professions; snares like freezing gust and interrupts like cry or pdrain. It requires skill to use those utility spells well, even if it requires zero skill to listen to the caller and spike on 1. Yes, it's a gimmick. No, it's not really overpowered; rank 5/6 mirror spike groups will have to try their hardest to be able to beat a r5/6 balanced, especially ones that took the time to make Cold damage reduction shields. The build has 8 squishies, so it relies on player skill (ability to snare targets and interrupt key skills) to stay alive, compared to relying on broken mechanics like Soul Reaping-fueled healers that have enough energy to spam 25e skills on top of all their healing skills (and spirits).

When you get builds that require no skill and, more important, have no drawback, you promote poor play. I'll use my RaO example again for this. If RaO caused you to take double damage, would people still run it? No way! They don't have nearly enough skill to use something like that if it had a drawback. As it is, they don't have enough skill to use it without an additional crutch (EW to manage energy). Gimmick skills and builds don't need to be nerfed into nonexistance as much as they need to be balanced - they need to be given a considerable downside, like Frenzy or Infuse Health. Bad players flock to gimmicks because of the risk-free play. You don't have to think. You don't have to get better. You don't even have to watch the screen. You just have to c-space, mash buttons, and win. That shouldn't happen, ever, in a game that prides itself on game balance and competitive play. That is my argument against gimmick builds. -Auron 17:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the walls of text, I just feel really strongly about this issue, and I can't convey the same message (in debate format) without providing evidence and examples, which takes up the bulk of those posts :P -Auron 17:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Auron for balancer '08. -- Armond Warblade 02:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

/agree with nerfing sf, /agree with wanting gimmicks to require skill but still be good /agree with armond. Psychiatric Consultant 15:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Totally agree with builds requiring skill. Unskilled builds should be viable but no way should they be more powerful than the skilled ones. Thus, Frenzy's high attack rate is OK because you have to be reasonably skilled to avoid taking too much damage. However, skills which are just purely more powerful than others are bad since they give you a benefit regardless of skill level. Equally, skills like Rending Touch are bad because even though they are normally well-balanced with a drawback, there are ways of getting around it (e.g. taking no enchants, in this case) which make it horribly OP.

I would also like to point out, however, that OP gimmick builds aren't just unfun for people who lose to them or bad for encouraging skill-less play, the also ruin the game in other ways. For example, they devalue things like rank, since people can get it easily without any skill. Being able to win that many games that easily is also very unfair, again not just for the people you beat, since you then get high ranked people who can't play talking rubbish at others for being a lower rank when actually they know more about the game than them (for example, I have a pretty low rank, and while I don't claim to be an expert as per say, I like to think I know a fair bit about the game and whatnot - but I've only ever played SWay like once and don't live in HA, hence not having the rank to actually get in decent teams). It also messes up rewards from tournys and suchlike. I could go on.

Alternate suggestion

→ moved from ArenaNet:Skill feedback/Monk/Smiter's Boon (PvP)

Interesting example - this would bump Castigation's energy gain from 9 to 11. Good thing to avoid. -- Armond Warblade 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

It says "spells only" on this particular suggestion. On the other hand, you could just give all smiting prayers skills like 10-20% extra damage or something, but I'm not sure about that.

I was complimenting the forethought of the "spells only" part. -- Armond Warblade 15:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Yeah, Castigation's good as it is. With +2 to smiting it'd be way too OP and you'd have the same problem as with Healer's Boon.

On reflection, how about simply removing the healing but making Smiting Prayers spells cast faster, maybe ~20% (a la Healer's Boon)? This would eliminate the healing problem and yet still be useful to counter interrupts. I can also see a powerful synergy with Scourge Healing, which is awkward to use due to the 2 cast but would be too powerful with a mere 1 cast (see Soul Bind). However, with 20% off the cast time it would take only 1.6 seconds which is a much happier balance (especially given you use up the extra slot). There would also be an added bonus in that currently you may as well play Me/Mo smiter for Fast Casting over Divine Favour if you're going as an offensive caster (since the DF bonus is pretty low unless you spec highly and/or take lots of ally-targetting skills), but with a skill to decrease cast times, primary monk smiters would be able to compete.

overpowered

nerf this, it's op! - Y0_ich_halt 08:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

How about now? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.215.11 (talk).

If exhaustion isn't added in the September build ima rage~ 24.179.144.91 10:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

They should nerf it to be more like some of the other skill they have, hmmm... how bout... disables all skills for 10s when used, lose all energy on after cast, exhaustion, needs longer cast time, hmm, and instead of 2x healing from divine favor from smiting spells, make that 1x healing... and then when enchantment ends you lose 2hp for every point of energy and health you have. might still be a little overpowered after that but, its a start.

--24.175.108.212 19:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

i suggest they make it 10 2 1 and gives 1..3..3 degeneration while maintained. - Y0_ich_halt 02:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

reading my comment here, i think the sarcasm isn't obvious enough. - Y0_ich_halt 02:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

They could make it viable. Just add "When you cast Smiter's Boon, all World of Warcraft servers crash. When this enchantment ends all GuildWars servers crash." It deserves that. Noctarch 03:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Tbh, that would explain why Hyjal server crashed a few days back. -- Armond Warblade 15:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

So, uh...

Not accusing Izzy of anything. AT ALL. But if whatever all the ranters claim is true, Izzy pretty much destroyed a good skill based on opinion; "Izzy thinks it was too good so he ruined it."

Waht?! It would be one thing to underpower it, but making it impossible to use is drastic. Smiter Monks are already endangered species, why encourage the killing of an entire line?

I'm not one of those "wtb Izzy resigning" people, but still, I think this is kind of abuse of power. 72.209.41.202 14:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

No it's not. Izzy's doing his job as a balancer to remove smiting monks from PvP, which I for one applaud him for - smiters bring far too much healing, utility, and damage to the table when you let them. -- Armond Warblade 14:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

By that it's good to extinct something if it could cause problems. Noctarch 09:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

IMO it was the most appropriate short-term solution, but should not be considered a substitute for a long-term solution. -- Gordon Ecker 23:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. If they'd said "OK, Smiter's Boon need to be nerfed now but we don't have time to re-balance and test it so we're gonna kill it and fix it up properly in the next update" I'd be happy (it did need to be dealt with, really), but so far they've left us as it is, which is a bit disappointing.

The only thing that bugs me slightly (other than that) is that Smiter's Boon was obliterated like it was the devil's own skill, but yet other skills and/or builds which do or have done at least as much damage to the game (*cough* SWay et.c. *cough*) have been largely ignored for long periods of time... But I digress.

Too much damage, healing, and utility? No armond. Did you notice that the smite build used ONLY RaO's? Is it just a coincidence that every other build that uses RaOs is overpowered? Yet, no other build using smiter's boon even existed. ~Shard 01:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Except, smite damage is AoE :/. And smiters are extremely common in many builds. The RaO's are just especially gay, and can lock pets on monks. --Readem 01:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

72.64.4.243's suggestion

The problem is it's not hard to tri-spec. Heal/prot monks do it literally all the time. I understand it's harder for a smiter (because you need high divine for Divine Healing as well as the primary attribute), but you could manage with 11+1+1 smiting, 10+1 favor, and 10+1 healing. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 12:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of attribute splits, one thing that was good about this skill was that it gave smiters a reason to spec into divine favour. If you're going smiter you can choose to take a support role (e.g. using ally-targetting skills like Reversal of Damage et.c.) or a more offensive one (e.g. with Bane Signet- and Scourge Healing-type skills), but if you choose the latter there's not much point in taking divine favour - in fact, it could be argued that there's not much point in going monk at all, other than the runes. Why not Me/Mo or even E/Mo? Or even N/Mo for the Soul Reaping. This encouraged monks to put some points in DF and go the support route - it just made them a bit too good at it. I would personally advocate some kind of change which would support offensive smiting as well so that primary monks are more favoured (it would also make it more difficult for them to spec into something else too). 82.3.255.222 14:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

You know, that's a good point. --Antioch 23:15, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll FIX IT!!!

Can I apply for the job, i'll take minimum wage. I'll fix those skills right up :D24.56.247.13 02:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

O RLY? --Antioch 16:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Killing Smiting prayers

Why not remove the attrib line from the game? If there is a usefull skill, it gets shot on sight.. 82.171.24.156 13:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

smite hex, smite condi, castigation sig, soh... you aren't even trying. - Auron 06:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Yea, but that's 99% of everything that is remotely useful for smiting. Outside of ROJ and Judges Insight.--72.189.84.187 16:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

doh...

what if it'd deal the same amount of dmg (ok maybe 66% of it) of the DF healing whenever you use a monk skill that targets a foe?(or if u want zf synergy then deals damage to a foe) and maybe make it maintained idk.. - wuhy - 86.101.134.142 23:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Idea for skill changes (look to the right for info box)

Enchantment Spell. For 30 seconds, your party is healed for an amount equal to 0...24...30% of all holy damage you deal.

Smiter's Boon (PvP)

• 5
• 0.25¼
• 10

Profession

Monk

Attribute

Divine Favor

Type

Spell

Campaign

Eye of the North

Animation

Click to view

Enchantment Spell. For 30 seconds, your party is healed for an amount equal to 0...24...30% of all holy damage you deal.

--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Omlolz (talk).

| yes well you forget to mention that this would kill them because you would get idiot | monk/dervishes using it for the increased holy damage caused by most dervish enchants and the | judges insight effect with a scythe. you would usher in a new monk the 105 scythe monk with | this judges insight prot spirit maybe reversal of dmg and of course victorious sweep and | lyssa's assault and a res sig. LORD --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:74.167.212.90 (talk).

Before you make a suggestion...

Please, make sure it has nothing to do with the old Smiter's Boon (heals target for x!). In no way should it represent Zealot's Fire. Don't even think about suggesting this increase smiting prayers or damage from smiting prayers. Obviously, this leaves very few options. Still wondering why this was (and still is) removed? If you don't understand, please ask me to elaborate and I'll happily do so once I have a keyboard. -~=Sparky (talk) 08:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Doooo iiiiit. I already know, but walls of text are fun. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 14:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll get on my computer sometime and do that. P.S. I almost clicked the "Bacon" button again. Tricky. -~=Sparky (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)