Question to the Community

IF there will be no class tags in PvP, maybe A-net can make armor sets the same as weapon sets.

Then run around naked and just hit Armor set 2 to put on armor at the last second before casting/attacking.

Example: On a patrol, US officers during WW2 Europe hid the rank on their uniforms in case German snipers picked them off first during an ambush.

This would reduce the amount of tactics in PvP. It would add randomness. Instead of having a general idea about what the opposing team is built around, and being able to formulate some general tactics to stop it, you have to instead have a general tactic that works ok against everything.

Plus, it would screw all the debuffing classes and piss off target callers.

Not the point, in the example it's a random member of B that is shutdown, so B's leader can't make a decision based on their being a 'good chance' of someone being shutdown. The point is, simply, that the fact that A leader knows who on his team will be taken out, whereas B leader does not is an advantage to A. Thus, even if a mesmer were only shutting down a random opponent rather than a priority opponent, he'd still be a worthwhile pick.

While this is true to a degree, it's not like the mesmer has to be perfectly fitted to his opponent's build, he just has to know generally which of those categories the opponent is. I'm pretty sure an anti-spell mesmer is still going to be able to identify two opponents who use spells in short order. And as I covered in my previous post, if he can identify ANY opponents to target, even if they are not high priority, he's already making himself valuable. If your team further has the skill to identify the high priority targets in this situation, great, that's a bonus for the mesmer.

I also think that the classes are balanced as is. However, I also think the classes would be balanced after the change. The fact that different classes serve different roles allows a lot of leeway in class balancing. For example, say we doubled all healing attribute skills. This obviously makes healing monks a lot better balance-wise. Is the ideal team now 8 healing monks? No, you're still going to want someone to do damage, shutdown enemy monks, etc. You can't just win with your uber healing alone.

What it comes down to is you like mesmers, and this change tones down mesmers, so you don't like it. But just because the class gets toned down, it's not getting "nerfed to uselessness" as you claim. They will still be useful after the nerf, so saying that this hurts mesmers is not sufficient reason to say the change is a bad one.

IMO, even with the nerf they will still be above average in balance. And even if *GASP* they are below average...guess what? Not every class can be above average. As long as they don't become useless, nerfing of one class is not a sufficient reason to avoid a change which would otherwise add to the total level of the game.

So, in short, we should get off the mesmer thing and get back to talking about whether or not the gameplay would be more interesting.

We are talking about that. Removing the ability for some classes to compete makes the game less interesting to me.

You're missing a lot of what I'm saying. It's not just that I like mesmers, it's that they add a very important check and balance to elementers and monks specifically (and other classes to a lesser degree). Because of this, a nerf to a mesmer is /also/ a big power increase to other classes.

That said, questioning my motives does not help your argument and I take great offense at what you've said.

However it's clear that I will continue to point out that this is unbalancing and you will continue to believe that this is game balancing. I'll leave the thread be now as I don't believe area-net will ever do this anyhow (so I don't see a point in arguing).

-Diomedes

I like the idea. I think it would make fighting PVP more like PVE where you don't know what a mob is until you fight it. Of course, you'll have the armor to go off of, but you wouldn't know the secondary until you fight or observe them.

The majority of my post was about how this change would not remove their ability to compete. Toning them down is not the same thing. I agree with what you are saying here, but do not agree with the idea that mesmers can no longer perform these functions just because it takes longer to figure out who is who.

I come off as very abrasive at times in debate, and for that I apologize. I did not mean to imply that you have ulterior motives, only to point out to you yourself that your viewpoint is based as someone who favors a particular class. You are so used to how powerful mesmers are now, that you see anything less as unplayable, even if that is not necessarily the case.

*shrug* if you no longer find the discussion worthwhile, you are free to leave. However I will point out that as I mentioned somewhere above, as the person who is attacking the OP's idea on the basis that it will be unbalancing to the mesmer class, the burden of proof is on you to show how.

And I believe that I have. I don't see your arguments as defeating mine, I see every point I made as valid. On the other hand, you see your argument as solid. Clearly we're not going to agree.

Further, there is no burden on me. If you'd like to place a burden on anyone it's on those proposing a change to show that everything is still balanced. Truthfully, in this argument, I don't see how a burden can be applied to anyone. This isn't a legal matter with defined rules of conduct.

-Diomedes

If neither argument has defeated the other, than nothing is proven, so you can't say you have.

You don't have to be in a legal battle to assign a burden of proof in a debate. He proposed an idea for discussion. When you attempt to show that the idea concretely has a good or bad effect on the game, you have a burden of proof.

I'm not saying you have a burden of proof to show that this idea is bad. Only that you have a burden of proof to show that it would completely kill the anti-caster mesmer, since you have made such a concrete statement.

I see no standards for evidence nor a judge to decide, hence there is no way to "prove" anything here. I do not think that it's mathematically possible to break down every action that can happen both before and after the implementation in order to "prove" something with some hard numbers. Hence there is only argument. I have made mine and I consider it to be correct. So just how would you like to see something proved? To convince you?

Of course you don't, but now I debate that it's you who gets to do the assigning. Assigning proof is nothing more than a social convention. As there are no rules for that assignment here, I contest your claim. I still believe that if /anyone/ here deserves a burden of proof (which I still regard as impossible as there is no judge to decide the matter), it would be those who desire change to show that this proposal is concretely good.

-Diomedes

And as a side note, IMO = "In my opinion". That does not mean QED. Hence the next time someone says, "Boy, it's a nice day out in my opinion." Please ask them to prove it.

-Diomedes

I agree that it's impossible to prove it, because I believe it is wrong. You're telling me I have to prove it in order to show you it can have a burden of proof to show you it's wrong?

It is a convention of debate, not a convention of a society. We are discussing a point "does this change kill the mesmer class", within the context of the larger discussion "is this a good change". If you make the statement "this kills the mesmer class" and do not prove it, then we must disregard that statement within the larger discussion. I can't just say "this change will stop world hunger" with no proof.

You are correct, anybody who makes the statement "this change is good" is not correct until they prove it, which won't happen. However, we still like to discuss the change (and note that the OP did *not* make this statement). That's miles different from going on to insert that statement into other larger discussions without first proving it. You are trying to put the statement "this change kills mesmers" into a larger discussion, and that necessitates a proof of it.

You can't use statements to support other statements if they themselves are not supported. Say for example, there is another discussion "does A-net ignore good suggestions?" I cannot mention this suggestion and say "this is a good suggestion they ignored" because we have not reached a proof or consensus on whether or not this suggestion is good.

I wouldn't support a change like this for a few reasons.
1) Names aren't enough to tell people apart, especially given the different languages. Professions help a lot.
2) Showing primary and secondary profession gives a well-prepared player an edge, and I think the system should reward the well prepared. If you're playing an El/Mo I can anticipate what you'll be running better than if I only saw Elementalist armor. It doesn't mean I automatically know what you'll run, because you keep your hand (skills) secret til used, but it helps me anticipate.

Removing profession names removes that element of anticipation. To those of you who say it requires more battlefield observation skills, I say a good team still needs good observation skills, and seeing secondaries doesn't change that. But it does let me see what you're capable of, so I only have to anticipate 75+75 skills, instead of 75+(5*75) skills, or every skill in the game.

You need to be able to narrow down what your oppoent is using quickly to adapt. Remove profession titles and you take away and advantage from well prepared teams.

3) You don't see shouts and stances when they're used
4) GW visual is too cluttered to rely on it, and animations aren't clear enough. This problem would be compounded in multi-team maps. (And the Hall of Heroes, a Dais map, is one of the prominent maps in the game)

There already is the element of guessing. You have 8 skills out of a possible 150, making for 150!-141! combinations. That's more than a few trillion, yet you're telling me that there's nothing to guess, or that we have to guess more? Ridiculous. You can already play mindgames as it is.

More importantly, the focus on build rather than confusion would be lost. You can already hide what you're playing from other people by inventing your own builds, and yet very few people do. Is that because of the meta? yes it is. People like their builds, but our meta can just as easily support trickery and mindgames as is. Basically, you're making a moot argument: we have stealth already, but you don't use it. Don't penalize the intelligent among us because you don't use it.

Completely untrue, i've stated before that a mesmer has to know the entirety of the skills available to the other team in order to attempt to keep key parts of their build from functioning. You casually ignored this. Here's a tidbit: matches don't last 10 minutes. In HoH, your engagement lasts for approximately 4 minutes per team, max. As a mes, if i had to watch 8 players over 4 minutes, i'd get 30 seconds per player. Now, if i've got 30 seconds per player, its almost certain that they wouldn't use all their skills in 30 seconds, but more importantly, if i had to watch that long, i wouldn't be able to lock someone down effectively.

Your argument later on amounts to "mesmers should spam shame and not lock down priority targets" which is fair, except that mesmers, with the exception of the illusion line, are built specifically to not allow someone to do what they want. I'm sorry that you dislike the entire class and want them to be much harder than any other class, when they're already the most difficult class to play, but i don't think that's fair to anyone who bothered to grind out PvE.

This is exactly why i know you don't play mesmer: the mesmer cannot randomly hamper 2 people and hope for the best: he is used specifically to take a player out of the game.

You argument is "mesmers will be balanced in a different way" but that's simply not true. You have a 11-22 wand, i have a 11-22 wand. We are both equals. If we would both stand and wand each other, no one would win, it would be luck. However, if i clearly nerf your wand, giving you a 2-3 wand, you claim things will still be balanced, because things will be balanced in a different way.

News flash: you've admitted you think mesmers are too powerful, that's your bias, something you have yet to prove in any way, shape or form.

The fact is, interuption as well as skills like backfire and blackout are specifically, and obviously, used for shutting down characters. To say that the mesmer has to randomly pick a target and shut them down basically amounts to the mesmer being useless in any build, because he's a free spot that could be used for something focused. Mesmers are rare as is, I've been to the HoH 8 times in the past day, and i didn't see a single mesmer there. Bad timing? maybe. But it tells me that if mesmers are so awesome, as you claim, since they're obviously the second/first priority target, in your eyes (i go after the necro first, thank you very much), then everyone is simply an idiot for not bringing one.

An important thing to mention: if priority is the measure of how "unbalanced" a character is, then monks clearly need to get nerfed. Not only can they farm like mad in PvE, but they're in constant demand in PvP.

Maybe we should take out the health bars too, and have monks flail around uselessly as they try to find a target to heal

Because that's what you're doing to mesmers.

Straw man argument #1 (never said there isn't guessing right now)

Straw man argument #2 (never said there is no stealth right now)

I would say straw man argument #3, but I think you honestly failed to read the last bits of the conversation. To summarize, even if the mesmer cannot keep key parts of their build from functioning, he can still aid his team enough to be worth spending a slot on, and therefore is still balanced. (read it for further elaboration)

Think about this. You agree that the ability to lock down non-priority targets would still be sufficient for balance, then you say "but they're supposed to be able to do this other more powerful thing, taking that away would unbalance them". If ability A is enough for them to be effective, but they also have in addition to ability A better ability B, then toning down B is not going to "nerf them to uselessness" (the point of yours that I was arguing).

I don't dislike or like them, I don't really care so long as they are not underpowered or overpowered, neither of which I think will be the case with or without this change. You are the one that is making this discussion about mesmers. I don't want this change because it nerfs mesmers, I want it because I think it would be cool. I agree that it nerfs them, but I don't agree that it nerfs them enough to make them underpowered, and so long as that is not the case, I don't see that as reason enough to call this a bad idea.

No, I don't, but that doesn't mean I don't understand their role in the game. Your argument basically boils down to "this change would hamper their ability to do their current role", and YOU are the one that is completely sidestepping my argument which is that "even without their current role, the role they would be relegated to is still better than average in class balance".

Umm, how in gods name did you equate this to what I'm saying?

Strawman argument #3 (4?)

I provided a concrete comparison showing how this siutation does not make a mesmer useless. You've gone and said the opposite of my statement and.... not provided a concrete comparison showing anything.

I never claimed they were so awesome, this is going back to your strawman arguments. Furthermore, your personal experiences over the course of one day don't mean anything to this discussion.

Again, straw man arguments. This discussion is not about whether or not mesmers are balanced or unbalanced. All I said is that if they get nerfed in this way, they will still be usable, you have yet to disprove that.

There is nothing in this discussion about who "needs" to be nerfed (except where you insert that), only about who CAN be nerfed. Yes, I also think that if some other change that could improve the game required a nerfing of monks, that would be fine too, since they can afford it. That doesn't mean I think they NEED to be nerfed.

There is almost an infinite combinations of skills for me to guess when you run with primary/secondary but you'd want to increase that. What you want to increase already exists: you're posing a false dilemma here. Why take away the secondary if we already have all the strategy you could want? You admit stealth and guesswork are already existant, but you have yet to prove they must be increased. Oh, just so you know, i know what logical fallacies are too, so don't feel special trying to point out some that aren't present in my argument.

No, that's not what this argument is about. This argument is about the fact that this change would obliterate a class, which i've explained the reasoning behind in depth, cited skills that need the secondary class info to work, and the general philosophy behind why the change would punish mesmer over anyone else. I further explained that your reasoning behind your statement that "as a 2nd priority target, a mesmer can be nerfed and still perform" is spurious and completely illogical, since you obviously ignore the first priority target, the monk.
Neither does your statement that mesmers are the 2nd targets. Please, if you're a pot, you better not call the kettle black. Makes your arguments look stupid.

No, you provided nothing in the way of concrete situations, your A/B team comparison was debunked by another, and your statement that without having a priority target, a mesmer can "toss grief at a second" is completely untrue. How do you know your build counters his? how do you know the E you're fighting isn't packing E/W and running a flame sword with mark of rodgor? Honestly, you CANT IDENTIFY A "CASTER". I locked down that mesmer, oh wait, he just used sig of judge and bane on me, alone with 3 friends, now i'm dead. Without knowing the second class, your "shut down" is completely and utterly wasted. Without knowing what counters they have, playing your purely counter based character leads you nowhere, unless you take the massive amount of time i described before to figure out who can actually be shut down.

This of course isn't touching the fact that mesmers need to target key build components, which we now can't identify, a point you never brought up, or disputed.

You've argued for a nerf of a class and spent a paragraph explaining how it wouldn't hurt said class, since they could work around it. Fair enough, they could, but their usefulness would be reduced considerably. Similar nerfs across the board would leave everyone resentful, but you've stated that you think mesmers can suck up the change because they are priority 2 targets. Remember, that was your argument, not mine. I've completely debunked your "nerfing mesmers because they can be nerfed" argument, and you've yet to counter my argument about interupts.

So you're telling me that mesmers, as crippled as they would be are still superior to the other classes post nerf? Honestly, its like you're digging yourself a hole here: mesmers are currently utility. They gain usefulness by interfering directly with an opponents build. Without that, a mesmer becomes either an illusion mesmer, dealing out statuses, or he can try to dominate, but fail to actually do much. Basically, you're asking the mesmer to become a general caster dampner, which makes them far too vague and unfocused for taking a spot in a tombs team. If you go up against a ranger build, for example, the general anticast mesmer of your "concrete example" is completely useless. If you go up against a warrior smite build, the mesmer is useless. If you go up against a spike group, a mesmer can annoy 2 spikers, get himself spiked, and that's the end of that. Mesmers don't have huge armor, they don't have huge damage dealing spells, and they don't have huge party boosting spells.

All they have is disruption: as it stands, despite their obvious utility, mesmers are rarely used. That's our meta: nerfing them more won't exactly help the class out.

I don't think i sidestepped anything, i think you keep failing to understand how mesmers work. You've admitted you don't play as one: try it out, then try your arguments again: the job is the hardest one in the game, by far, and i've played every character combination you can think of. If you can shut my pure prot monk down for 60 seconds, i'll pay you 150k, and that's knowing what class i'm using.

Actually, you're the one avoiding your next few statements. You want the change because it is cool, yet it doesn't affect your play style. Mine, on the other hand, is going to change radically, and i know exactly what the changes will be. I know i won't be able to mes properly in KoH battles, or against spirit groups, when visual clutter is at its maximum. I know mesmers with computers weaker than mine would have a SERIOUS problem with the required rapid target switching, and i know just how hard the job is now when compared with other classes. You, however, admit to not knowing what you're talking about, using what you've seen about mesmers to formulate an argument which suffers from a serious flaw: 9/10ths of what mesmers do isn't visible. I have to count energy, i have to know how much each monk has, and i have to know which is casting the spells i need gone. I need to know psychology: will that monk chump a spell into that shame in order to keep another monk alive? will he try to out heal backfire by using larger heals? A warrior, on the other hand, is STILL going to be running up to something with non-warrior armor, backbreakering them, and pounding them as they flop on the ground. Obviously your point of view is skewed: you haven't seen both sides of the coin, and you readily admit to that.

I'm not saying they "must" be increased, nobody has said "this change is necessary, or GW will be broken". All I argue is that this will increase strategy. You imply here that you agree with this. I like more strategy, so to me that is a plus. Maybe to you it's not, but I'd not venture to argue as to what you should enjoy. I do believe, however, that the majority of players would like more strategy if there is a way to achieve that.

Well good for you. I like how because I refer to logical fallacies, I must be trying to feel special. Such an attitude says more about your security or lack thereof on the subject than anything else.

You haven't proven this at all. I agree that the change would punish the mesmer over anyone else, but I do not agree that it would obliterate them. You keep on equating the two, which is a big leap in logic.

If you noticed, at the end of my prior post, I said I'd be ok with the monk getting a nerf too, if it benefitted the game somehow. Your logic makes no sense. "Because mesmer is not the best, any nerfing to them destroys them"

Pardon? I must have completely missed this. Or, somehow in your mind, referring to a point automatically means it is debunked. In fact, I think the A/B team comparison is a perfect example of how a mesmer can afford a nerfing, and I want you to address that above any others of my points.

I'm not even sure what you're saying here, and you're supposed to be quoting me somehow? I said that the mesmer will find someone to shutdown, and even if it's not the priority target, he's still being useful.

If you successfully shutdown one enemy (any enemy), while still causing annoyance to a second, that is a big win. The guy you shutdown (who may or may not be vital to their build idea) is doing nothing to affect the remaining seven while you (assumedly chosen not to be vital to the rest of your team's build idea) are also affecting one other person. This kind of thing shouldn't be free, otherwise any team could have 7 mesmers and one guy specialized at 1v1 fighting (with the added advantage of whatever the 7 mesmers are contributing to his duel) for a free win.

Never brought up? I've said this multiple times, and you've ignored it. A mesmer does not "need" to target key build components. My whole point is that this is a powerful ability, a bonus on top of other powerful abilities they already have. Even if they are not targetting key build components, they are still providing a valuable function.

For crying out loud, pay attention already. I did NOT say it wouldn't hurt said class. I've agreed with you multiple times already that it would. What I do not agree with is your assessment that this hurt is something the mesmer class cannot afford.

You've done no such thing, you quote it and and then make the weird logical leaps I mentioned before.

You assume they can no longer do that after this change. I find that ridiculous for the reasons above.

With the correct counter-build, almost any single person can be made completely useless. Stop being so self-centric.

Do you just say things that sound like good arguments without worrying about what you're actually saying? What of my own statements do I avoid? Specific quote and explanation, please.

You are still working off of the assumption that mesmers need to be able to do all the things they are doing now to be considered an effective team member. My whole point is even if they don't accomplish as much as they generally do now, they are still effective.

For the millionth time, my whole point is you DON'T need to do all that. Doing all that allows you to get a benefit above and beyond what most classes can accomplish. Taking that away will hurt you, nobody argues that. What I argue is that you can afford that loss.

Both our views are skewed, you obviously like being a mesmer very much, so any harm to it is offensive to you. That's why you continue base all your arguments off the assumption that any nerfing at all is unacceptable. That's why we should restrict our discussion to concrete observations.

Don't fix what ain't broken, people. Before I step out of the line of fire of your handy little flame war/quote frenzy, I have to point out that everything Orochim does is what I need done in my groups. I don't want a mesmer who keeps his head down and never peeks around to see the battlefield.

Every target calling warrior initially calls a cloth-armored target, usually a monk, and then heads for the people who can do the most harm to his support. This means, in order of priority (usually), monk, mesmer, ele/necro, ranger/warrior. Or, in layman's terms: healer, shutdown, soft damage-dealer/utility, utility/hard damage-dealer. This order is not the same for mesmers... a mesmer usually needs to know a person's secondary and also what he is doing with that secondary, before he tries to shut him down. So yes, this change will be an unnecessary addition to already complicated game dynamics, and yes, it will heavily favor warriors and damage-dealers over mesmers.

Actually i've been saying that this would decrease strategy, nerf a class, add chaos, and generally lessen the enjoyability of the game. Good job getting that inference out of a statement which was made to say the exact opposite.

Had the fallacies you said existed been actual fallacies, this would be correct, however you just threw out words like "scarecrow" hoping i wouldn't catch on to the fact that they weren't. Good job.

We've already stated that proof is irrelevant, and nowhere in that quote did i say i proved it, i said i explained it. If you're going to argue against my point, be sure to first read it, otherwise you get egg on your face by saying something completely irrelevant.

like here.

I'm a mes against a 4 man ele, 1 necro 3 monk team. Who do i shut down? An amateur mesmer would shut down a monk, while an intelligent one would stop the necro. Why? Redundancy. Without enchantment stripping, the spikes will deal far less damage, and allowing the opposing team to survive the spikes until the eles are out of steam.

Redundancy is something teams bring in all the time. Ranger builds relying on spirits often have more than one spirit dropper, since if that one person goes down, they're in a huge spot of trouble. The problem being that only 8 spots are allowed on a team. As i stated before, and as you should learn by playing a mesmer, the mes has to target an indispensible element, or he's just wasted space. Might as well have brought another character who actually fits with your build instead of the mes.

You believe that a mesmer can simply say "omg you're shutdown" and it happens. As i said before, nothing could be farther from the truth. Apart from blackout and diversion, nothing the mes has cannot be broken. People ARENT standing around doing nothing. If nothing else the scenario you described would turn out to be an 8v1 wand frenzy, if the mesmers had the perfect build to stop their opponents. Now since you'd lose that 8v1, your argument here is obviously lacking in basic logic. More importantly, say a mesmer casts backfire on you: you aren't shut down. You have the option of casting spells for the added cost of 147 hp. Say you've got fertile season down, wouldn't you not care? Ah! i see now that mesmers, as powerful as they are, can be worked around, unless you've brought the perfect build.

It comes down to this: you believe that no matter what a mesmer can cancel out an enemy, but that simply isn't true, otherwise 8 player mesmer teams would hold HoH all day long. The fact of the matter is that you've made an assumption, an assumption i've shown to be untrue (if you say i haven't, look through all my posts as well as this paragraph, there's around 60 lines on the matter). Your assumption that the mes is an auto lock, which underpins all your other arguments leads you to believe that they can be nerfed and still stay balanced, when as it is, mesmer is the weakest single character class in the game. In team builds, however, the mesmer's skills become incredibly useful simply because they throw huge wrenches into an enemy build.

I can name like... 4 builds currently operating in the meta which are wildly popular that aren't affected by a mesmer. That isn't a counter build, that's a useless class.

Again, sir, i've shown the pot that he is black in the face of his cries that the kettle is evil and black. Please, stop being a hypocrite.

Yeah, and my point is that you have no idea how mesmers work. This described change affects everyone, yet more than one mesmer has stated that he'd be screwed because of it. Doesn't that raise alarm bells? ALL classes are going to have to change, not just mesmers, but if they're the only ones saying that they'll be ineffective, maybe that's a hint that they might need the information. Forcing me to take 30-60 seconds to start effectively finding people i can shut down means that i'm useless for the majority of the match, since top tier groups win their matches in around 2-3 minutes.

Oh, i found my target? Well, too bad, half my team is dead now.

For the millionth time, go play a mesmer before making these arguments.You don't know what you're talking about. Prove that i don't need to do this, or at least show me a decent mesmer build post-nerf using anything from domination.

Um, mesmer is one of 6 classes i've played the game through with. I don't "like" my mesmer anymore than i like my elementalist. Truth be told, i like my prot monk and my E/Mo smiter more than playing my mes, because my mes is VERY hard to pull off properly, and when i do an excellent job, no one notices, meaning the mes is often one of the first people dropped from a group. The proposed change would make my smiter neigh invincible, since when i start my attack, i start dealing 120 dmg aoe with all my enemies slowed. Monks have huge problems out healing that. Without knowing who i am, it makes it almost impossible to stop my build, seeing as i heal around 140 hp/sec and deal out that 120 aoe. Honestly, i could run a 8 of me, make people assume i'm spiking, then lay out over 1000dps for an instant win.

But yeah, seeing as i'm trying to be fair about this change, i'm not going to blindly favour myself over others. You on the other hand are doing just that. Again, you've questioned someone's motives while having no backing to do so. I don't question your motives, i question your credentials.

I'm fairly sure this debate is over. Go play a mesmer, earn 50 fame or so, then come back and talk to me.

In the interest of brevity, I am ignoring purely inflammatory statements and grouping similar points. Let me know if you think I've left anything out.

Umm, they were strawman (you sure you know the proper terminology here?) arguments. I debate one thing, you act as though I am debating something else, that's the very definition of a strawman argument. I won't repeat what I said before, but if you want to show that they weren't strawman arguments, the proper way to do so would be to quote me where I actually said the arguments you were arguing against.

All you did was say "these aren't strawman arguments" and then provide no backing. Your debate style often seems to boil down to "no it's not. yes it is. no it's not"

And again, my point is that you don't know that. You only evaluate your success as a mesmer versus the performance of other mesmers, so of course if you don't shut down the core of the other team you feal you've failed, because right now good mesmers can do that.

But guess what? That very attitude comes from the mesmer's natural advantage in class balancing. Not all players are team-breaking, only mesmers get to do that now, which is why I say they can afford to be toned down.

No, as I specifically stated in my last post, that would be way overpowered.

No, anytime a class gets nerfed a lot of people from that class say they are going to be screwed. Unless a lot of people actually get a beta of this game-type and play it for awhile, then complain, "a lot" of people saying one thing or another doesn't prove squat to me.

We're talking hypotheticals here, neither of us has played the game in question. I don't argue that you have more experience with mesmers in the current meta-game than I do, but if you expect that to make me say "wow, I bow down to your opinion and no longer require logical backing for your statements", then your dead wrong.

Um, I did provide backing, which is why i explained exactly why they weren't strawmen after i posted your quote. As for you believing that my style of debate, that's your opinion, something i don't care enough to change. If you ask me, your style of debate is making absurd claims, then failing to back them up.

Um, yes all players ARE teambreaking. An air elementalist breaks up a team by killing their players. A monk kills a team by rendering the damage they deal moot. A ranger breaks another team by adding spirits which make the other team ineffective, or by dealing damage, thus taking people out. Same with the warrior. EVERY player on a team has the potential to break the other team: the method via which they do so is not, however always disruption.

If you meant to say that only a mesmer can disrupt, which i think is what you're saying, then you're also flagrantly wrong. Thunderclap/perma kd? more disrupting than a mes. Backbreaker? How's about quickening zephyr? Exactly. I have proof that other classes do the same thing, you have statements which you don't backup.

Notice this entire time i've been evaluating a mesmer's performance not vs. other mesmers, but vs. anyone else in their slot in an 8v8 tombs battle. Your statement is false, i made no such evaluation, and its clear you're ignoring what i'm saying.

Yet that was your A/B analogy, which i said was disproved, which you said wasn't. In fact you claimed that all mesmers should shutdown 1 1/2 ppl. Thank you for proving my point. Next.

Irrelevant, if i decide that rangers should all die in one hit, and they cry nerf, it doesn't change the fact that you should listen to what they're saying. Raising alarm bells and assigning a "correct/uncorrect" tag to something are different. In essence, this reply of yours was the perfect strawman.

I expect you to know what you're changing before you talk about it. You don't. Debate over. I'm honestly asking you to play some mes pvp and see if you still have the same PoV. When you do that, you can revive this thread.

Complete nonsense!!! If you got the skills, then it shouldn't be a big problem for you to figure out which one is a monk. You know having a little observation and paying a little attention to your enemy wouldn't hurt in PvP. Uh wait... You want to take it the easy way. Should anet add a bulleye in the front and back of every monk in PvP arenas?

See, i said before, if you're a nub mesmer, the first thing you do is run to a monk and backfire him. Things aren't so simple. Please look back, read my posts, then come back here.

First of all, as a mesmer, if you think carrying backfire is the way to go against monk, then I'm sorry for you. Second, after enchantments are stripped and all enemy targets are poisoned/bleeding/deep wound, then the enemy monk is the target of focus fire.

Removing profession tags shouldn't hinder a good team with good observant players from doing what they want. However, it would make it very difficult on lesser skill/observant players or team.

how is this an unfair advantage?? everyone from BOTh teams can see what everyone is. no one has an advantage over another in this game unless it due to skill/experience.

Removing profession tag would bring PvP to another level. Right now, it is fairly systematic and easy to spot a monk which is your first target for focus fire after the battle is setup.

Did i say i use backfire? Does your conditions argument have any relevance? No, and No

Again, monks aren't always the first target. Please, pvping isn't a game of "rape the monks" unless you're still at that level.

After you slam nature renewal on their team, please enlighten us (at your "pro?!" level), what's a better target than monk?

Answer: uhh...uhh.. There isn't one. Death monks on frozen soils = GG

Uhh Uhh... ANYONE is a better target if you're under the assumption that you can kill one person and not have them res with ease. You take down their eles? No offence. With the frozen you talked about they can't res either, so they're no longer a threat to your team, and you can focus on other teams, or take your time and kill them.

If you haven't done that in HoH, i wonder how you've kept the center against renewal and 10 players devoted to hurting you.

Edit: have you even been to HoH yet?

More times than your total posts here combined. Don't give advise and make arguments about HoH if you only got there a few times.

About their eles, one of their eles can just run around, not doing anything and their team won't missing much. It'll take a while taking down a non-standing-still elementalist while 2 or 3 monks are healing it. Now if one of their monk is doing the same, then it's not the same; they will be missing 1 source of healing.

Btw, you do know that you can run and strafe during pvp, right?

Uh, the argument stands, if you have to disable more than 1 team, you aren't going to spend your time trying to take their monks out if you can effectively spike their damage dealers, as per your statements. The best spike groups i've been in take out the eles first, that way they don't have to worry about getting hurt.

You can't hurt me = you don't take my altar.
You have no healing means you hurt me while you die, then respawn and come back.
The team is missing alot: they have around 180 less dmg per spike cycle, which is around a 1/3 of a spiked targets hp. A monk, however, shouldn't be running in the first place. If they do run, they will get snared, and when they do, they're dead. If you're a warrior and you cannoy kd or snare your enemy, you've failed. Strafing in pvp only helps vs. projectiles, and dmg dealing rangers normally bring incindiary or kindle arrows anyways.

More importantly, your post has no point.

Also, how do you keep the center with no enchants running and 10 players devoted to killing you? you ignored this.

If you and your group are still worrying about spike damage from elementalist at this stage of PvP in guild wars, then I should definitely stop arguing with you.

One side note, my group have seen many many spike teams, and none of them are as difficult to deal with than a team that can resist spike damage (via greater/winter/mantra) and can good damage over time to a whole group and decent spike (or focus) damage.

I kill your winter, you die after nature's renewal. Spike damage can't be stopped if no one has enchants, stances, wards or shouts, and it happens that most people don't bring shouts, leaving mantra of lightning and ward against elements/harm as your only options. Sadly, if the character running those wards is down... you're in trouble. If you're relying on that spirit spammer, you're equally in trouble. More to the point, having 3 spike teams on you is quite annoying in HoH, hence why neutering them helps.

Winter itself takes a minor spike to kill.. so its not too hard.

Oh, and i didn't notice this before, but you're under the impression that my groups can't do sizable damage over time, and not just spikes... You'd be wrong.