Psycoprophet.8107

> @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > > @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > > > > @"TinkTinkPOOF.9201" said:

> > > > > > @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > > > > > > @"LolLookAtMyAP.8394" said:

> > > > > > > The way my paw paw taught me terminology low skill floor = easy to play, which means it's easy to be effective. You're trying to reach the floor, and if it's low, there's less effort required to get to it.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I was dueling a condi Herald as power Mirage and they blew so many cooldowns and still managed to wittle me down to near-death. Keep in mind I did my best to dodge every attack, this person used all their skills at the wrong time but the sheer size of AoEs and CCs, multiple sustain tools makes this an easy build to play. This was before switching to Elusive Mind so hopefully that makes it a lot easier.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Skill floor = How the class is when played badly

> > > > > > Skill ceiling = How the class is when played well

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Low skill floor = The class is terrible when you don't know how to play it

> > > > > > High skill floor = The class is good even if you don't know how to play it

> > > > > > Low skill ceiling = The class is bad even when played well

> > > > > > High skill ceiling = The class is quite powerful when played well

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Usually you want noobs playing high skill floor classes (Warrior BS) and skilled people playing high skill ceiling classes (Chronotank, Quickbrand).

> > > > >

> > > > > No.

> > > > >

> > > > > A low skill floor means the entry to be effective is LOW, meaning an inexperienced player can be effective on it. A high ceiling means it requires lots of skill to play at it's limits. Where you are getting the opposite from I have no idea, maybe you should google "low skill floor meaning".

> > > > >

> > > > > Here, let me do it for you:

> > > > >

> > > > > "This brings us to skill floors. A skill floor is the counterpart to a skill ceiling. A skill ceiling is the level of play that’s possible with training and mastery. A skill floor is a way of describing how difficult it is to begin the process of mastery. For example, playing Widowmaker in Overwatch isn’t easy if you don’t have a background in other FPS titles. In order to even be relevant with her, you need to have exceptional aim and positioning. The skill floor for Widowmaker, in other words, is very high — if you want to be somewhat competent, you need to have mastered a variety of game mechanics."

> > > > >

> > > > > "Skill floors, to start, are the bare minimum amount of skill with that game (or sub-category within the game, see class shooters ala TF2) to participate in the game effectively. This is the status quo that the developers have modeled the game around, and if you’re not good enough to meet this floor you’re going to have a hard time. This is the developers saying “you must be this tall to ride this ride.”

> > > > >

> > > > > "The floor tells us how easy it is to get going with the task. A low floor means it’s easy for everyone to get on board. Tic-Tac-Toe is an example of a game with a low floor. It’s easy to understand and even the youngest of kids can start playing pretty quickly. A low floor is inviting. Chess has a high floor – evidenced by how many college-educated adults I’ve met who cannot play. Chess’s floor appears so high that they just never got going. A high floor is a barrier."

> > > > >

> > > > > Do I need to go on?

> > > >

> > > > This^ is correct.

> > >

> > > I disagree :)

> >

> > Well ur wrong so...

> > It's easy

> > Low floor- easy to pick up and do well

> > High floor- not easy to pick up and play

> > Low cieling- can only be so effective regardless of skill

> > High ceiling- a great player can utilize the classes potential and perform far better on it than a good player, aka has higher potential for skillful play.

>

> Or am I ? Maybe you are. Your description sounds inconsistent like a mix of both mindset. Floor using a threshold, ceiling not having one.

Nope ur confused, not very complicated lol

> @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > > @"TinkTinkPOOF.9201" said:

> > > > @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > > > > @"LolLookAtMyAP.8394" said:

> > > > > The way my paw paw taught me terminology low skill floor = easy to play, which means it's easy to be effective. You're trying to reach the floor, and if it's low, there's less effort required to get to it.

> > > > >

> > > > > I was dueling a condi Herald as power Mirage and they blew so many cooldowns and still managed to wittle me down to near-death. Keep in mind I did my best to dodge every attack, this person used all their skills at the wrong time but the sheer size of AoEs and CCs, multiple sustain tools makes this an easy build to play. This was before switching to Elusive Mind so hopefully that makes it a lot easier.

> > > >

> > > > Skill floor = How the class is when played badly

> > > > Skill ceiling = How the class is when played well

> > > >

> > > > Low skill floor = The class is terrible when you don't know how to play it

> > > > High skill floor = The class is good even if you don't know how to play it

> > > > Low skill ceiling = The class is bad even when played well

> > > > High skill ceiling = The class is quite powerful when played well

> > > >

> > > > Usually you want noobs playing high skill floor classes (Warrior BS) and skilled people playing high skill ceiling classes (Chronotank, Quickbrand).

> > >

> > > No.

> > >

> > > A low skill floor means the entry to be effective is LOW, meaning an inexperienced player can be effective on it. A high ceiling means it requires lots of skill to play at it's limits. Where you are getting the opposite from I have no idea, maybe you should google "low skill floor meaning".

> > >

> > > Here, let me do it for you:

> > >

> > > "This brings us to skill floors. A skill floor is the counterpart to a skill ceiling. A skill ceiling is the level of play that’s possible with training and mastery. A skill floor is a way of describing how difficult it is to begin the process of mastery. For example, playing Widowmaker in Overwatch isn’t easy if you don’t have a background in other FPS titles. In order to even be relevant with her, you need to have exceptional aim and positioning. The skill floor for Widowmaker, in other words, is very high — if you want to be somewhat competent, you need to have mastered a variety of game mechanics."

> > >

> > > "Skill floors, to start, are the bare minimum amount of skill with that game (or sub-category within the game, see class shooters ala TF2) to participate in the game effectively. This is the status quo that the developers have modeled the game around, and if you’re not good enough to meet this floor you’re going to have a hard time. This is the developers saying “you must be this tall to ride this ride.”

> > >

> > > "The floor tells us how easy it is to get going with the task. A low floor means it’s easy for everyone to get on board. Tic-Tac-Toe is an example of a game with a low floor. It’s easy to understand and even the youngest of kids can start playing pretty quickly. A low floor is inviting. Chess has a high floor – evidenced by how many college-educated adults I’ve met who cannot play. Chess’s floor appears so high that they just never got going. A high floor is a barrier."

> > >

> > > Do I need to go on?

> >

> > This^ is correct.

>

> I disagree :)

Well ur wrong so...

It's easy

Low floor- easy to pick up and do well

High floor- not easy to pick up and play

Low cieling- can only be so effective regardless of skill

High ceiling- a great player can utilize the classes potential and perform far better on it than a good player, aka has higher potential for skillful play.

> @"TinkTinkPOOF.9201" said:

> > @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > > @"LolLookAtMyAP.8394" said:

> > > The way my paw paw taught me terminology low skill floor = easy to play, which means it's easy to be effective. You're trying to reach the floor, and if it's low, there's less effort required to get to it.

> > >

> > > I was dueling a condi Herald as power Mirage and they blew so many cooldowns and still managed to wittle me down to near-death. Keep in mind I did my best to dodge every attack, this person used all their skills at the wrong time but the sheer size of AoEs and CCs, multiple sustain tools makes this an easy build to play. This was before switching to Elusive Mind so hopefully that makes it a lot easier.

> >

> > Skill floor = How the class is when played badly

> > Skill ceiling = How the class is when played well

> >

> > Low skill floor = The class is terrible when you don't know how to play it

> > High skill floor = The class is good even if you don't know how to play it

> > Low skill ceiling = The class is bad even when played well

> > High skill ceiling = The class is quite powerful when played well

> >

> > Usually you want noobs playing high skill floor classes (Warrior BS) and skilled people playing high skill ceiling classes (Chronotank, Quickbrand).

>

> No.

>

> A low skill floor means the entry to be effective is LOW, meaning an inexperienced player can be effective on it. A high ceiling means it requires lots of skill to play at it's limits. Where you are getting the opposite from I have no idea, maybe you should google "low skill floor meaning".

>

> Here, let me do it for you:

>

> "This brings us to skill floors. A skill floor is the counterpart to a skill ceiling. A skill ceiling is the level of play that’s possible with training and mastery. A skill floor is a way of describing how difficult it is to begin the process of mastery. For example, playing Widowmaker in Overwatch isn’t easy if you don’t have a background in other FPS titles. In order to even be relevant with her, you need to have exceptional aim and positioning. The skill floor for Widowmaker, in other words, is very high — if you want to be somewhat competent, you need to have mastered a variety of game mechanics."

>

> "Skill floors, to start, are the bare minimum amount of skill with that game (or sub-category within the game, see class shooters ala TF2) to participate in the game effectively. This is the status quo that the developers have modeled the game around, and if you’re not good enough to meet this floor you’re going to have a hard time. This is the developers saying “you must be this tall to ride this ride.”

>

> "The floor tells us how easy it is to get going with the task. A low floor means it’s easy for everyone to get on board. Tic-Tac-Toe is an example of a game with a low floor. It’s easy to understand and even the youngest of kids can start playing pretty quickly. A low floor is inviting. Chess has a high floor – evidenced by how many college-educated adults I’ve met who cannot play. Chess’s floor appears so high that they just never got going. A high floor is a barrier."

>

> Do I need to go on?

This^ is correct.

Low skill floor- a noob can be effective on it with little experience.

High skill floor- better to have a decent understanding of the game before trying and expect to to be less effective until more experienced on class aka not easy to just pick up and play.

Low skill cieling- class only had so much potential for high skill play, for example over time a good player could perform as well as a great player due to classes overall potential being realized fairly early in play.

High skill ceiling- huge difference between a good and great player after both have played class for significant amount of time. Basically if player skill is high enough to maximize the class potential the class can be very powerful, usually more so than classes with lower ceiling but require more skill.

Just seems weird warrior can use all these different weapons but not a spear, who at anet thought hmmm warrior should be able to use more variety of weapons cuz it a warrior then leaves out one of the most common and iconic melee battle weapons. That's like designing ele and making staff or scepter not being unusable on the class. Same for guard class, as soon as staff was considered spear and spear like skills and how fitting it would be for it should been obvious.

> @"wevh.2903" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > Umm yeah its 360 but isn't it the shortest range pull in the game? Or is this a joke thread?

>

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > Umm yeah its 360 but isn't it the shortest range pull in the game? Or is this a joke thread?

>

> almost spammable pull on a high value aoe condition class with stab/resistance uptime yee seemss like joke thread . Thats why there r ppl runnig 3 revs comp perma ccing ppl aroud xd

Hmmm never found it a problem myself.

Warrior is one of the least threatning classes to face in melee, warrior thee melee class lol the perfect example of the competence of the devs ability to balance, games in good hands.

Power shiro- high skill floor/high skill ceiling.

Crev/renegade- low skill floor/low skill cieling.

> @"Skyronight.6370" said:

> > @"anjo.6143" said:

> > Wait, there is some ppl thinking rev is not overperforming? Oh my

>

> its because of delusion, im a main rev and all i see in 3v3s is crev, fb and necro comps, i dont see anything else. its why im trying to bring in some ideas on how to nerf rev without making it useless like they did to chrono and druid etc

Power revs not crazy OP, crev is simply cuz condi in general wasn't hit as hard as power, that and the fact of the condi skills being designed with condi being in a less overperforming state leads to issues. Burn guards, ele's, condo thieves etc are all overturned cuz condi is still overturned. I'm not say classes like burn guards are crazy OP as a whole but in their respect their burn damage is definitely overturned as a example.

Can we please nerf skill because a player used it on me and it was effective. It's annoying and a problem as I'm trying to enjoy pvp but it's hard to do so if players are using effective skills on me, pls anet nerf these skills.

There now u guys can list all ur skills and classes u want gutted purely cuz they were effective against u, u kno in the name of balance and such.

Umm yeah its 360 but isn't it the shortest range pull in the game? Or is this a joke thread?

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > So no los sporting is or has been a issue on thief etc for how long and the most accepted nerf was make them require los port to make it more fair. Rev has a port that requires los and it's a issue?

>

> wat.

> literally everything is wrong in that.

Haha sry I only do action cam so the ports are los for me. Guess i wasn't considering how they function in tab target.

> @"Hirosama Nadasaki.6792" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > It’s kinda boggling that some of you people are participating in a competitive game mode and complaining that you need to be competitive to win... Don’t play competitive pvp if you’re not going to make an effort.

>

> Except every self respecting competitive game has premade matchmaking, which makes your whole point null. If the devs don't want to make an effort why should anyone else want to?

This^ the fact that the devs are so ....... that they have a competitive mode that puts premade groups against pugs and thinks it's fine for 8 yrs makes me question how any player could consider this games pvp even close to being competitive.

Games pvp modes a meme at this point.

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> > @"Shao.7236" said:

> > snips

>

> my gripe is more with los porting in general then with power rev.

So no los sporting is or has been a issue on thief etc for how long and the most accepted nerf was make them require los port to make it more fair. Rev has a port that requires los and it's a issue?

> @"Supreme.3164" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > Why doesn't the community just be blunt and just say that u guys would like burst specs and the burst playstyle fully removed from the game. U all have issues with any spec doing it so....

> > Like the above poster what kind of burst spec would a spec be if its bursts didnt take half to close to the enemies hp if its burst connects effectively, a burst class hitting for 15% of ur hp in a game like gw2 would not be functional or effective as a burst class if it did so little. Also the sword 5 requires line of sight and if u kno revs targeting u u can assume given the class type hes gonna be trying for the sword 5.

> > Lastly rev being a burst spec it makes sense it has skill like sw5 for quick engage but definitely isnt amazing at disengaging compared to a lot of other classes. The fact it's got great engage but less disengage and the port on sw5 needing los seems pretty balanced given gw2 roster of skills. Rev may have been some superpowered spec but it's not nearly as broken as the community is making it sound these days. Also the cmc comment makes sense as power rev as I'm assuming hes referencing has a higher skill floor so usually players not that mechanically skilled more often than not don't do very well on it and rev players that people hear about or get wrecked by are unsually good players that are skillful on multiple classes or would be so on any the took the time to learn. Even now I see far more variants of necros, guards, thieves, engis than power revs in pvp. U guys are literally killing ur own game along side anet lol.

> > It's funny no?

>

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > Why doesn't the community just be blunt and just say that u guys would like burst specs and the burst playstyle fully removed from the game. U all have issues with any spec doing it so....

> > Like the above poster what kind of burst spec would a spec be if its bursts didnt take half to close to the enemies hp if its burst connects effectively, a burst class hitting for 15% of ur hp in a game like gw2 would not be functional or effective as a burst class if it did so little. Also the sword 5 requires line of sight and if u kno revs targeting u u can assume given the class type hes gonna be trying for the sword 5.

> > Lastly rev being a burst spec it makes sense it has skill like sw5 for quick engage but definitely isnt amazing at disengaging compared to a lot of other classes. The fact it's got great engage but less disengage and the port on sw5 needing los seems pretty balanced given gw2 roster of skills. Rev may have been some superpowered spec but it's not nearly as broken as the community is making it sound these days. Also the cmc comment makes sense as power rev as I'm assuming hes referencing has a higher skill floor so usually players not that mechanically skilled more often than not don't do very well on it and rev players that people hear about or get wrecked by are unsually good players that are skillful on multiple classes or would be so on any the took the time to learn. Even now I see far more variants of necros, guards, thieves, engis than power revs in pvp. U guys are literally killing ur own game along side anet lol.

> > It's funny no?

>

> Interesting point...really I think people complain about the nature of the burst spec, everything is fair game except when dealing with a deadeye in which case , the devs should remove the "stealth on dodge" trait as alone it removes any resemblance of counterplay against this particular burst spec, other thief builds are fair game

Even thief players admit stealth on dodge was a mistake as was kneel.

> @"Hirosama Nadasaki.6792" said:

> Premade vs PUG is obviously a horrid design, but the best alternative would be to match premade vs premade and pug vs pug, and I don't think the pvp population is big enough for that sadly.

> Anet kinda cornered themselves with this one, and I think this is all we're going to get.

True, if split the queue times would be long but if match quality is better the mode might actually see a incline in population vs a decline over time. I'd deal with longer ques times if that was the possible outcome as I'm sure a lot of players would, now I say that as someone who doesnt play often anymore so maybe players who play often would feel differently. But if it makes game better in long run 6 months or so of longer queue times be worth it in my book.

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > It's easy, if u don't have friends to play with or their never on when u are to team with either find more friends to play with or play a different pvp game all together which would be more fun than constantly being farmed by premade. Leave the premade to fight other premade, I'm sure the game can handle losing all its solo queue players to other games anyway :)

>

> I'm sure PvP can handle losing the premade-only players better than the solo-queuers.

I was being sarcastic on last part lol

My point is all these premade groups defend the situation cuz they like farming solo q'rs so I say all solo q'rs leave and see how much these premade groups like fighting among their handful of premade groups over and over with barely any new players joining up cuz the aforementioned issue and see how long pvp even goes before being shut down or unsupported. Ur right there 10x more solo q's than there is premades and always will be but if anet wants to cater to premades giving them the obvious advantage and the group players are to selfish and self centered to see the other side of the arguement then just don't play it and give them the satisfaction of farming u. See how they like the mode after most the solo q'rs leave.

Why doesn't the community just be blunt and just say that u guys would like burst specs and the burst playstyle fully removed from the game. U all have issues with any spec doing it so....

Like the above poster what kind of burst spec would a spec be if its bursts didnt take half to close to the enemies hp if its burst connects effectively, a burst class hitting for 15% of ur hp in a game like gw2 would not be functional or effective as a burst class if it did so little. Also the sword 5 requires line of sight and if u kno revs targeting u u can assume given the class type hes gonna be trying for the sword 5.

Lastly rev being a burst spec it makes sense it has skill like sw5 for quick engage but definitely isnt amazing at disengaging compared to a lot of other classes. The fact it's got great engage but less disengage and the port on sw5 needing los seems pretty balanced given gw2 roster of skills. Rev may have been some superpowered spec but it's not nearly as broken as the community is making it sound these days. Also the cmc comment makes sense as power rev as I'm assuming hes referencing has a higher skill floor so usually players not that mechanically skilled more often than not don't do very well on it and rev players that people hear about or get wrecked by are unsually good players that are skillful on multiple classes or would be so on any the took the time to learn. Even now I see far more variants of necros, guards, thieves, engis than power revs in pvp. U guys are literally killing ur own game along side anet lol.

It's funny no?

It's easy, if u don't have friends to play with or their never on when u are to team with either find more friends to play with or play a different pvp game all together which would be more fun than constantly being farmed by premade. Leave the premade to fight other premade, I'm sure the game can handle losing all its solo queue players to other games anyway :)

> @"Kulvar.1239" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > For one its anet devs so ull be waiting a absurd amount of time for changes some traits have been literal place holder for years.

> > 2 its anet devs so instead of reworking or redesigning useless or un used traits they will instead nerf the traits that are fine in the tree to make them compete with useless traits or to make the already useless traits seem more tempting to use.

> > U picked the wrong mmo if u want any decent changes that make any kinda sense in the near future, their just gonna keep running their game into the ground until ncsoft steps in again and says enough.

>

> I don't know any MMO where players dont wait forever for some stupid things to be fixed

true but anets on another level.

Changing numbers is the easiest approach therefore the approach that will be taken with regards to gw2 devs, have u not noticed this thru the years?

Class focusednerfs are 100% dictated by niose these days as it iterate's the notion that instead of the balance team doing what they're paid for they just use forums and threads to do their job for them for the most part due to the fact the have zero clue what their doing.

> @"xWiroo.3841" said:

> To have a clear direction in terms of design you need a leader, someone that takes the horse and rides it to a direction considering all the multiple factors and that keeps working on it with a clear vision. I doubt there is one in this game, because all patches become superficial solutions to deep issues, i mean, kitten, this game is like 8 years old and it suffers from issues noted years ago.

>

> Considering that this game is old, that makes me think we will never see a deep change or rework on certain things because the game as it is brings money. I think there never was any kind of intention on fixing things and there never will, all those posts saying stuff like: "we promise you guys, this time we will have pvp and wvw improvements" were just lies to keep playerbase going on.

>

> Think about this, if the next week, people stop playing, the playerbase just keeps going down and down, what would arenanet do? Would they say: "hey guys, we are doing real changes so come back because this time we swear for real we are fixing things!" or would they just drop the game because it is not redituable? I think they would drop it with no doubt because thats the kind of things ncsoft is famous for, thats also one of the reasons i think we wont see gw3 in years.

>

> sorry for the rant

Ncsoft is far from the monster depicted or have at least changes their ways or this game would have been canned by now.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > Just happen to catch a MMO of 2020 video from a youtuber I follow, and he ran down the current status of the Big Three, those being : WoW, FF, and ESO.

> >

> > Sadly I think that is just how it is going to be. People will talk about the Top MMOs people and playing, and then "oh yeah, and then there is Guild Wars 2".

>

> FF14 isn't a MMO at all.

Ff14 is absolutely a mmo, it's the closest thing to wow their is hense why most vet wow players moved over to it. Only thing different is it's very story heavy, basically a mmo with rpg quality campaign vs most mmos like gw2 for example which have meme worthy stories lol.

Its end game dungeon and trial scene also craps on the sad scene we got here in gw2 lol strike missions oh my.

Honestly the very high toxicity is no surprise,the pvp is infuriating to play, by time 3rd match is over ur left wondering how all the devs haven't been fired and blacklisted by now so not sure what u expect.

> @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> > U think adjusting literally a couple of things or less on one or two classes each month after doing a huge lazy blanket power drop balance patch is enough and constitutes efficient and acceptable support of game modes such as pvp and wvw? That's good I guess to keep the bar very very low.

>

> Yes, constant small adjustments to things that are currently being abused is exactly how you balance PvP. I have no idea what you expect, but it's unrealistic and never going to happen in any game. What anet is currently doing is EXACTLY what people wanted since day1.

>

> Also, the "blanket power drop" is exactly what every top player and veteran wanted for years, and NEEDED to happen. I never expected it, and I'm so amazed they did it. It was the EXACT thing that needed to happen, 2 expacs of power creep was making the game stupid.

> > @"TeqkOneStylez.8047" said:

> > Guild Wars2 would need it's own PVP focused game if we were gonna see any significant changes for the better that actual competitive gamers can respect.

>

>

> But it does have it's own pvp focused game? PvP uses it's own rules for nearly everything at this point. Competitive gamers are not the type of people you want playing your MMO PvP, they ruin the game for everyone else.

>

>

If u actually think about those few balance updates since the blanket drop can u actually say u think a team even if small focused on these changes couldn't have played for a couple week, come to those conclusions including all of which was in the last few patches and more and gave those changes to the devs to implement them in the time itrook to roll out even the first patch after the big lazy blanket patch?

Also the vets wanted a big power lv drop between the classes with each class individually depowercrept through thoughtfully tweaks to individual skills but instead got a huge blanket power drop that even anet knew was lazy and would cause a lot of imbalances, the opposite of desired intentions. Their bandaid fix and response to such a obvious situation was were aware and will do quick fixes as time goes on lol problem is is they are working at less than a snail's pace. Like I said all the changes that have occured since the big patch should have been includes in the first update 3 weeks post big patch. The dev current balance changes and the frequency are far from efficient and are not even close to acceptable. I'm sry but again look at passive traits still on 5 min CD over half year later lol wtf. Anyway ur expectations from a mmo company are far from where mine are at and this is thee only one of the three I play I feel remotely close to this way. No devs are perfect but lol wow.

Sustain means the ability to stay engaged actively in a engagement. Sustained damage is the ability to deal damage over time within a engagement through multiple effective damage dealing skills vs burst which uses a couple quick high damaging skills but doesn't have the ability to keep the significant damage going for the duration that a class with sustained damage could, but the burst is usually higher damage spike than that of a sustained damage dealer could do. Unless ur talking gw2 where sustained damage classes can match or somtimes even out burst the burst specs or vice versa lol one of many reasons there is really zero balance in this game.