Obtena.7952

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never seen that happen, but judging by posts on this forum, it seems everyone "gets kicked or insulted" unless they play barely few of the top meta picks. So nah, I doubt that's what you're frequently met with. > > > > > > > then you are a lucky one. lets call it like that: If a build (like dps herald) isnt found on something like "Snowcrows", then its not accepted. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not about luck, it's about knowing how to get teams that allow you to play how you want. Not being meta isn't a sign there is something wrong and if groups are rejecting you, this isn't a reason for Anet to change something. it is a reason for you to get a different group. > > > > > > > > > > but dont forget, people only want "meta" these days. Doesnt matter if they can execute meta tactics or not, just the team composition is important > > > > > > > > I didn't forget ... if people only want meta these days and you CHOOSE to play with those people, you are essentially foregoing your ability to play how you want because your criteria is playing with people that want meta. > > > > > > Yea thats the problem. Almost all pugs that can be found in the lfg section (at least to my playtimes) are meta-only. > > > > The solution to that is changing how you play and you decide to play with. > > so i decide to play something like herald & play solo? Or play smthing besides herald, but with almost everyone If you want ... I mean, the game doesn't stop you from doing that. Are you implying you can't play how you want? That's not a problem for LOTS of people so what is stopping you? Then answer is YOU. Nothing you can say will change the fact that people play Herald and get teams. Just because you can't doesn't mean there is a problem Anet needs to solve by changing the game.

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > >If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > Never seen that happen, but judging by posts on this forum, it seems everyone "gets kicked or insulted" unless they play barely few of the top meta picks. So nah, I doubt that's what you're frequently met with. > > > > > then you are a lucky one. lets call it like that: If a build (like dps herald) isnt found on something like "Snowcrows", then its not accepted. > > > > > > > > It's not about luck, it's about knowing how to get teams that allow you to play how you want. Not being meta isn't a sign there is something wrong and if groups are rejecting you, this isn't a reason for Anet to change something. it is a reason for you to get a different group. > > > > > > but dont forget, people only want "meta" these days. Doesnt matter if they can execute meta tactics or not, just the team composition is important > > > > I didn't forget ... if people only want meta these days and you CHOOSE to play with those people, you are essentially foregoing your ability to play how you want because your criteria is playing with people that want meta. > > Yea thats the problem. Almost all pugs that can be found in the lfg section (at least to my playtimes) are meta-only. The solution to that problem isn't for Anet to change the game so that everything is meta. They CAN'T. The solution to that is changing how you play and you decide to play with.

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > >If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > > > > > > > Never seen that happen, but judging by posts on this forum, it seems everyone "gets kicked or insulted" unless they play barely few of the top meta picks. So nah, I doubt that's what you're frequently met with. > > > then you are a lucky one. lets call it like that: If a build (like dps herald) isnt found on something like "Snowcrows", then its not accepted. > > > > It's not about luck, it's about knowing how to get teams that allow you to play how you want. Not being meta isn't a sign there is something wrong and if groups are rejecting you, this isn't a reason for Anet to change something. it is a reason for you to get a different group. > > but dont forget, people only want "meta" these days. Doesnt matter if they can execute meta tactics or not, just the team composition is important I didn't forget ... if people only want meta these days and you CHOOSE to play with those people, you are essentially foregoing your ability to play how you want because your criteria is playing with people that want meta, NOT playing how you want. Besides, Anet can't ensure whatever choice players make is meta anyways. _people only want "meta" these days_ is not an accurate assessment of the situation to begin with... because if people ONLY wanted to play meta, then there wouldn't BE a problem with people wanting to play off-meta builds to begin with, so clearly that's incorrect. What you REALLY mean is that lots of PUG teams only want meta ... and that CERTAINLY is no reason to change the game because it's not a problem if lots of PUG teams only want meta. They play how they want and you can to ... you just need to make better choices who you play with, just like how the meta PUG's make choices who they play with.

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > >If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > > > Never seen that happen, but judging by posts on this forum, it seems everyone "gets kicked or insulted" unless they play barely few of the top meta picks. So nah, I doubt that's what you're frequently met with. > then you are a lucky one. lets call it like that: If a build (like dps herald) isnt found on something like "Snowcrows", then its not accepted. It's not about luck, it's about knowing how to get teams that allow you to play how you want. Not being meta isn't a sign there is something wrong and if groups are rejecting you, this isn't a reason for Anet to change something. it is a reason for you to get a different group.

> @"Kurrilino.2706" said: > lol, not a demand and supply issue..... > Many people need/want them, few are available. How is that no a demand and supply issue. You LITERALLY just answered your own question ... they are available for purchase to the people that want them. I mean, let's flip that around ... how IS that a demand and supply issue?

> @"Jski.6180" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > Can someone confirm it was Anet's actual intention to apply trade offs to every single core/espec combo in the game? I recall they were going to do it where they felt it was necessary, but I don't remember if they were going to apply this concept comprehesively. > > They kind of talked about it here. > https://massivelyop.com/2019/04/19/guild-wars-2-is-heavily-overhauling-some-class-elite-specs-in-next-weeks-balance-patch/ > > I cant find when the elite spec came out for HoT. Thanks. From the article, it seems to me that from what is said by Anet in it ... not every class/espec was intended to get tradeoffs. “To use the example of necromancer, by choosing an elite specialization, you lose access to your core Death Shroud abilities, but you gain different abilities,” ArenaNet says. “This is a clear trade-off. In the case of elite specializations like druid, herald, chronomancer, berserker, or scrapper, this type of trade-off isn’t possible because the specialization adds a completely new ability. With this update, we’re targeting a few elite specializations to receive trade-offs, and we expect to continue doing this in future updates." I don't think anyone should assume Anet 'dropped' the idea or didn't finish implementing it; it was never all that clear the scope of the trade off implementation in the first place.

Can someone confirm it was Anet's actual intention to apply trade offs to every single core/espec combo in the game? I recall they were going to do it where they felt it was necessary, but I don't remember if they were going to apply this concept comprehesively.

> @"Super Hayes.6890" said: > Literally every player that logs in gets these coins for free. Multiply that by the game's population and you have a HUGE supply without even considering the other acquisition methods. I have a hard time believing this item is being manipulated the way the OP claims. If it is ... the people doing it are not that smart to begin with. Considering it's taken them YEARS to drive up the price to a measely 2 gold ... that's a MASSIVE market manipulation FAIL!

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > > Uh. Rev is one of my fav classes to play. I have specced my renegade rev to be a survivable and it still hits pretty decently for being nowhere close to optimized for damage. It's... really not in any way a weak class. Your self heal is absurdly good with battle scars, you can do amazing aoe and control with Kalla's warband and your shortbow, and you can do great support both from renegade and herald with buffs to fury and might. Being able to give a whole group in meta on demand 15 might stacks and an aoe field that both amps their damage and allows them insane self heal is no joke either. There are also times when it helps a lot to have an anti ranged shield. Revs dominate the field of saying no to projectiles, outdoing even guardians. While this is limited application in groups, it can sometimes be a downright blessing solo, and also if you use planar protection from the heal with protective solace and your hammer shield then you can stay protected from missile basically forever while still dishing out damage. > > > > > > > > > > Renegade is not Revenant in whole. > > > > > > > > > > Revenant as core if pretty much bottom of everything, while herald can be a bit better, but still nowhere near "being not a joke". > > > > > > > > > > Renegade is extremely overtuned. 10man alac, 5man 25might, extreme group lifesiphone, extreme usage of battlescars, epic burst damage etc. > > > > > > > > being bad without elite speccs is nothing new. And many revs I see use herald because of the facets. > > > > > > if im lucky i see one other herald per day, while most play renegade. Most heralds chose herald simply because of the "perma swiftness". > > > > > > Because Rapid flow is kinda annoying & shiro is simply to loud > > > > Maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe if you're talking about pve only. Which this thread doesn't. And I'm sure you play herald because it's bad :D > > > > Not only that, but OP takes his stats for the initial statement from some publicly accessible site, so when he says "revenant is the least played profession", he means "revenant and its especs". > > I play herald because i have fun with it, which doesnt mean its good or bad. If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > And i assumed this thread is about PvE only, because Revenants are often found in wvw zergs and even in pvp. > > Renegade alone is way more often found than Engineers ,thiefs, elementalists and mesmers (in PvE&pvp at least) OH REALLLY!!! That's based on ?

> @"valhalahunter.9863" said: > This isn't a supply and demand issue. Actually, it absolutely IS a supply and demand issue. That's ALL it can be.

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > > > >and decline in sales, player numbers, etc. proves my point > > > > > > > > No it doesn't, because you have NO idea how those things are correlated to game balance. I mean, people have been leaving for various reasons for a long time ... so don't pretend like you got the data to claim it's because PVE isn't balanced the way you want it. > > > > > > I was saying that it proves my point they're going in a (general) wrong direction at the moment! > > > > Or it's natural given the age of the game > We're talking about a game here, nothing natural about a game! I'm saying it's natural for a game to lose players over time so you can't say your point the game is making wrong direction is proven because of things you don't know. > There's enough proof (some even official from NCSoft) that tells you that No, that's not proof. You need correlation for it to be proof. It MIGHT be proof. You don't know. You don't have player counts and log in statistics and you don't get financial statements from Anet so no ... you DON'T have anything that tells you the game is going the wrong direction. You simply suspect it.

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > >and decline in sales, player numbers, etc. proves my point > > > > No it doesn't, because you have NO idea how those things are correlated to game balance. I mean, people have been leaving for various reasons for a long time ... so don't pretend like you got the data to claim it's because PVE isn't balanced the way you want it. > > I was saying that it proves my point they're going in a (general) wrong direction at the moment! Or it's natural given the age of the game, etc ... You just don't know. You don't even know what the player numbers or sales are ... you just say they go down because it suits your view of what's happening.

> @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > Methods to get Leg Armor outside of Raiding. > > Already in game wvw and spvp. Yup ... but the thread asks for unnecessary ones ... so I want more of them.

> @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > @"Mungo Zen.9364" said: > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > > Companies like Square Enix can release class info 2 years before the actual expansion drop, Anet instead can release a teaser...of a teaser and after one year no more info. What about? > > > > > > 1)Concept art of new elites? - They are already set in stone now, at the very least you can indicate what each new elite will focus..we don't even need gameplay video > > > > > > 2)Hint for new features....alliances? legendary armor? > > > > > > 3)Location of the new expansion like possible locations? > > > > > > 4)Monsterpedia? > > > > > > After one whole year not even a single new info.... > > > > How do you know the elites are set in stone? I believe this game has had major profession overhauls mere months before a release. I know it has happened in other MMO’s. > > By now the concept and idea behind each elite must be set in stone and this got little to do with actual balance which comes before and after release I wouldn't assume any of that.

Methods to get Leg Armor outside of Raiding.

> @"Reaper X.6305" said: > It never ceases to amaze me how the actual playerbase always argues for a worse experience. Probably because much of playerbase understands Anet is running a business and you don't do that giving away your goods for nothing.

> @"Reaper X.6305" said: > Yep, even WoW in their latest expansion lets you change your entire sex and everything in the barber shop. You basically get to do the whole character creation window again there. It's sad that GW2 does not allow us to customize without paying premium. Sure ... as long as you pay my monthly sub ... and everyone else.

> @"Boogiepop Void.6473" said: > I was running 100CM last night with a group of first timers. We got up to the final boss. Then, due to RL, people had to leave. So I LFGed for more, clearly marking the group as for first time 100CM players. 4 People joined me, then after one run (failed at 16%) demanded to see my title (all of them changed to theirs) and kicked me out when I reminded them the group was for first run people. Essentially, they just wanted to get the completion and stole my last boss instance. > > This is why I keep saying we need to remove these kinds of titles. Give a group a method to say "you aren't leet enough for us" and they will use it to discriminate. Removing titles isn't a solution to that problem ... you don't think people will discriminate for other reasons?

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: >Ok, so at the very moment that means not balancing at all or very rarely. OK ... I mean, Anet can change the game however they want, however frequently they need to. I don't see a problem with that. Theoretically, if Anet came to the position where they believe PVE balance was achieved, then they could completely _stop_ making PVE class changes. Balance patches are done until things are balanced ... why anyone would expect some frequent continuous stream of them based on their OWN OPINION the game still needs them makes no sense. >and decline in sales, player numbers, etc. proves my point No it doesn't, because you have NO idea how those things are correlated to game balance. I mean, people have been leaving for various reasons for a long time ... so don't pretend like you got the data to claim it's because PVE isn't balanced the way you want it. >Maybe they should?! It means showing an interest in their current player-base and what moves them in getting better in the game they play. Maybe? Not for the reasons you gave. What makes you come to the conclusion Anet's goal is to eventually get to balance around meta? or 'get players better'? I would conclude it's the exact opposite of that ... because the game is designed to allow people to play how they want. >You see, change can sometimes be a very good thing Sure, sometimes it is. It's certainly not a reason for Anet take a gamble, throw out their philosophy to the game and balance according to all the other traditional MMO's. You claim the numbers show they should ... but there is no correlation between the numbers you talk about and how they relate to game balance.

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > > > But let me continue on this: not as much in sPvP and WvW, but I think in the PvE endgame, DPS is actually one of your biggest pillars you should balance around, cause it's the absolute most important factor to complete endgame content. > > > > The biggest pillars are knowing the encounter and knowing how to play the build you have because it doesn't matter HOW much DPS you have if you don't have those two things ... but if you have those two things, you only just need to meet the threshold of DPS to complete endgame content. > > > > There is much evidence that shows that threshold is far below that of meta builds and team compositions. For instance, the fact that highly capable players are short manning and finishing raids WELL within the timer is evidence. The fact that people don't need to take optimal builds and be successful is also evidence. Why? because the game is NOT designed around big DPS pillars that you claim it should be balanced around; it's balanced around allowing people to play how they want. > > > > The only reason you think DPS should be the big balance pillar is because you dislike the DPS range that exists over the classes DESPITE the fact that it doesn't impact players being successful. > > > My god, you even give the example yourself in your own post. Short-manning raids is a real thing. It happens all the time for instance when people are selling raids! The person(s) buying the raids can (and probably will) die the very first few seconds a raid starts. And at the end is still **successful**. HOW has this anything to do with balance??? Or how should ANet balance their game around facts like that??? How should Anet balance the game around the fact that highly capable people are short man raids? Seems to me they should just keep doing what they are doing ... because shortmanning raids is an example that the threshold for success is low enough to allow people to play how they want. > Everyone can be successful in this game, so why balance at all? Oh that's easy ... because the game doesn't work how Anet wants it to work. I mean, what do YOU think is the reason Anet balances to PVE for the last 8 years? It' certainly not to give everyone meta builds and high DPS choices for all the options they want to play.

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said: > But let me continue on this: not as much in sPvP and WvW, but I think in the PvE endgame, DPS is actually one of your biggest pillars you should balance around, cause it's the absolute most important factor to complete endgame content. The biggest pillars are knowing the encounter and knowing how to play the build you have because it doesn't matter HOW much DPS you have if you don't have those two things ... but if you have those two things, you only just need to meet the threshold of DPS to complete endgame content. There is much evidence that shows that threshold is far below that of meta builds and team compositions. For instance, the fact that highly capable players are short manning and finishing raids WELL within the timer is evidence. The fact that people don't need to take optimal builds and be successful is also evidence. Why? because the game is NOT designed around big DPS pillars that you claim it should be balanced around; it's balanced around allowing people to play how they want. The only reason you think DPS should be the big balance pillar is because you dislike the DPS range that exists over the classes DESPITE the fact that it doesn't impact players being successful.

> @"Zee.1294" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Zee.1294" said: > > >I see you all over the forums passionately defending the " design of the game" story. > > > > I'm glad I can make that significant impact here because there are lots of people that don't understand how the game design affects them and the choices they make. This thread is just proof of that. > > not sure what impact are you talking about when 95 % of the people that PlAY the dam game dont even read to forums Hey, if the message hits the 5% that do ... I'm good with that.

> @"Zee.1294" said: >I see you all over the forums passionately defending the " design of the game" story. I'm glad I can make that significant impact here because there are lots of people that don't understand how the game design affects them and the choices they make. This thread is just proof of that.

> @"Jski.6180" said: > Meaningful chose could be any thing right .... Correct ... that's what '_play how you want_' means. Maybe playing how you want is a meaningless slogan that's easy for you to brush aside because it means the game doesn't work how you want it to ... but for others it's the reason they play this game and it's important to them. > I want to see ... Yes, you've made it clear you think Anet should cater to how you think the game should work ... but the reality is that Anet can't do that for you. It's why we have choice to allow us to play how we want.

> @"Jski.6180" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is know as power creep and p2w. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that's true, it certainly doesn't change the truth of what I'm saying to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is NO REQUIREMENT for all these classes and especs to be the same level of performance for people to have meaningful choices and play how they want to be succussful. It's not a problem if things are not equivalent in performance. The game is designed that way to allow it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so your cool with it. That all i am trying to get at. Just be willing to take on that yoke in your post and stop dancing arone it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Its not good for the game it makes a real split between the haves and have nots and makes ppl exclude others from playing content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's _not true_ ... the only people that are excluded are the people that make bad choices about who they team with. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stop taking my words out of context and only quoting part of my thoughts and ideals. They are complete points of views. By doing what you have been doing and it seems always do your making ppl seem to say things they are not and its just wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No words are out of context here ... you are implying people are excluded from playing content because they aren't using optimal or high performance builds. That's _not true_. That simply depends on who you team with. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not quoting your whole post because it's based on the false premise that people are excluded because of class choices ... That's _not true_. They are excluded because they team with people that _tell_ them they can't play it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So your cool with forgetting part of ppl post are you even reading it all? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I read it, I just didn't quote it ... and I replied to it appropriately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jski.6180" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Its not good for the game it makes a real split between the haves and have nots and makes ppl exclude others from playing content. > > > > > > > > > > This is entirely subjective and your opinion. There is nothing that is preventing core elementalists from playing and completing content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Number are not subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh so you HAVE NUMBERS now that suggest you can't play ele and be successful? Great, what are they? (this should be interesting) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You avode quoting things you do not want to deal with. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've dealt with EVERYTHING you have posted > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are not raid meta build web pages that tell you every thing about classes? > > > > > > > > > > > > So raid meta build pages tell you EVERYTHING about classes? Um, that's _not true_. They tell you about meta builds ... that's about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "For comparison : Condi Tempest uses 9 unique weapon skills in it's rotation, while Condi Chrono uses 6. They both have the same dps at 38 K. (source : snowcrows)" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From the op. > > > > > > > > > > > > .. and that has what to do with the fact you can choose ele and be successful? ANSWER: absolutely nothing. Therefore, implying people are excluded from playing content because they aren't using optimal or high performance builds continues to be _not true_. > > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking of things people don't want to deal with, I would still love to see those numbers that say show you can't choose ele and be successful in this game. > > > > > > > > > > You asked for numbers there they are and they do not lie. Just because its the meta dose not make it some how less true. Its makes it more true in fact lol. > > > > > > > > There are no numbers on meta raids sites that show you can't choose ele and be successful in this game. So no, whatever numerical information you are referring to that those sites have ... has ZERO relevance to the truth that people can choose ele and be successful in this game. > > > > > > > > You know what would fix all this? Is if you just admitted you want a buff on ele because it's not meta. That's still a completely irrelevant reason to buff ele and has nothing to do with the topic ... but at least it's based on some level of truth. > > > > > > Odd you would think a meta web pages would have dps numbers must not be a good one. > > Nothing I have said should give you that impression. I asked you for the numbers that show ele can't be a successful choice since that was the claim you were challenging with the existence of the numbers ... and telling me things I don't think is also very dishonest but you already know that because I've already told you numerous times. > > > But core dose less dps then the eleit spec even the support eleit spec dose better dps all due to core weapons and effect getting nerfed. > > Even if that is true, it's not a reason to buff ele. > > > > > > I mean ya i want to see core ele buffed in such a way to NOT buff the elite spec. and to cut off any chase for the next elite spec to be balanced based off of core ele nerfs / buffs. I went though this before PoF with weaver and i went though this before HoT with tempest. Its a very bad system anet has made here and its all going to doom every thing to become the same if anet realty wants to balance things out and they will over time. > > > > It's only bad if you don't understand Anet can't create all options to match your criteria for class choice, even when the game changes. Anet can't cater to how individuals think the game should work. I like the little flavour of 'doom' you added as well ... because we all know GW2 is doomed if Anet doesn't do what you want right? > > > > > > They promote there elite spec over there core classes but understanding that dose not make it right. True, what makes it right is that the performance variation between all the specs doesn't impact people's ability to choose and be successful playing the game how they want, as intended by the goal Anet has to design the game to allow people to play how they want to play. > The balancing doom i am talking about happens with all the class mechanic are effectively the same thing with only small veneration. As long as the specs offer meaningful choices to people, WHATEVER that value is and no matter how similar the class mechanics are, there is no 'balancing doom'. Ele is a meaningful choice.