LucianTheAngelic.7054

Thief shortbow and rifle guys is oppressive in WvW zergs ???? I’ve seen it all now. Your experience unfortunately doesn’t match the reality that, yes, range is strong in zergs but there are tons of ways to get around that with any organized group. Also half of the range weapons you listed aren’t even a problem in zergs or have already been highly nerfed in WvW. Thief shortbow abd rifle are extremely good examples of weapons that don’t perform well at all in any sort of large Zerg environment. Rev hammer is a good example of a ranged weapon that has been repeatedly nerfed for WvW to the point that it’s a shadow of what I once was and incredibly buggy since the reworks as well. Different environments call for different weapon sets. It’s fine if a certain build or weapon set excels in zerg vs zerg but doesn’t excel in smaller scale or 1v1

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Hokkaido.4213" said: > > Thanx for your answer ! Im still thinking about it, i do fractal with my friends so i don't have to bother too mutch about the meta. Do you think that this build can do better than the condition build ? > > imo it does better in fractals than the condi renegade ,due to many immune phases & short boss fights. Where condi renegades needs to ramp up its damage slowly, power renegade starts off with an amazing burst. This depends on how good the group is and which boss you’re on. If you have a bunch of average or below dps players in your party and you’re good at the Condi Ren rotation then it actually performs better in fractals on a lot of bosses, especially Ensolyss, Artsarriv and some of the non-CM bosses like Volcanic’s Shaman and Thaumanova Anomaly (and ofc ifs better for Sunqua always). Power Ren or Herald shine more the better the group is just like all power classes

> @"DARKSLAYER.4793" said: > Im fairly new to revenant and I play in groups and do things like bounties and I was leaning towards herald but I want the shortbow so I'm very confused at this point ? . I don't know which is better for me because I play solo and in groups. Like I said I'm very confused no harm in having builds for both

This approach to balancing is a problem. Certain builds are fine being strong in certain settings. WvW is inherently unbalanced and attempting to balance it (especially balancing around small scale) usually just nukes classes/weapons/traitlines from orbit entirely, never to be seen again Condi Herald is: Good in 1v1, but has clear counters Great in Small Scale, especially with an organized group and/or against unorganized groups Atrocious in Zerg Fights, especially organized zerg fights, just like nearly every condi class This to me is balanced. It's not overperforming overall and it's, more importantly, not overperforming in WvW Zerg fights, which is what the mode is (mostly) balanced around. **If Condi Herald (and Condi in general) isn't allowed to be good in 1v1/uncoordinated small group fights, where is it allowed to be good in WvW?** Because condi is certainly not good against any sort of organized group with a support and/or big zergs

All of the new fractals are great. The only thing that was bad was abandoning CMs on Twilight Oasis, Deepstone, and Siren’s Reef and then abandoning fractals completely for over a year. It would be nice to have a rotational tier of CMs (3 a day) to do just like regular T4 dailies (daily CM players already do 5 to 6 fracs a day anyway) but we need more CMs to make that work well. This could have been fairly easily achieved if they just continued to add them with the newer fractals as they released

But what if I’m wearing boots!?

> @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > > I'm glad the majority of the thread are able to put aside their balance prejudices though, and actually try to find ways to boost Herald's effectiveness so that it can sit in a better range with other specs, instead of continuing to keep it languishing very far behind like it continues to do. **The OP's suggestion to boost Shared Empowerment from 8s to 12s Baseline for PvE is a really good start,** as it still wouldn't be OP with those changes, but would at least be more able to keep up better with the other supports. I would probably take it a step further and boost both Facet of Strength and Shared Empowerment to 16s, considering it still takes quite awhile for the might to ramp up, unlike other supports like Druid which can just slap 25 onto 10 people no problem > > > > > > I'm not sure it's worth trying to compete against druid when it come to boons. Afterall, slap a diviner gear onto a druid and it become really easy to keep up fury, swiftness, protection, regen and vigor on 5 targets (by using a single skill and swaping pets). At this level, the fact that it can provide 25 might stacks on top of that is merely a matter of convenience (like saying: "don't bother, the druid will do it"). From the very beginning it's an uphill battle to try to compete with druid on these boons. > > > > > > Edit: When it come to support it's better to focus on the things that are more unique to the revenant/herald (facet of nature) or other boons (resistance/stability/alacrity) than focus on might. > > > > I disagree with this assessment. The 25 stacks of might for 10 people + Spotter & Spirits is *the* primary reason Druid is the premier raid support for years. The other boons and utility it provides as well as low heals are just a plus. > > > > By buffing Herald to be able to do 25 stacks of might (it can only do 14 at 100% boon duration currently) it becomes a viable replacement for Druid on par with Tempest (which can also do 25 stacks for 10 and is a viable Druid replacement due to that). It would still remain weaker than Druid overall, but would fit into more team comps easier > > > > > > I'm not sure, you really get my argument, so I'll rephrase it: "Is there really a need to fight druid on his turf? Is there really a need for Herald to try to somehow replace druid? Why exactly do you want something like that? Why have the herald grow in this direction when you have already the possibility to grow in different direction with less competition?" > > The Herald/revenant have access to support tools that the druid don't, why exactly would you push to promote the same tools that the druid use when you can turn yourself toward support tools with a more unique twist? Why would ANet do that? I get what you’re saying I just don’t think it takes into account practicality and overarching balance concerns. For a support to be truly viable it has to provide at least one of the following: quickness, alacrity, 25 might, (strong) unique buffs, and/or (strong) unique utility. The issue with trying to buff classes’ unique buffs/unique utility is that it creates an environment where these classes then, if overbuffed, become necessary in team compositions. Good examples of this include Warrior banners, Druid spirits, etc. I wouldn’t want to buff Herald in this way as I don’t want it to become another “mandatory” team slot; I just want it to be able to better compete with other supports (which currently it doesn’t do well because it doesn’t offer enough of any of any of the above boons/buffs). Since buffing unique buffs is likely not the answer, then buffing the supportive capability for generic boons is an easier way to create diversity among classes. The big 3 boons are and always have been since HoT 25 might, quickness, and alacrity. So if a support can provide one of those then it can be reasonably chosen as a replacement for whatever the meta spec support is without necessarily being a detrimental loss to the team. It isn’t about fighting Druid on Druid’s turf or trying to make Herald as good as Druid. Even with access to 25 might Herald still wouldn’t be as good as Druid because it still doesn’t bring spotter + spirits. This is about boosting Herald to a reasonable range in relationship to other supports. This also doesn’t remove Herald’s unique tools that would still be useful in differentiating it from Druid, Tempest, etc. Druid wasn’t the first class that could provide 25 stacks of might; its merely the first that could provide it to 10. Since then other classes have also been buffed to be able to supply 25 stacks to 10, such as Tempest. This is absolutely not a Druid exclusive ability. Buffing Herald’s might ability to be able to generate 25 for 10 fits Herald both mechanically and thematically. The issue is that the numbers are just not there for it at the moment.

> @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > I'm glad the majority of the thread are able to put aside their balance prejudices though, and actually try to find ways to boost Herald's effectiveness so that it can sit in a better range with other specs, instead of continuing to keep it languishing very far behind like it continues to do. **The OP's suggestion to boost Shared Empowerment from 8s to 12s Baseline for PvE is a really good start,** as it still wouldn't be OP with those changes, but would at least be more able to keep up better with the other supports. I would probably take it a step further and boost both Facet of Strength and Shared Empowerment to 16s, considering it still takes quite awhile for the might to ramp up, unlike other supports like Druid which can just slap 25 onto 10 people no problem > > I'm not sure it's worth trying to compete against druid when it come to boons. Afterall, slap a diviner gear onto a druid and it become really easy to keep up fury, swiftness, protection, regen and vigor on 5 targets (by using a single skill and swaping pets). At this level, the fact that it can provide 25 might stacks on top of that is merely a matter of convenience (like saying: "don't bother, the druid will do it"). From the very beginning it's an uphill battle to try to compete with druid on these boons. > > Edit: When it come to support it's better to focus on the things that are more unique to the revenant/herald (facet of nature) or other boons (resistance/stability/alacrity) than focus on might. I disagree with this assessment. The 25 stacks of might for 10 people + Spotter & Spirits is *the* primary reason Druid is the premier raid support for years. The other boons and utility it provides as well as low heals are just a plus. By buffing Herald to be able to do 25 stacks of might (it can only do 14 at 100% boon duration currently) it becomes a viable replacement for Druid on par with Tempest (which can also do 25 stacks for 10 and is a viable Druid replacement due to that). It would still remain weaker than Druid overall, but would fit into more team comps easier

> @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > @"CutesySylveon.8290" said: > > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > > Thief skill breaks > > > > > > > > > > > > Anet: Dw fam I gotchu > > > > > > > > > > > > Kalla Elite doesn't have fire field for months > > > > > > > > > > > > Anet: I'm just gonna ignore that. > > > > > > > > > > There are a lot of thief skills that are not working, some since launch. Don't worry, thieves are in same boat and often die due to those bugs (actually have to build and play around those bugs since they affect most builds). The reason why bound was fixed is most likely due to pve (raids say hello). Also, hammer is inconsistent while bounding dodger effect was simply removed - the last is probably easier to fix than wonky mechanics. > > > > > > > > They broke the skill consistency since the added uniformity in the damage and it's only gotten worst with the targeting added with the dislocated hitbox in front of the player, so really It's not hard to fix, they're just not doing it. Shouldn't have had to fix what wasn't broke, or broke what was working fine beforehand. > > > > > > > > The skill is really popular in WvW too so there's no reason to neglect it so badly. > > > > > > Did you really just assume that they care about class balance in wvw lol? > > > > Well, that is quite literally the only reason it was ever changed. Hammer is used absolutely nowhere but WvW as ranged burst damage. The damage nerfs, damage equalizing, and the CD nerfs were all 100% done in attempt to balance around WvW. So...yes, they do. Certainly not often, but it's the case here. > > Absolutely true. The only reason the damage got normalized is because people were upset (apparently) at getting nuked in wvw by backline hammer revs. > The response was to make the skill objectively worse, and useless if you attempt to hit anything directly in front of you or on a modest incline. > > Before this at least it had meme potential in Spvp. Now it just doesn't function acceptably as a weapon. Hammer was my favorite Rev weapon before the October 2019 changes that murdered it and riddled it with bugs. Now my Sharur sits untouched with a thick layer of dust for 1.25 years

> @"The Boz.2038" said: > So your advice for someone who likes playing Herald and wants to play Herald to.. fix the problem by playing something other than Herald? > And... that's okay? This is precisely the problem. Some don't want actual class balance in PvE and refuse to acknowledge the very clear imbalances that some specs deal with. Instead of tearing down suggestions to improve the game it would be far easier and better to offer suggestions to improve the overall balance. There are dozens of small buffs (or even nerfs to classes) that could bring classes and specializations further in line without completely breaking everything. I'm glad the majority of the thread are able to put aside their balance prejudices though, and actually try to find ways to boost Herald's effectiveness so that it can sit in a better range with other specs, instead of continuing to keep it languishing very far behind like it continues to do. **The OP's suggestion to boost Shared Empowerment from 8s to 12s Baseline for PvE is a really good start,** as it still wouldn't be OP with those changes, but would at least be more able to keep up better with the other supports. I would probably take it a step further and boost both Facet of Strength and Shared Empowerment to 16s, considering it still takes quite awhile for the might to ramp up, unlike other supports like Druid which can just slap 25 onto 10 people no problem

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > >I don’t think I’ve specifically said “it’s not meta therefore it needs a buff.” What I have tried to point out throughout the thread is that the gap for Herald in terms of both support and damage is too wide compared to other options. Personally I don’t care if Herald is meta or not; I just care that it’s in a reasonable range with other options. Currently it doesn’t fit my criteria for “reasonable range.” > > > > > > Isn't it reasonable tho? What does it have in terms of power dps, 28-30k on an easy rotation? At the same time it has some utility/support/boons to provide some help in case of your squad's deficiencies? If none of that is desirable for you then why do you even want to play power herald? Like, what exactly is the reason of you wanting to specifically play power herald out of rev (or even other class choices) choices and lobby for it to be power dps equal with other less flexible pure power dps builds? > > > I'm not so sure current power herald dps is unreasonably low. > > > > Anet doesn’t balance off of easiness of rotation, or else Weaver would be unequivocally top DPS. Also there are as easy rotations that get much higher dps than Power Herald. > > Cool. Now if you understand this fact, then you also shouldn't have a problem with understanding that they don't balance off of top of the dps charts of certain builds. But it seems you do and that's exactly what keeps being brought up here whether you directly call it this way or not. That's not true, they also balance based off "the top of the dps charts" as well. I've provided evidence and statements that prove this from Anet themselves in one of my previous posts in this thread. There are dozens more examples out there and plenty of interviews with Anet developers expressing their intentions on how they balance the game. Overperforming and Underperforming DPS and Support specs are targeted for changes based on their overall representation in the current meta as well as their dps and support thresholds, both high and low. There is so much evidence and direct confirmation from Anet that this is how they balance *in addition to thematic balancing as well* that it should be clear to anyone paying half an iota of attention over the past 8 years that yes, they do balance based on performance. > > > While 28-30k sounds like a lot > > Sounds like a lot and for the balance of this game's pve it is a lot. > No, it's actually low when compared to the balance of this game's PvE. Just because it's possible to literally clear much of the content with a Minstrel Tank (as long as that encounter doesn't have some sort of weird fail mechanic) doesn't mean that the rest of the game should just sit in a state of imbalance between classes with large gaps in effectiveness that aren't consistent across classes or with what each class offers > >it also lacks high Burst damage, which is the entire point of Power damage as a whole. > > "it's the entire point" (according to you, not anet?), but it's actually not needed at all to ahve those bursty phases. So you might think it is the entire point, but it is not. > No, not just according to me. Developers at Anet have specifically said that the intention of power damage is supposed to be about burst and upfront damage. So this isn't about what I think, but about what Anet thinks. > >So you end up in a situation where the class has low power burst and low power sustain. At that point it’s almost always better or equivalent to just run a condi dps (I.e. Renegade) or a different class entirely since it doesn’t even fulfill the role that power damage is supposed to fill in a reasonable manner. > > So just do it. What's your point again? You're allowed to run whatever you want. Both are enough. Something being better is irrelevant. And yes, it does fulfill that role in a reasonable manner, not sure why you'd try to claim otherwise. It fulfills it in a reasonable manner according to you. However, I don't think it does and it doesn't fall into my criteria of what I would call reasonable or balanced. It's very clearly unbalanced when looking at the entire context of the game. And it's not just Herald either; there are several other specs that have been languishing behind for ages as well. Reason-ability is clearly not something we'll agree on since it's inherently subjective and the standards we're applying are vastly different. My standards aren't even that high either > > > So no, it’s not a reasonable DPS nor is it a reasonable support. > > Yes, it does and it does. Not meta, but easly reasonable. Time to learn the difference if that's what you want to use as an argument. > Nope, it's still 15-20% behind other classes' power DPS specs and one of the worst supports. This isn't reasonable in context unless the standards being applied are incredibly low > > Why do I personally want power Herald to perform better? I believe classes should operate within a reasonable range of each other. I don’t consider the current divide between some specs as reasonable. I also enjoy Herald thematically and mechanically and don’t want to feel punished by the game for choosing the class I enjoy. Herald clearly has design aspects of both power and support, but still fails to provide either of them meaningfully. I also never said I need it to be equal to other classes, but I would like for it to operate within a closer range. The current range is too large. > > What exactly is so "thematically and mechanically" enjoyable regarding the herald that other rev/ren builds don't have? Like what EXACTLY do you enjoy about that which can't be provided by other rev/ren builds? > Because you think it should be able to provide meta dps and meta support at the same time? (you *say* you don't mean that, but then you keep typing... this, comparing it to meta builds on both sides -so yes, it seems that's exactly what you want, just without admitting it openly) I'm not going to go down the rabbit hole of what I personally find enjoyable or what I don't find enjoyable regarding Herald with you. It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand and I don't need random people to tell me what I should or shouldn't enjoy within my chosen class I once again, never said it should be 'Meta dps or meta support." I've merely been advocating for it to be within a closer range than what it currently is. 15-20% dps differential with LOW BURST is NOT within a close enough range. I'd be happy if it was merely a 5-8% differential. Please stop putting words into my mouth simply because you're misunderstanding my posts. I only compared it directly to QFB and STM simply because it was the easiest to show you that, *for the level of damage and support Herald is doing it is vastly out classed by other options by a huge margin.* Personally, I would want it to be on the level of Tempest (in terms of supportive ability when played as a support); a viable off-meta support that isn't a meme and can still fit it's way into a team composition without a huge sacrifice. What I would like is for it to be within a close enough range of higher tier classes that I can actually replace a Druid with it without feeling like I'm massively gimping myself (and Tempest currently has that feeling since it *mostly* keeps up with Druid just fine, I think Tempest is an example of good balance) and/or I'd like to be able to use it as a DPS without feeling like I need to replace it with any of the other vastly stronger DPS classes. **Nowhere have I advocated for it to be the next Druid or the next QFB or the next STM. If that's what you took from my posts then it's a clear misunderstanding on your part.**

Rev is super inconsistent with this at times so no this one doesn’t make any sense. At least with some other ones that pay upfront you’re usually paying for the initial effect (like the breakstun on RotGD)

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > >I don’t think I’ve specifically said “it’s not meta therefore it needs a buff.” What I have tried to point out throughout the thread is that the gap for Herald in terms of both support and damage is too wide compared to other options. Personally I don’t care if Herald is meta or not; I just care that it’s in a reasonable range with other options. Currently it doesn’t fit my criteria for “reasonable range.” > > Isn't it reasonable tho? What does it have in terms of power dps, 28-30k on an easy rotation? At the same time it has some utility/support/boons to provide some help in case of your squad's deficiencies? If none of that is desirable for you then why do you even want to play power herald? Like, what exactly is the reason of you wanting to specifically play power herald out of rev (or even other class choices) choices and lobby for it to be power dps equal with other less flexible pure power dps builds? > I'm not so sure current power herald dps is unreasonably low. Anet doesn’t balance off of easiness of rotation, or else Weaver would be unequivocally top DPS. Also there are as easy rotations that get much higher dps than Power Herald. While 28-30k sounds like a lot, it also lacks high Burst damage, which is the entire point of Power damage as a whole. So you end up in a situation where the class has low power burst and low power sustain. At that point it’s almost always better or equivalent to just run a condi dps (I.e. Renegade) or a different class entirely since it doesn’t even fulfill the role that power damage is supposed to fill in a reasonable manner. Looking at other classes almost every class has at least 1 elite spec pulling numbers in the 37-39k range for power damage. Herald pulls about 31-32k at best with considerably less burst than any of those 37-39k specs. This is a 15-20% dps difference and the burst differential is even more substantial. While 15-20% doesn’t sound like a lot, when talking about classes and class performance it’s a fairly massive difference. Also the boons Power Herald provides are fairly generic. Chrono and FB can provide quickness for their subs and bench higher than Herald. *Quickness.* That’s a massive dps increase for 5 people and that doesn’t even count all the other boons they put out as well. Also many of the 37-39k specs provide some boon or other unique support as well. What does Herald provide? Generic swiftness/protection/might/etc. that literally every spec and their mother has access to. It can’t even do 25 stacks of might either. Herald’s unique buffs are also not strong enough to warrant as low a DPS number as it has. It provides boon support that is largely redundant in the vast majority of groups, which makes it fairly useless as a support or supportive DPS. So no, it’s not a reasonable DPS nor is it a reasonable support. Why do I personally want power Herald to perform better? I believe classes should operate within a reasonable range of each other. I don’t consider the current divide between some specs as reasonable. I also enjoy Herald thematically and mechanically and don’t want to feel punished by the game for choosing the class I enjoy. Herald clearly has design aspects of both power and support, but still fails to provide either of them meaningfully. I also never said I need it to be equal to other classes, but I would like for it to operate within a closer range. The current range is too large. > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"taara.3217" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Its struggeling to compete with other classes in player-limited pve content. > > > > > > > > > > > Herald don`t need to compete with any class in PVE content. It can do all content without any problem, helping other classes more than once. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every class can do almost every PvE content without any problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In terms of raids ,fracs, even dungeons herald arent even taken into groups often ,simple cuz of them being counted as a joke due to bad support and dmg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, only a problem if that's how _you decide_ to play. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its a problem for alot of people that decide to play like that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK ... then they shouldn't decide to play that way if it makes problems for them they don't want to experience. Classes don't need to change because players create problems for themselves that they have solutions to fix themselves as well. If you decide to make performance your criteria for playing the game ... that's on you since that is automatically going to restrict builds that are available to you because of those criteria you are using to make those choices. That's not a problem Anet needs to fix or should even consider fixing because the game isn't designed to be played ONLY with builds that meet those criteria. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is still, weeks later, a reductive argument that essentially boils down to "Anet shouldn't balance anything ever because there are currently options for players for all playstyle routes." It's still not actually a helpful or meaningful argument for class balance in GW2 PvE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If balance was ONLY about performance, that might be correct ... but it's not, because Anet has shown they also don't ONLY make changes because of performance. More anecdotally, I have YET to see Anet state that any of the hundreds of class changes were BECAUSE of targetting meta either ... so people need to absolutely STOP using meta to justify class changes. > > > > > > > > > > And to be clear, it's not weeks later, it's YEARS ... because I've been making this point ever since people have been pushing their ideas about how sacred meta is while proclaiming everything else doesn't matter ... all the while ignoring the fact that the whole game is balanced around NOT playing meta. > > > > > > > > Well then years later it's still a reductive argument that doesn't lead to any sort of actionable PvE balance. > > > > > > Again ... if performance was the ONLY factor in balance, that might be correct ... but it's not, because Anet has shown they don't ONLY make changes because of performance. Also, the game is not balanced around meta as the threshold for success in the first place, so arguments that class changes need to happen because something 'not meta' are nonsense. > > > > I mean the threshold is literally “1 full tank minstrel support and nothing else” in a lot of cases so I’m not sure using the bare minimum threshold is actually useful when discussing balance in gw2 > > Right ... that's why it's nonsense to argue performance balance based on instanced content teaming and meta. Let me be very transparent here ... mechanically, there aren't many reasons for Anet to change the game because of performance. We see when Anet does change something for performance reasons, it's NEVER anything to do with making classes more appealing for teaming or meta ... it's just PURE performance plays based on what Anet thinks the game should be. That’s still false and incorrect though. They’ve stated many times previously that “X class is over represented and over performing.” If Anet wasn’t interested in “teaming or meta” then they wouldn’t speak specifically about team compositions, which they have done plenty of times in the past. So no, Anet DOES make changes based on usage and representation, while sometimes also balancing around theme or other factors

> @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > @"taara.3217" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > Its struggeling to compete with other classes in player-limited pve content. > > > > > > > > > Herald don`t need to compete with any class in PVE content. It can do all content without any problem, helping other classes more than once. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every class can do almost every PvE content without any problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In terms of raids ,fracs, even dungeons herald arent even taken into groups often ,simple cuz of them being counted as a joke due to bad support and dmg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, only a problem if that's how _you decide_ to play. > > > > > > > > > > > > its a problem for alot of people that decide to play like that. > > > > > > > > > > OK ... then they shouldn't decide to play that way if it makes problems for them they don't want to experience. Classes don't need to change because players create problems for themselves that they have solutions to fix themselves as well. If you decide to make performance your criteria for playing the game ... that's on you since that is automatically going to restrict builds that are available to you because of those criteria you are using to make those choices. That's not a problem Anet needs to fix or should even consider fixing because the game isn't designed to be played ONLY with builds that meet those criteria. > > > > > > > > This is still, weeks later, a reductive argument that essentially boils down to "Anet shouldn't balance anything ever because there are currently options for players for all playstyle routes." It's still not actually a helpful or meaningful argument for class balance in GW2 PvE > > > > > > > > > > If balance was ONLY about performance, that might be correct ... but it's not, because Anet has shown they also don't ONLY make changes because of performance. More anecdotally, I have YET to see Anet state that any of the hundreds of class changes were BECAUSE of targetting meta either ... so people need to absolutely STOP using meta to justify class changes. > > > > > > And to be clear, it's not weeks later, it's YEARS ... because I've been making this point ever since people have been pushing their ideas about how sacred meta is while proclaiming everything else doesn't matter ... all the while ignoring the fact that the whole game is balanced around NOT playing meta. > > > > Well then years later it's still a reductive argument that doesn't lead to any sort of actionable PvE balance. > > Again ... if performance was the ONLY factor in balance, that might be correct ... but it's not, because Anet has shown they don't ONLY make changes because of performance. Also, the game is not balanced around meta as the threshold for success in the first place, so arguments that class changes need to happen because something 'not meta' are nonsense. I mean the threshold is literally “1 full tank minstrel support and nothing else” in a lot of cases so I’m not sure using the bare minimum threshold is actually useful when discussing balance in gw2 > > >It's completely possible to want buffs for something simply because the gap is too wide between it and other classes. > > That's true and that's agreeable ... so people need to STOP using 'not meta' to justify class changes. I don’t think I’ve specifically said “it’s not meta therefore it needs a buff.” What I have tried to point out throughout the thread is that the gap for Herald in terms of both support and damage is too wide compared to other options. Personally I don’t care if Herald is meta or not; I just care that it’s in a reasonable range with other options. Currently it doesn’t fit my criteria for “reasonable range.”

> @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > @"taara.3217" said: > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > Its struggeling to compete with other classes in player-limited pve content. > > > > > > > Herald don`t need to compete with any class in PVE content. It can do all content without any problem, helping other classes more than once. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every class can do almost every PvE content without any problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > In terms of raids ,fracs, even dungeons herald arent even taken into groups often ,simple cuz of them being counted as a joke due to bad support and dmg > > > > > > > > > > Again, only a problem if that's how _you decide_ to play. > > > > > > > > its a problem for alot of people that decide to play like that. > > > > > > OK ... then they shouldn't decide to play that way if it makes problems for them they don't want to experience. Classes don't need to change because players create problems for themselves that they have solutions to fix themselves as well. If you decide to make performance your criteria for playing the game ... that's on you since that is automatically going to restrict builds that are available to you because of those criteria you are using to make those choices. That's not a problem Anet needs to fix or should even consider fixing because the game isn't designed to be played ONLY with builds that meet those criteria. > > > > This is still, weeks later, a reductive argument that essentially boils down to "Anet shouldn't balance anything ever because there are currently options for players for all playstyle routes." It's still not actually a helpful or meaningful argument for class balance in GW2 PvE > > > > If balance was ONLY about performance, that might be correct ... but it's not, because Anet has shown they also don't ONLY make changes because of performance. More anecdotally, I have YET to see Anet state that any of the hundreds of class changes were BECAUSE of targetting meta either ... so people need to absolutely STOP using meta to justify class changes. > > And to be clear, it's not weeks later, it's YEARS ... because I've been making this point ever since people have been pushing their ideas about how sacred meta is while proclaiming everything else doesn't matter ... all the while ignoring the fact that the whole game is balanced around NOT playing meta. Well then years later it's still a reductive argument that doesn't lead to any sort of actionable PvE balance. See my other posts I already responded to you weeks ago on this issue for verifiable proof that Anet does make balance changes based on what is or isn't meta > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > @"taara.3217" said: > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > Its struggeling to compete with other classes in player-limited pve content. > > > > > > > Herald don`t need to compete with any class in PVE content. It can do all content without any problem, helping other classes more than once. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every class can do almost every PvE content without any problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > In terms of raids ,fracs, even dungeons herald arent even taken into groups often ,simple cuz of them being counted as a joke due to bad support and dmg > > > > > > > > > > Again, only a problem if that's how _you decide_ to play. > > > > > > > > its a problem for alot of people that decide to play like that. > > > > > > OK ... then they shouldn't decide to play that way if it makes problems for them they don't want to experience. Classes don't need to change because players create problems for themselves that they have solutions to fix themselves as well. If you decide to make performance your criteria for playing the game ... that's on you since that is automatically going to restrict builds that are available to you because of those criteria you are using to make those choices. That's not a problem Anet needs to fix or should even consider fixing because the game isn't designed to be played ONLY with builds that meet those criteria. > > > > This is still, weeks later, a reductive argument that essentially boils down to "Anet shouldn't balance anything ever because there are currently options for players for all playstyle routes." It's still not actually a helpful or meaningful argument for class balance in GW2 PvE > > Yeah, sure and the argument that "it constantly gets kicked *[it doesn't]* because it's not meta, so we need to buff it" is perfectly reasonable and doesn't boil down to a FoTM builds changing with every patch. Because surely all of the builds should be meta or should be buffed, right? > It's pretty similar to that "it doesn't have x boon" (or can't upkeep it 24/7, whichever that was), so lets add it to some skill/weapon, so it can be kept longer and easier. Also lets slap a unique group buff because it doesn't have one [but it does, just not *as meta as rev's another espec*] and absolutely needs one, because that's totally the rule and makes perfect sense, while not being a bait for randomized buffs by... well, the exact same person that now made the above claim about *needing buffs because not meta*. I didn't make the argument that "it constantly gets kicked so it needs to be meta." Personally I don't think that argument is helpful since it doesn't analyze WHY something is being kicked or not nor does it account for gradient However, when there is as big of a gap as there is between Herald and nearly all other DPS classes AND all other support specs, then there is a major issue. The benchmark numbers for Herald DPS are undeniably low when *nearly all other specs in the game get nearly 20% more DPS than it does. Its support potential is fairly low as well since it doesn't function as well as Druid/Tempest/Firebrand/Renegade/Chronomancer/Boon Thief/Scourge and maybe even Scrapper. It's not even in the same ballpark as those supports in terms of its potential to provide necessary team buffs/utility/healing I don't think something has to be "buffed because it's not meta." It's completely possible to want buffs for something simply because the gap is too wide between it and other classes. That doesn't mean it needs to be equivalent, but buffed to being even vaguely similar to the above classses would mean it could be useable in a wider variety of situations and not feel like you're being punished for taking something so completely out of the meta. Tempest is a good example of this as it can replace Druid, you just lose some of the offensive buffs that Druid brings, but it's *almost* a 1 to 1 swap in terms of functionality for the important things that Druid brings. Swapping Druid for Herald would be a nightmare