otto.5684

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > > > @"darren.1064" said: > > > > This poll isn't even close. > > > > > > Ah yes. The ever indicative, conslusive, and comprehensive, at cutrent time of posting, 56 vote poll. > > > > > > > There are multiple polls. > > Still not really indicative of anything for me besides vocal players are angry/upset. Also considering who comes to the forums, how biased polls tend to be, and how universally people who are unhappy are more likely to speak out, is always the case. > > Since playing from release I have never really seen a poll for "Do you like the meta" return with the answer yes. I think there may have been one...but the countless others are all negative. Then you get the people who vote negatively, not because of the meta, but because of the lack of follow up patches. Which, regardless of if they undid everything meta, would still be an issue. > > The grass is always greener. I honestly feel you could revert everything, wait 6 months, run the same poll and get the same "no" answer to "do you like the meta". > First, there are poll with 300+ and multiple polls. Is it pin point accurate? no, but saying it is not indicative is either hypocrisy or idiocy. Take your pick. Second, this poll, and the similar polls to it, are not asking if you like the current meta. It is a specific question regarding the February 2020 patch. Saying “people always hate the current meta” has nothing to do with this. And you know what, if Anet sPvP are so mucho they can do an official poll and encourage players to post. I dare them.

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"darren.1064" said: > > This poll isn't even close. > > Ah yes. The ever indicative, conslusive, and comprehensive, at cutrent time of posting, 56 vote poll. > There are multiple polls. One had over 300 votes. It surely is not a absolutely accurate, but the margin of error is going to be very small. So far, all these polls had a 40/60 approval/disapproval. While 60% disapproval may seem not that bad, if you are going to remake sPvP you better provide the players something better than what they had. And this clearly is not the case. For a game, the worst thing you can possibly do, as devs, is taking away something the players liked and implement something the do not like. And all this was unnecessary. The damage at Jan 2020 was on the lower side to begin with. The high damage meta was in 2018. It was long gone. all what needed to change is removing damage from some CCs, nerfing might stacking, so that no class can maintain more than ~10 stacks and nerfing quickness access for some classes. Everything else was flat out wrong. In fact, most builds that were out of the meta, were out cuz the lacked damage. I do not see a point of listing again why the current sPvP is a shit show. But if you like mindless aoe spam + CC spam, enjoy. I do not.

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > Same here. I dunno why we moved away from some HoT designs. VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. > > > I highly suspect your statement that these maps are viewed highly by MOST players. > > > > When people criticize HoT they typically mention TD. When I see favorite maps list, AB and VB tend to come out a lot. > > I get that. It also depends on the definition for "viewed very highly". I think that the maps are very well done. I don't enjoy playing them. > > EDIT: It also depends on whom you ask. Your circle of players might share the same opinion as you as would mine (see: confirmation bias). In either case, I don't believe that you or I can say with certainty that "most" players view HoT maps highly. Or otherwise. If I say that PoF maps suck, can you proof this statement wrong? This is why I said I see AB and VB come out in the forums as favorite maps a lot. I did not say it is conclusive statistics, cuz even Anet do not have that. Or even my personal favorite maps. What is for sure, is the Hearts model, followed in PoF, is being ditched, in favor of designs similar to HoT. BM is close to AB and VB in design. DF and last map are similar to DS. That is 4 out of last 5 maps being similar to HoT designs. For a game entering its 9th year, why do you think that we are going back to designs from 5 years ago?

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > Same here. I dunno why we moved away from some HoT designs. VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. > I highly suspect your statement that these maps are viewed highly by MOST players. When people criticize HoT they typically mention TD. When I see favorite maps list, AB and VB tend to come out a lot.

> @"radda.8920" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"radda.8920" said: > > > > @"Pockethole.5031" said: > > > > -L2P your build > > > > I am playing. I dodge and use the arsenal I have. And I still feel they are unnecessarily hard. > > > > -then you are lying > > > > Just like the rest of other humans, when something hurts me, it's my fault for existing. You always want to blame the thing least important to you. > > > > > > > > I didn't say I want to one-shot everything. Did you read what I wrote? I wrote like so: "wanting the game to be just a millimeter, a smidge, a tiny bit, a single pixel easier?" > > > > For wishing a small quality of life change, I get judged as if I'm absolutely kitten at this game. Then I have no Idea how I've completed every story chapter until LS4 (and to top it off, with varying classes/specs). > > > > Basically everything is my fault. Ok. Let's go with that. No argument here. > > > > > > no frankly, i don't understand how you can have difficulty in pof > > > it is almost impossible to fail metas because they are so simple, even the bounties, I hardly failed a single one > > > There is absolutely no form of challenge on pof, we are light years away from the level of HOT > > > > > > I think you have to review your whole way of playing in question because if cantha is much simpler than pof, we will end up on a pokemon level child's play. > > > Sincerely if EoD is as easy as you ask, I see no point in buying it > > > > I somewhat disagree. The djin are relatively hard. And that is not my opinion. When Anet showed statistics, earth djin was the mob with highest win rate against players, with 44% win rate. It could make to silver 3 in sPvP :p > > > > With exception of the 2 ranged units in HoT (the frog leap and the land arrow damage), I would say the difficulty is about equal. PoF is just... empty. There are barely anything on the maps beside scattered mobs. > > > > If you can make it to platinum in sPvP (whatever you want to put as PvE equivalent) open world will be super easy to you, regardless. It is designed for silver skill players to have a good time. And it makes sense, since majority of players are between mid silver to mid gold. And thus Anet designs the content so that average skill players are challenged enough to have fun. > > yes maybe djinn and sometimes hydra bounties are fun to do, a little challenge. The rest is for players who spend their time spamming 1 > But I hope ,we will have events and metas much harder with EoD like during the release of the first expansion ( much more cooperation and organization). > So quite the opposite as requested by the author of this topic. > If cantha is as simple as he wants, I would be really disappointed, probably the last expansion so... Same here. I dunno why we moved away from some HoT designs. VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. I most definitely do not want another PoF designed map, ever. Good news is Anet seems to have moved away from these designs. None of the last 4 maps had hearts. I greatly dislike the last map, but the three previous ones were all pretty good.

Armor. I do have some outfits, but they grow old very fast. And most outfits I like just a part of it. And since you cannot mix and match, it is not fun.

> @"Mungo Zen.9364" said: > Anyone who played SWTOR will remember the long quiet spaces on Tattoine. Between the hubs was a lot of desert and hidden in the desert was stuff to do. Not a lot of stuff but, it was there. The highlight being that once an hour balloon ride... > > I would be stoked for that type of environment in GW2 since we don’t have something quite like it yet, but GW2 has a lot of map environments done as good or better than other games so I have never really been left wanting for more. I do had Tattoine, but that was the only area in it I remotely liked. I remember the first time I did the planetary mission, and went to the secret Cerka facility where there was a Rakata artifact. Good times :) To me Desolation kinda fills that vibe, somewhat.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > Cmc stated in a stream that they are unfortunately there to stay do to the effort required to change them. Clear indicator that the current anet devs do not have the resources for a game the size of gw2. > > > > > > > > I keep hearing this about various facets of the Feb update. Anet made half baked work, that shattered a stable game mode, and now does not have the time to fix it. Am I supposed to give them credit for lack of planning, lack of vision or lack of knowledge? > > > > > > Nope! U just gotta accept the realization and reality of what support or lack there of anet has given to this game in the last couple yrs and the fact it only has gotten less over time. Regardless of the upcoming expect the future of this game is not bright unless some major things change within the company, of course if ur happy with the mediocre pve content/bread crumbs that have been recent additions than game future is promising indeed. > > > > I understand that, but if Anet already knew this is the case, pre Feb sPvP was in relatively stable state, and would have shrugged along fine with minor updates. Why kitten with all sPvP systems, do an incomplete job then claim you do not have the resources to fix it? This is not only a lack of support issue, it is mianly lack of vision and competence. > > True! But there were constant pressure from the community for a lot a big changes, some needed. Evaluating each class and changing what's needed within each one would require the effort and resources of a adequate sized team which anet no longer has, unlike most other popular mmo's. So the only way for anet to achieve such a large impactful patch with the least amount of effort or resources would be to do as they did, a large thoughtless and lazy blanket damage reduction across all classes. Most vets understood why some players complained about some classes having to small of a ttk ratio but could easily see how destructive a blanket patch like the feb patch would actually be to the game as a whole. Vets also easily should of known how likely anet would adhere to their post patch plans, I knew thos exact situation was likely to happen and am not surprised at all. As much as the community wants to pretend things are fine due to the content still being produced for pve, if u actually look at the mediocre content released over the last couple years its obvious the company is struggling. There wasn't even soposed to be a expac but now their rushing one as a last ditch effort. Not sure made the decision over the last few years to hualt development and fixes to the vast content they've already produced and or abandoned. Honestly anet needs as much as a restructuring as the game does. To be fair, I think the issues have started around mid last year. While I do not like PoF story or maps, same for LWS4, I still think it is decent content. It is afterwards were things began to fall off the wagon. No coincidence, this was after the mass layoffs. I know couple of big timers left and we cannot tell how involved NCSOFT currently is, and how much of an impact (positive or negative) they have. Was the expansion planned or not? We cannot no for certain. What is beyond a doubt is that the game would not have to go indefinitely without new elites. As for sPvP, I still think the primary culprit is CmC. While he does take a big portion of the blame, whoever green lit the changes is equally, if not more responsible. You do not go to a game in its mid life, throw away 8 years of balancing, start from scratch, and not expect massive issues and backlash. And you most definitely do not implement this until it is fully complete. Putting in the game, what is essentially a beta patch is unacceptable. In any case, I think sPvP is now a lost cause. I am more interested in good PvE content. I do anticipate EoD to be better than PoF, since we finally have moved away from Hearts in the maps. But man, LWS5 is bad so far. The first 2 maps were alright, but everything else, including the story, has been pretty mediocre. And we are getting hosed on the quantity too.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > Cmc stated in a stream that they are unfortunately there to stay do to the effort required to change them. Clear indicator that the current anet devs do not have the resources for a game the size of gw2. > > > > I keep hearing this about various facets of the Feb update. Anet made half baked work, that shattered a stable game mode, and now does not have the time to fix it. Am I supposed to give them credit for lack of planning, lack of vision or lack of knowledge? > > Nope! U just gotta accept the realization and reality of what support or lack there of anet has given to this game in the last couple yrs and the fact it only has gotten less over time. Regardless of the upcoming expect the future of this game is not bright unless some major things change within the company, of course if ur happy with the mediocre pve content/bread crumbs that have been recent additions than game future is promising indeed. I understand that, but if Anet already knew this is the case, pre Feb sPvP was in relatively stable state, and would have shrugged along fine with minor updates. Why fuck with all sPvP systems, do an incomplete job then claim you do not have the resources to fix it? This is not only a lack of support issue, it is mianly lack of vision and competence.

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > Cmc stated in a stream that they are unfortunately there to stay do to the effort required to change them. Clear indicator that the current anet devs do not have the resources for a game the size of gw2. I keep hearing this about various facets of the Feb update. Anet made half baked work, that shattered a stable game mode, and now does not have the time to fix it. Am I supposed to give them credit for lack of planning, lack of vision or lack of knowledge?

> @"radda.8920" said: > > @"Pockethole.5031" said: > > -L2P your build > > I am playing. I dodge and use the arsenal I have. And I still feel they are unnecessarily hard. > > -then you are lying > > Just like the rest of other humans, when something hurts me, it's my fault for existing. You always want to blame the thing least important to you. > > > > I didn't say I want to one-shot everything. Did you read what I wrote? I wrote like so: "wanting the game to be just a millimeter, a smidge, a tiny bit, a single pixel easier?" > > For wishing a small quality of life change, I get judged as if I'm absolutely kitten at this game. Then I have no Idea how I've completed every story chapter until LS4 (and to top it off, with varying classes/specs). > > Basically everything is my fault. Ok. Let's go with that. No argument here. > > no frankly, i don't understand how you can have difficulty in pof > it is almost impossible to fail metas because they are so simple, even the bounties, I hardly failed a single one > There is absolutely no form of challenge on pof, we are light years away from the level of HOT > > I think you have to review your whole way of playing in question because if cantha is much simpler than pof, we will end up on a pokemon level child's play. > Sincerely if EoD is as easy as you ask, I see no point in buying it I somewhat disagree. The djin are relatively hard. And that is not my opinion. When Anet showed statistics, earth djin was the mob with highest win rate against players, with 44% win rate. It could make to silver 3 in sPvP :p With exception of the 2 ranged units in HoT (the frog leap and the land arrow damage), I would say the difficulty is about equal. PoF is just... empty. There are barely anything on the maps beside scattered mobs. If you can make it to platinum in sPvP (whatever you want to put as PvE equivalent) open world will be super easy to you, regardless. It is designed for silver skill players to have a good time. And it makes sense, since majority of players are between mid silver to mid gold. And thus Anet designs the content so that average skill players are challenged enough to have fun.

> @"Vancho.8750" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > Well... the pandemic is... everywhere. So..? Anet is not the only gaming company dealing with this. And arguably the gaming industry is benefiting from the pandemic. SPvP was trashed. Limited class balance changes for PvE. The saga, so far, is the worst LW. > > > > I still occasionally play GW2, but no longer sPvP and mostly old content. So, no, Anet gets an F for 2020 performance. The pandemic does not give them a pass or even some credit. > I kinda feel confused that they dropped everything when there will be the most butts in front of PCs, and I don't think there will be another opportunity like this for free mulla, I get that they are making the expansion but come on man, they are missing out on allot. The Steam release was a good call but they pulled out, probably because of WoW and Cyberpunk, and if they wait to release it after the expansion instead after the hype dies for both games would be a big mistake, since getting your game on the front page of Steam during a pandemic is printing money. Also they don't have Game director, no one is steering the ship, it is kinda amazing what they are pulling off now but it will soon start to unravel. > I agree that Anet management is performing poorly. But, isn’t that the problem? As a customer I primarily care about quality content. Anet having a game director or not is Anet, not players, issue. They do not get any credit for that. And we clearly are not getting quality content. If there was a hiccup of 2-3 month due to people transitioning to work from home, I get it. But this has been an issue since the layoffs early last year. They do not get credit for pandemic or lack of game director. And they need to get their act together, otherwise the revenue stream will fall beyond recovery. Earlier game development was masterful. GW2, as a whole, is one of the best designed open worlds and has great combat, animations and character designs. It would be a shame to waste all the good work done over years cuz the current team lacks vision and leadership.

Well... the pandemic is... everywhere. So..? Anet is not the only gaming company dealing with this. And arguably the gaming industry is benefiting from the pandemic. SPvP was trashed. Limited class balance changes for PvE. The saga, so far, is the worst LW. I still occasionally play GW2, but no longer sPvP and mostly old content. So, no, Anet gets an F for 2020 performance. The pandemic does not give them a pass or even some credit.

> @"Mellow.7409" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Mellow.7409" said: > > > > @"Widmo.3186" said: > > > > > @"Mellow.7409" said: > > > > > > @"Widmo.3186" said: > > > > > > The ele profession should become more of an ele and less of a support > > > > > > > > > > > > Ele is so disgustingly underpowered and even more so since you removed our beloved crowd control damage (besides LR, but it also got nerfed by 33% dmg), FGS isn't even close to being "Elite", Glyph of Elementals _(which should be equivalent to Flesh Golem)_ is a joke and doesn't even turn the tide of a battle in a 1 versus 1 situation. All that we have left of this profession is anti-fun support build which isn't very ele-like if you ask me. > > > > > > > > > > Guess you haven't played Tempest nor Weaver. > > > > > > > > Guess you haven't played Berserker nor Spellbreaker. > > > > > > That's not a valid argument since both Tempest & Weaver are viable even in 1500+. > > > > So is warrior. Heck anyone with experience can take any synergistic build on any class to 1,500. If you cannot what you are lacking is skill not class balance. > > > > And yes, **warrior needs a buffs in some areas, but is also needs nerfs in others.** > > That is the whole point of this thread buddy. But that is not what your original post mentioned. In any case, yes, warrior does need damage buff for several weapons.

> @"MatyrGustav.6210" said: > I want a Summoner spec with a Horn for Guardian. Could have Swiftness with a Horn skill That would suck and probably not PvP viable.

> @"Mellow.7409" said: > > @"Widmo.3186" said: > > > @"Mellow.7409" said: > > > > @"Widmo.3186" said: > > > > The ele profession should become more of an ele and less of a support > > > > > > > > Ele is so disgustingly underpowered and even more so since you removed our beloved crowd control damage (besides LR, but it also got nerfed by 33% dmg), FGS isn't even close to being "Elite", Glyph of Elementals _(which should be equivalent to Flesh Golem)_ is a joke and doesn't even turn the tide of a battle in a 1 versus 1 situation. All that we have left of this profession is anti-fun support build which isn't very ele-like if you ask me. > > > > > > Guess you haven't played Tempest nor Weaver. > > > > Guess you haven't played Berserker nor Spellbreaker. > > That's not a valid argument since both Tempest & Weaver are viable even in 1500+. So is warrior. Heck anyone with experience can take any synergistic build on any class to 1,500. If you cannot what you are lacking is skill not class balance. And yes, warrior needs a buffs in some areas, but is also needs nerfs in others.

Man, sPvP forums are becoming almost as bad as sPvP.

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > > they should for sure balance for mAT as it's the highest current level of play. doesn't mean they shouldn't balance for ladder too. > > > > > > honestly, the best example was and will probably always be dragon hunter. > > > > > > the build was strong but not overly so, it was just relatively easy to play to a certain extent. let's say everybody could play it to 80% effectiveness right off the bat. in high level play, the build was only good not broken. > > > > > > now take a build that is harder to play, and you might only achieve 40% effectiveness right off the start. compared to dragon hunter, this build will most pikely perform worse on ladder but might very well be much stronger than dragon hunter on 100%. > > > > > > what's the right thing to do here? nerf dragon hunter? nerf the fictional build that is harder to play? > > > > > > it's actually quite simple. > > > > > > is dragon hunter too strong at the top level? > > > yes -> nerf > > > no -> buff if needed > > > > > > is dragon hunter too strong at lower levels? > > > yes -> don't nerf it, but increase the skill cap by making the skills more interesting. this could even become a buff because the build might become more flexible. > > > no -> leave it > > > > > > if the fictional build i'm talking about is too strong st high level but weak at low level you have two pathes you can take. nerf it, or nerf it and up the skill floor a bit. > > > > > > something that anet often does and i really hate is the following: > > > > > > they see a build that does something that it's not supposed to do or a build that is very uninteractive to play against (minions, turrets, bunker thief). instead of changing the build or making it less obnoxious they just whack it so hard with the nerf hammer that people stop playing it, thus ruining build diversity. > > > > > > > > > > There is more that goes to it than that. You cannot only balance around the top 0.25%. You need to consider the top 10%. But even in the top 0.25%, how you measure top performing can be highly misleading. > > > > IMO (and I go this from another game devs) the best indicator is to aggregate results by winning composition. What this means you see what class/elite compositions have the highest win percentage in 1,500 and mAT. Then you look for how often you see a specific elite. If holo shows up 8 times in the top 10 compositions, clearly it is over performing. If mirage shows up 1 time, it clearly is under performing. > > > > You would then look for feedback from players and experience (if devs play the game, which at this point I am pretty certain rarely, if ever happens), and hone in on what is causing the class of over/under perform. > > > > Honestly though, this is not really going to work well now. sPvP as a whole has been fundamentally broken since Feb patch. This is what happens when you through away 8 years of balancing then do a half kitten-ed job trying to implement new values for everything. First step is to remove whoever is responsible for this fiasco. Second, get close or at, where we were before. Then do the steps above, while also keeping an eye on what happens in gold. > > i agree with what you say. you shouldn't balance only around top" 0.25%". honestly, i don't even know if the remaining players are a good enough standard nowadays but top "0.25%" should be where you can see what's the near absolute maximum output of a build. this is only one part of the equation. the other 99.75% show you how the build performs for the low to average to above average player. if you have one build that heavily outperforms everything else in those 0.25% it is probably too strong. doesn't mean it is too strong for the rest of the game, but if it's problematic for the top it needs to be changed in a way that nerfs it for the "0.25%" but keeps it the same for the rest, which quite frankly is really hard to achieve unless you just say, welp we nerf it for high level and the other players need to "git gud". > > i touch on that subject about team comp in a different post i made aswell. holo is a simple example because it is a side noder and it's quite clear it is overperforming. but sometimes it isn't necessarily a single build but rather a combination like for example support firebrand + scourge + blood scourge. that's more tricky. maybe none of the three are broken but the combination is, that's where you need to find a way to nerf something without making them unviable individually. > > the stuff i'm talking about is very simplified so don't take everything for bare value. there's much more to balance than just looking at numbers. sometimes it's just about the feeling of a build too. i mean, look at mirage. yes mirage is weaker now with only one dodge, but it feels incredibly bad to play and will feel bad even if it was (i'm not saying it is) numerically overtuned. on the other hand it's also wrong to nerf around stuff, something anet really loves to do with holo changes. just because you nerf other stuff doesn't mean what you should be nerfing gets less broken, the result might be the same in the end, the build will be weaker, but it will feel terrible to play. The issue with the build “feel” it is hard to quantify and hard to relate to if you do not play the class. I am familiar with how to play against necro and engi, but I do not know the detail of their builds. On the other side, I know every single detail about guardian. It is much harder for me to gauge engi, but I can pretty accurately gauge guardian. If I am in a position to make a decisions about engi, numbers and player feedback is all I got. You would hope that the team that makes balance decisions play all classes, but you need multiple devs to do that. And it does not seem to be the case. Personally, I think it is much better to have balance devs by class versus by game mode. You want people who understand the class, on fundamental level, to make decisions. And you can never do that unless you play the class. Without playing you can understand design, but you will never understand performance. I want people who make buffs and nerfs understand what they are doing. And even though we had some highly unbalanced periods, till 2018, I think the people who were making decisions understood the classes. But from end of 2018, going forward it seems this strategy shifted. And once I heard there is “CMC” I knew this will end up in a disaster. And that is exactly what happened. As a guardian main, regardless of performance (currently shit) I can tell CMC has no fucking clue how guardian remotely works. Probably all he knows is “immobile, aoe damage and good healing.” You cannot effectively balance classes like this. In addition class balance, there are multiple layers and objectives. You surely want things to be balanced at the high end, but games generally want to appeal and create a fun experience for everyone. Take Condi mirage as an example. With the exception of the first few month, after phantasms rework, mirage was fairly strong, but hardly OP. However, cuz it was extremely oppressive against inexperienced players, it continuously kept getting nerfed. At this point, a 1,200 player would not have much issues playing against Condi mirage, but above 1,500, it does not work. This is flat out wrong balance methodology, but should be considered, to an extent, to prevent lower levels of sPvP to have massive entry barrier. It is a balancing act, that requires much thinking and planning. In any case, Anet current spvp devs do not seem to do much but follow qq. I highly doubt in-depth statistics analysis are performed in any level. There are no indications of it.

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > they should for sure balance for mAT as it's the highest current level of play. doesn't mean they shouldn't balance for ladder too. > > honestly, the best example was and will probably always be dragon hunter. > > the build was strong but not overly so, it was just relatively easy to play to a certain extent. let's say everybody could play it to 80% effectiveness right off the bat. in high level play, the build was only good not broken. > > now take a build that is harder to play, and you might only achieve 40% effectiveness right off the start. compared to dragon hunter, this build will most pikely perform worse on ladder but might very well be much stronger than dragon hunter on 100%. > > what's the right thing to do here? nerf dragon hunter? nerf the fictional build that is harder to play? > > it's actually quite simple. > > is dragon hunter too strong at the top level? > yes -> nerf > no -> buff if needed > > is dragon hunter too strong at lower levels? > yes -> don't nerf it, but increase the skill cap by making the skills more interesting. this could even become a buff because the build might become more flexible. > no -> leave it > > if the fictional build i'm talking about is too strong st high level but weak at low level you have two pathes you can take. nerf it, or nerf it and up the skill floor a bit. > > something that anet often does and i really hate is the following: > > they see a build that does something that it's not supposed to do or a build that is very uninteractive to play against (minions, turrets, bunker thief). instead of changing the build or making it less obnoxious they just whack it so hard with the nerf hammer that people stop playing it, thus ruining build diversity. > > There is more that goes to it than that. You cannot only balance around the top 0.25%. You need to consider the top 10%. But even in the top 0.25%, how you measure top performing can be highly misleading. IMO (and I go this from another game devs) the best indicator is to aggregate results by winning composition. What this means you see what class/elite compositions have the highest win percentage in 1,500 and mAT. Then you look for how often you see a specific elite. If holo shows up 8 times in the top 10 compositions, clearly it is over performing. If mirage shows up 1 time, it clearly is under performing. You would then look for feedback from players and experience (if devs play the game, which at this point I am pretty certain rarely, if ever happens), and hone in on what is causing the class of over/under perform. Honestly though, this is not really going to work well now. sPvP as a whole has been fundamentally broken since Feb patch. This is what happens when you through away 8 years of balancing then do a half ass-ed job trying to implement new values for everything. First step is to remove whoever is responsible for this fiasco. Second, get close or at, where we were before. Then do the steps above, while also keeping an eye on what happens in gold.

Warrior, I am expecting staff and heavy support spec. Similar to FB somewhat. Expecting 100% uptime to quickness. Guardian, off hand sword. Power dps and mobility focused. Rev, I think power, but not sure what weapon. Ranger, no idea. Thief, I think condi focused. Engi, no idea. Mesmer, SB, ranged power focused. I am anticipating all F skills will change. Ele, heavy support with power ranged weapon. Probably 100% uptime to alacrity. Necro, heavy support. Not sure regarding the weapon or support type. Also, could be power dps that functions different than reaper.

Would not the title make more sense that GW2 sPvP is bad? And it is not bad on its face value. Pre Feb infamous patch, it was pretty good. And conquest does work well. After the Feb patch it still is not bad, but for someone like me who played the game for years, post Feb it is vastly inferior to what it was before.

Condi mirage most of the time. Axe/p + t. I may switch to staff if the occasion requires it. Some champions are hard to solo in melee.

> @"Legedric.9372" said: > Thank you for the quick response and the very valuable feedback! > > No I do not have acces to elites yet and I did not start PoF. I just started HoT yesterday, so I will definitely switch to start PoF to follow your advice. > > I will start to roughly follow this guide here for a Mirage Condi Mesmer: > https://metabattle.com/wiki/Build:Mirage_-_Condi_Mirage > Personally, I prefer chaos line over illusion for Condi builds, since you are not too focused on shattering. For hero points, the PoF ones do not need a group. The HoT ones though, some do. You may find hero point farming groups (called trains) in the group finder. Would make life really easy.

Conditional mirage is what you are like looking for. I do not know if you unlocked elites or not yet. If you have not, go for mirage. Staff works much better with mirage. Also, you get good survivability and damage boast to condi damage. Also, Axe does very good damage. If you have not played PoF yet, I strongly advice starting there. You unlock mounts and hero points are much easier to farm. You do not have to go through story except the first instance. Just go through the maps collecting hero points and unlocking teleport points. HoT hero points are far more difficult to get to and to obtain. Also, navigating HoT without its respective mastries is a pain. Mounts reduce that pain a lot. As for story, it makes sense to chronologically, but you can run PoF first. They are connected, but not that much. Personally, I would focus on gathering hero points, teleport and upgrading gear before worrying too much about story, unless that is what you are primarily looking for. For detailed mirage build I recommend GW2 metabattle website. It is a pretty good general guide. Personally, HoT maps (first two specifically) are much better than all PoF maps combined. And probably have more content too. But HoT is generally harder.

> @"Ganathar.4956" said: > > @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > > @"SloRules.3560" said: > > > > @"Valelutra.9128" said: > > > > > @"JohnWater.5760" said: > > > > > > @"Valelutra.9128" said: > > > > > > I’m thinking our next patch is February > > > > > > > > > > Why do you think that? T_T > > > > > > > > Because I have a feeling they’ve cannibalized the balance team to make elite specs. So no meaningful balance will happen until elite specs are further in development or public outcry gets bad. It’s a guess but I put one of those two things are happening around Februaryish > > > > > > Well post on reddit actually proves it. The balance team -> new elite specs. > > > > Well that is horrifying! > > The balance team has always been the team to make elite specs. There has been no cannibalization there. However, I am nort sure if we are getting the full story yet. Their absence is still unusual, because they were capable of releasing balance patches while working on especs before the previous expansions. They may be working on more profession related stuff than just 1 set of elite specs, or perhaps they really have been working on unrelated stuff. Because of course Anet will use the systems team for other stuff. Not like balance is important or anything, right???? I assume the balance team do more than just balance patches. If you are working on project A that does not meant project B is down for eternity. The problem is much simpler. Anet current management sucks. They cannot manage projects or resources.