Israel.7056

Gw3 will probably be a mobile game lets be real.

It really is important that we be able to have unmoderated matchup threads because one of the most fun parts of gaming is the drama it creates between players. Without that the whole thing just isn't as much fun. Does it turn some people off? Yeah. Some people are kinda soft and they get their feelings hurt easily. But it scratches a particular itch for a lot more people who hate their enemies and want to taunt them and throw salt on emotional wounds and call them trash and get called trash etc etc. I firmly believe that getting rid of the matchup threads, trying to reduce the "toxicity" of the community, has been one of the primary things that has extinguished hardcore player interest in WvW.

A lot of people, whether they want to admit it or not, play online multiplayer pvp oriented games to get outside the boring polite humdrum milquetoast experience of their everyday social lives and take out all their pent up aggression on one another in a relatively safe context. Games like this can be a great outlet for that impulse but you have to let people be mean and insulting and say mean words and that's apparently a bridge too far for Anet.

I mean if that's all they ever do yeah. But you're also bad if you get a quick chance to plus a fight and don't because you're worried about it making you a worse player or something.

I hear bomb is really good

> @"Dinas Dragonbane.2978" said:

> I just feel the more based off of k/d ratio it becomes and the more people want to "win" the fewer fights one might find, as server A could just completely dominate the weekend and get enough of a lead to basically quit the rest of the week and nobody could potentially catch up because they can't get enough kills with Server A absent the other five days. Same as the more roamer types would build even MORE for mobility and escape than they already do which helps kill that scene as well. There must be some sort of balance between the two that would promote both at the same time.

They're kind of opposite focuses though, it's hard to balance them against one another.

> @"coro.3176" said:

> I'm skeptical of being able to beat 10 (good) soulbeasts and mirages with half the numbers of (good) engis/revs. I'll grant it for the sake of argument.

I wasn't suggesting half the numbers just that it's possible to shut down mirages or soulbeasts with a comp designed to do so. So even if engi gets a 5 solo it gets a different number when used properly as part of a good comp.

> I think "the game as it's actually played" includes a lot of pugs vs pugs, and yes, 1v1 roaming encounters.

You're right I phrased that poorly. What i mean to say is that pug v pug or 1v1 is so far removed from what's possible with comp and teamwork that it may as well be seen as a different game mode, at least in the abstract. It's like Solo Q versus Team Q in pvp.

> @"coro.3176" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"coro.3176" said:

> > > No, not literally every combination of every build, but .. more than we currently have?

> > >

> > > Maybe:

> > > * at least 1 power and 1 condi build for each class

> > > * all weapons for each class being useable for at least 1 build

> > > * all elite specs and core specs viable for at least 1 build

> > >

> > > I don't think that would be asking too much

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > .. but I think more important is the extreme power disparity between the meta classes and the off meta.

> > >

> > > Just as an example, look at weapon autoattacks on my condi engi vs a meta soulbeast:

> > >

> > > Engi:

> > > * ~2k damage (if it ticks the full 10s bleed which .. never ever happens. Realistically, like 700 damage)

> > > * 900 range

> > > * 0.8275s real cast time (0.5s listed)

> > >

> > > SB

> > > * ~4k-10k damage immediately

> > > * 1800+ (sometimes up to 2200!!) range

> > > * ~1.00s real cast time (0.75s listed)

> > >

> > > This is the sort of thing I mean when I say it's not even in the same league.

> > >

> >

> > What exactly do you mean by "off meta?" Do you mean every build that is not currently considered meta? Or every build that could be considered to be close to meta but not quite there?

> >

> > There are already more than 1 power 1 condi build per class. There are probably something like 10 potential power oriented variants 10 potential condi oriented variants 10 potential healing power oriented variants and another 10 boon duration oriented variants at this point there are so many gear sets now. It may not be literally that many but there are a lot of potential builds now.

> >

> > Most of them are either not being tried at all, are being tried but not being discussed or have been tried and found wanting for whatever reason.

> >

> > Comparing auto attacks by themselves is also not particularly useful imo.

>

> The auto attack comparison was meant to illustrate the power disparity between meta builds and the rest.

>

> It's true that you *can* make a whole bunch of different builds. They don't compete very well though because they have to fight against stuff like a ~40k unblockable quickness rapid fire combo in under 2s from 3x their engagement distance followed by autoattacks for 1/3 to 1/2 of their health and threatening a 1-shot maul or worldly impact out of stealth if they do close the distance. They have to fight against condi mirage with ~20 dodges every minute .. that can be used after CC .. while also counterattacking and reflecting. Etc.

>

> My point is that the difference between what is meta and what is unpopular/unplayed is extreme right now.

>

> If the current balance of builds is like this (on a scale of 1-10):

>

> 10 10 10 5 5 5...

>

> I want it to be more like this

>

> 8 8 8 7 7 7...

I think the problem with the math metaphor is that you could add up 10 things that would individually get perhaps a 5 or a 7 or whatever and get a much greater number than if one added up 10 things that individually would get a 10. So for instance 10 rangers or 10 mirages would be fairly easy to completely shut down with a comp that used just 2 or 3 engis and a couple revs for instance. Part of compcraft is using the various interclass synergies to create a comp that is greater than the sum of its parts. Thinking of balance as just build v build or class v class doesn't adequately reflect the realities of the game as its actually played.

> @"coro.3176" said:

> No, not literally every combination of every build, but .. more than we currently have?

>

> Maybe:

> * at least 1 power and 1 condi build for each class

> * all weapons for each class being useable for at least 1 build

> * all elite specs and core specs viable for at least 1 build

>

> I don't think that would be asking too much

>

>

>

> .. but I think more important is the extreme power disparity between the meta classes and the off meta.

>

> Just as an example, look at weapon autoattacks on my condi engi vs a meta soulbeast:

>

> Engi:

> * ~2k damage (if it ticks the full 10s bleed which .. never ever happens. Realistically, like 700 damage)

> * 900 range

> * 0.8275s real cast time (0.5s listed)

>

> SB

> * ~4k-10k damage immediately

> * 1800+ (sometimes up to 2200!!) range

> * ~1.00s real cast time (0.75s listed)

>

> This is the sort of thing I mean when I say it's not even in the same league.

>

What exactly do you mean by "off meta?" Do you mean every build that is not currently considered meta? Or every build that could be considered to be close to meta but not quite there?

There are already more than 1 power 1 condi build per class. There are probably something like 10 potential power oriented variants 10 potential condi oriented variants 10 potential healing power oriented variants and another 10 boon duration oriented variants at this point there are so many gear sets now. It may not be literally that many but there are a lot of potential builds now.

Most of them are either not being tried at all, are being tried but not being discussed or have been tried and found wanting for whatever reason.

Comparing auto attacks by themselves is also not particularly useful imo.

> @"Trittium.9104" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> >

> > Frankly I'm not sure exactly what's changed that has apparently gotten so many people upset recently. Seems to me it's always the same complaints. I don't think they always ignore the feedback it's that the feedback from the wvw forum isn't very good most of the time. You need to give specifics about what exactly is causing problems for you and why. Then we can talk about whether the specific complaint makes sense or not. Complaining about power creep generally doesn't really tell us or them anything useful I don't think.

>

> I agree with you to some extent, which is why I'm trying to start a dialogue about it with the player-base. What I'm posting about in particular in the insane synergy of some builds that have highly contributed from power creep.

>

> Example: Guardians have always been good supports in roaming and zergs, and that's fantastic, but with firebrand AND additions to concentration (A.K.A Minstrel gear) their ability to pop out loads of boons in a very short amount of time and keep them stacking through concentration, with the ability to get insane levels of condi cleanse (Water tome [opening tome removes 3 from 5 allies, skill 2 removes 3 from 5 allies, skill 5 converts 5 into boons on 5 allies], shouts, mantras, Sigil, food, traits) and direct healing for a constant 5-10 allies per 1 firebrand is absurd without sacrificing that much damage (fire tome, burning is still the highest damaging condi in the game even without condi damage built), and remaining in full tank stats in an MMO that isn't supposed to be in the realm of "Holy Trinity". Prior to PoF guardians were still great supports, and had decent cleanse, healing, and boon output, but it was much more limited. Boons would expire quicker, you could stack or apply as many in such a short amount of time, Healing was more limited, and condi cleanse was on higher cooldowns giving you a window to properly corrupt or burst.

What scale of play are you looking at the game from?

I'm guessing this is smaller scale? 15 or less?

> @"Trittium.9104" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> >

> > I would advise you to imagine yourself as a developer reading this sort of feedback.

> >

> > "My build sucks this other build is too strong either nerf them or buff me or i quit."

> >

> > What wisdom is there to be gleaned here?

>

> Or I'm saying: "I'm a long-time player who's dumped hundreds of dollars into this game to support it because I've always believed in it, but the overwhelming community outcry for WvW to receive and iota of the same attention as PvE in terms of just balancing with little regard to anything being done about it only results in the loss of playerbase". If you're quite done putting words in my mouth now.

>

> This isn't "oMG I died to a teef as a invincible warrior nerf nao QQ", it's WHY has the power creep that players have been more and more vocal about over the past 2-3 years become worse and worse and blatantly ignored, and IN THE PROCESS builds that used to at least be able to do something have been pushed out of the way for a "You play this class this 1 way only or get out" mentality.

Frankly I'm not sure exactly what's changed that has apparently gotten so many people upset recently. Seems to me it's always the same complaints. I don't think they always ignore the feedback it's that the feedback from the wvw forum isn't very good most of the time. You need to give specifics about what exactly is causing problems for you and why. Then we can talk about whether the specific complaint makes sense or not. Complaining about power creep generally doesn't really tell us or them anything useful I don't think.

> @"coro.3176" said:

> Now, I don't expect to be as good as the meta builds playing my off-meta condi scrapper... but I do expect to be somewhat competitive - like, in the same ballpark .

How many conceivable builds do you think there are in this game? Like every conceivable gear combination for every class every conceivable trait orientation every conceivable weapon choice etc?

Gotta be thousands at this point right?

> @"Trittium.9104" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Trittium.9104" said:

> > > Builds that used to bring a whole new perspective to roaming, zerging, and the whole experience have just been overrun by these cheese builds, and Anet also nerfing more and more specs into the ground (I.E. Berserker, Core elly). It's boring and frustrating at the same time. I don't want to play one of my many alts geared SPECIFICALLY to a build that *should* be working, even if it is under-performing a bit, as a cheese one-shot or hyper invulnerability boon spam, and I shouldn't have to. It's MY loss if it's underperforming a bit, but I shouldn't be debating never playing again because of HOW badly it's trashed into the ground.

> > >

> > > Example: My Dagger/Dagger Spellbreaker which is THEIR initial design and promotion is just... It's just really bad how terrible it gets trashed, and it shouldn't from the gearing/build. i shouldn't have to re-roll all his gear, runes, and build to match every cut-and-paste greatsword spellbreaker out there just to feel like I can actually play.

> >

> > Lot of moralizing. You shouldn't expect anything to ever work just because you think it's cool or because you got the gear for it or whatever. You shouldn't be so entitled as to turn your nose up at rerolling gear like come on dude most games don't even have gear rerolling. You shouldn't ever tie yourself mentally to any one build or class unless you're willing to play it through the not so great times.

> >

> > I get that you're trying to use your "debating never playing again" as leverage to get what you want here but it just comes off as petulant to me.

>

> That's not it at all. I actually am debating it due to the downfall that WvW is going through. It's been the ONLY game mode that has appealed to me about this game, and I t's basically all I do outside farm istan. That Spellbreaker isn't my only build, I have several that I play (Like condi soulbeast, power chrono, condi DE, full support scrapper, etc.). And that's also the thing; this game DOES have gear rerolling but I shouldn't have to stop playing dagger/dagger spellbreaker, or dagger/dagger soul beast and reroll all that time, gold, and effort into just playing LB power soulbeast, or roving tank spellbreaker. As far as tying myself to one-build of class... Yeah I never do that in any game. I'm partial to Necro in this game, but I'm generally only on that in PvE content.

>

> I'm not trying to be Petulant in anyway, shape, or form. I literally don't want another MMO to go into a trash pile because the company stopped listening (Looking at you, Archeage, Aion, WoW, and Tera), but there's not much I can do except HOPE that I also inspire some of you to stop being so complacent in letting this just happen and say something as well.

I would advise you to imagine yourself as a developer reading this sort of feedback.

"My build sucks this other build is too strong either nerf them or buff me or i quit."

What wisdom is there to be gleaned here?

> @"Trittium.9104" said:

> Builds that used to bring a whole new perspective to roaming, zerging, and the whole experience have just been overrun by these cheese builds, and Anet also nerfing more and more specs into the ground (I.E. Berserker, Core elly). It's boring and frustrating at the same time. I don't want to play one of my many alts geared SPECIFICALLY to a build that *should* be working, even if it is under-performing a bit, as a cheese one-shot or hyper invulnerability boon spam, and I shouldn't have to. It's MY loss if it's underperforming a bit, but I shouldn't be debating never playing again because of HOW badly it's trashed into the ground.

>

> Example: My Dagger/Dagger Spellbreaker which is THEIR initial design and promotion is just... It's just really bad how terrible it gets trashed, and it shouldn't from the gearing/build. i shouldn't have to re-roll all his gear, runes, and build to match every cut-and-paste greatsword spellbreaker out there just to feel like I can actually play.

Lot of moralizing. You shouldn't expect anything to ever work just because you think it's cool or because you got the gear for it or whatever. You shouldn't be so entitled as to turn your nose up at rerolling gear like come on dude most games don't even have gear rerolling. You shouldn't ever tie yourself mentally to any one build or class unless you're willing to play it through the not so great times.

I get that you're trying to use your "debating never playing again" as leverage to get what you want here but it just comes off as petulant to me.

I used to play with this guy who would play core engi no matter the "meta" no matter what we needed him to play. He did it so he could have the psychological win at the end of the day. If he lost he would just say "of course I lost I'm playing core engi." If he won he would say "wow this guy is trash he lost to a core engi." No matter what he had a way to make himself feel like he was the underdog, that the odds were against him. Sometimes he would lose a lot one day and complain about how op everything else was. I feel like this op could've been written by him.

> @"Jeknar.6184" said:

> I think the issue about reducing the importance of PPT in the final score is that it affect the structure of the game mode... Theorically you are suposed to take objectives and hold them, and people are suposed to be fighting for the objectives... Right now we have turtling objectives and people PPT'ing empty structures on off-times because cracking a T3 structure that is being defended is actually terrible...

>

> But if you remove the importance of objectives, most likely people will simply just avoid any fight that isn't a sure win in order to preserve score and won't even try to defend objectives because "why bother?" if they aren't important anymore.

I think that the design of the game mode brings out the cowardly pragmatist in all of us. We all start thinking too strategically and tactically. At some point you realize that if you really want you can avoid fighting almost entirely. There have been several legendary commanders who I will not name but we all know who have taken this philosophy to an extreme. Never fight unless absolutely necessary. Only attack stuff when you know there's no one to defend it. Upgrade and siege up every objective to make taking them extremely tedious and unfun. But this playstyle is entirely consistent with the design of the game mode. Why ever fight if you can win with siege? Why ever attack defended structures when you can wait for your opponent to go to sleep?

I think that if the rules of the game are changed that it will change the way the game is played. If the only way to win is to fight and win those fights I think a lot of people will try their hand at that instead. You have to be a little suicidal and open to risk to want to fight and try fights that are low odds. You have to be willing to disregard the present strategic or tactical value of turtling in favor of fighting instead. For some people like myself fighting is always the best option because it's always fun. For others the incentives need to be in the right place for them to be willing to take the risk. Ultimately the design of the game determines how people will play and I think the design needs to change.

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> The KIlls aspect only worries me as I think you would see even more turtling.

>

> Otherwise, if there were a way to minimize that, and incentivize fights, I agree

Yeah some people will do that. But if they want to actually win and move up or not get pushed down they're gonna have to go out and try to kill people. The structures won't be able to carry them anymore.

The meta strat for years has been upgrade and paper offprime and hold prime. You upgrade your things in offhours when there's no pressure, maybe paper your enemy's stuff if there's no real defense and then defend your upgraded structures during primetime. This is the tried and true method of winning at WvW. You don't even need to hold SMC, just your sides and maybe one side of an enemy map. If you can do that you win.

So how do NA guilds play into this? Spoilers: They don't. The only guilds that have mattered for putting the big points on the board and gettings things upgraded and keeping a server in their tier have been OCX/SEA/EU. NA is just the holding force.

Ah but the further along we go in this game the fewer and fewer offprime guilds still play. Most servers don't have enough offprime to get out of t3. So if an NA guild wants to fight something in t1/t2 they have to go where the offprime still exists or alternatively try to cover multiple timezones. But let me tell you that's not fun.

So this all means NA guilds have to stack servers with some sort of offprime coverage to be able to get out of t3/t4. This means that every relink the NA guilds have to reorient themselves to be able to stay in a tier they want to stay in. This means transfers. Endless waves of transfers.

The whole thing starts with the way the points are tallied and what the game mode prioritizes. So yeah maybe some people will turtle and play it safe, but they'll get punted down to the lower tiers eventually because that won't be a winning strategy anymore.

As an addendum: If the term "skill" makes you squeamish feel free to replace it with "knowledgeable, competent, organized, well lead." Superior leadership, organization and teamwork trump individual skill any day particularly where large scale endeavors are involved.

Essentially bloodie is right the matchups need to be weighted more heavily on kdr/kills not ppt. Ppt essentially tells you nothing useful about a servers overall skill on its own because it's too easy to get ppt by playing offhours and upgrading in dead zones instead of taking things from people when they're actually awake to defend them.

Too many people expect the guilds left playing to shoulder some extra burden and place themselves on servers that are complete disasters in order to try to balance the matchups. Guilds are expected to carry the ppt in offhours by playing overtime forever. No one wants to do that.

> @"Sylosi.6503" said:

> > @"Nimon.7840" said:

> > > @"Sylosi.6503" said:

> > > Because most WvW players who still play WvW on a frequent basis are basically PvE players at heart who use WvW as a substitute for a social life, rather than looking for good (challenging) PvP. No actual PvP player would put up with the pitiful quality of "PvP" in WvW where the majority of fights are not close in the slightest. (let's not even go into how infrequent fights are on top of that...)

> > >

> > > I remember last time I watched Helseth stream (long ago), a bit after they let you queue for PvP from WvW, he went into WvW duelled a warrior, beat him, said "this is stupid, I can just kite him" and went back to PvP, that is the response of an actual PvP player to the "PvP" of WvW.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > That's funny. I think it's the exact opposite way.

>

> Then you'd be wrong, putting aside most actual PvP players (and I mean in a general sense not specific to this game's PvP) from both WvW and PvP quit long ago or barely play anymore, the pattern for better WvW players (roamers especially) was to go from WvW to PvP. Frankly it was even the pattern for not so good roamers who weren't playing WvW as a substitute for a social life, for the simple reason you get far more action in PvP than roaming in WvW.

>

> > If you are looking for "good (challenging) PvP" gw2 is the wrong game for you.

>

> Correct, which is why I log in occasionally for a week or two to see if by some miracle if things like WvW have improved (it hasn't, it is in an even sadder state the previous time I played), then go back to playing actual PvP games for the next X months until my next little visit to GW2.

>

> > And when they get into wvw, where the first challenge occurs in crafting a good build, they often choose pretty poorly.

> > Because spvp makes you not flexible by having these stupid set stat amulets

>

> Nah, it is just more balanced and less carried by cheese (it is still cheesy of course), because they throw out most of the broken runes, sigils, stat combos and the game was designed around that game mode (e.g - look at stealth / mobility - the balance to those in PvP is the game mode itself, roaming in WvW on the other hand...)

>

> > You can't just say that wvw isn't good PvP. It actually is. But you need to find these people that are as good as you are.

>

> It is trash tier PvP, the basis of decent, skilled, even fun PvP is competition, and I don't mean that in some "esports" way. I simply mean having opponents that are around the same experience / skill / outlook toward the game as each other, so you get at least vaguely competitive encounters. WvW is complete garbage at that, which is exactly why you had people try to get that with things like GvG.

>

> WvW is "PvP" for PvE players, it is low skill, casual, undemanding to the point you can simply join a zerg and have the commander basically think for players to varying degrees, making decisions for them directly or indirectly on things that are considered fundamental to most PvP games like positioning.

>

> Which to be fair actually suits the playerbase of a casual MMORPG where most players are more concerned about playing dress-up than anything else.

>

>

>

>

Every pvp team i knew of or played with had a commander as well. You can't be organized and working as a single unit if you have multiple people thinking different things and pursuing different visions at the same time. Obviously each individual member of a PvP team had a role to fill but the rotations and the strategic decisions were all entirely centralized just like a wvw raid.

Transferring is essential for most guilds to sustain themselves and pick up new talent but the lack of stability probably drives away some number of pugs who just want to k train and build siege on the server they treat like their favorite sports team. So when the guilds move they have to move if they want to keep living the good pug life and it looks like a mess

> @"sephiroth.4217" said:

> > @"Spartacus.3192" said:

> > > @"Sylosi.6503" said:

> > > Because most WvW players who still play WvW on a frequent basis are basically PvE players at heart who use WvW as a substitute for a social life, rather than looking for good (challenging) PvP. No actual PvP player would put up with the pitiful quality of "PvP" in WvW where the majority of fights are not close in the slightest. (let's not even go into how infrequent fights are on top of that...)

> > >

> > > I remember last time I watched Helseth stream (long ago), a bit after they let you queue for PvP from WvW, he went into WvW duelled a warrior, beat him, said "this is stupid, I can just kite him" and went back to PvP, that is the response of an actual PvP player to the "PvP" of WvW.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Rather WvW roamers don't wont to lose any more brain cells playing the same tiny conquest maps on a restricted amulet build system that requires you to be on a circle to win. In WvW you have huge maps, able to LOS, dont need to stand on a circle that the entire enemy team will bomb. They also have the ability to play a wider variety of builds. Its refreshing to come across players actually experimenting with diverse builds which is virtually impossible in PvP.

> >

> > Im talking small scale roaming here not Zergs.

> >

> > If there comes a day when ANET implements the pvp amulet system in WvW will be the day i uninstall.

> >

> > Also LOL at quoting Helseth who plays mesmer which is literally the most OP duelling class in WvW like since forever.

>

> Yea but the concept is there...

> Being mostly a PvP player you're forced to play with a lot of restrictions such as mobility and builds, then you find a WvW player who "duels" on flat ground and wouldnt know how to kite or LoS if it slapped him in the face, most likely reliant on overtuned stats to do most of the work rather than skill.

Well that's the point thought right? The node fighting aspect of PvP structures the feel of the entire game mode. I played a lot of PvP the first few years and it was a lot of fun for a while but eventually I just got tired of the same fights in the same circles. So it's like even if the micro level play is more skill oriented the game mode itself is tedious. I play video games to have fun and PvP just isn't that much fun after a few thousand games imo.

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> I'd rather pay a sub but I'm in the minority.

>

> No such thing as a free lunch Bois

I'm down to pay a sub.

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> The path of least resistance will always be taken. People will transfer to make easier wins every time. Doesn't matter what you do, short of banning transfers.

Indeed half measures do not fix problems they only mitigate them to some degree.

Stats are way way different in wvw people can min max and the amount of stats one gets running full ascended zerk versus what's possible with zerk amulet is way different. I remember when I made the transition many moons ago it threw me off too except I went in the opposite order.

Here's the deal: if you're gonna go warrior dps you gotta push into melee range and stay there to hundred blades people down. You gotta run glassy enough to actually kill something but still be tanky enough to survive all the damage that's going to be dropped on your face as you push and while you're actually on target. Warrior damage is very easy to avoid and warriors themselves are very easy to shut down in a zerg fight. Arc dps is just a tool guilds use to figure out who's missing their damage that's all. The reason people don't go full warrior is because they know they're going to get annihilated by hybrid comps before they can even get in range to do their damage. Even if warrior could out damage rev or necro in a melee trade which they cant, they will never out damage them in a range trade. Case closed.