Crozame.4098

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > > > Were they? > > > > > > > > > > Burn DH is just over-performing for the general population. > > > > > > > > > > I have not really seen a connection between MATs and seasonal conquest in terms of problematic metas because the majority of players who do seasons do not perform at the winner's level at MATs, and consequently do not tend to use the same strats (nor coordination). > > > > > > > > > > I reckon that there are actually 2 metas, the seasonal conquest general player without coordination, and the MAT coordinated team metas. > > > > > > > > > > For the solo, perhaps DUO player, DH is quite effective. > > > > > > > > > > Guardian is pretty versatile, and if traps are too much, their role can change easily. > > > > > > > > > > Using the MATs for determining the outcome for a seasonal meta is like comparing strategies of the NBA to a pickup basketball game at the local gym. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally agree, MAT and ranked are very different. > > > > > > > > > > The real difference lies within communication factor. > > > > > > Some builds are good in low communication factor ranked solo/duo, then some builds are good in high communication factor MAT teams on voice coms. Believe it or not it has less to do with low/mid/high tier differences in skill, and more to do with the difference in how solo no voice com is played vs. 5 man on voice coms. > > > > > > A couple good examples: > > > > > > * A side node bunker is strong in solo when the teams he is against are not in voice coms and people are not orchestrating immediate +ing to get him off nodes. But a side node bunker can rarely do its job in 5 man organized voice com play because players either ignore him and force him to leave the side node and go to the other two nodes so his team isn't being 5v4d, and when he goes to normal team fights, bunkers deal bad damage and their sustain doesn't count for much. > > > * A Power Herald in solo is mediocre because he rarely has supports that are wise enough to fuel him and players aren't coordinating combat engagements with him. But a Power Herald in organized 5 man voice coms is debatably the strongest class/build in the game. This is mainly because of its ability to frequently shift targets and actually get to the new target very quickly with teleports. With organized communication during targeting shifting/team damage burst, Power Herald secures the mark better than any other class in the game, but this mechanic it possesses is only truly useful when his entire team is in communication with each other. > > > > I said I agree... Whats your point? > > It's just discussion my good bro. > > Not everything in the forum needs to be an argument. Well, have you tried to make sense with ppl who tunnel vision on nodes~ Just passing when you just need a tiny help to avoid death and maybe make a kill~ Many ppl in sPvP hold very strong beliefs even they are silver or gold~

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > Were they? > > > > > > Burn DH is just over-performing for the general population. > > > > > > I have not really seen a connection between MATs and seasonal conquest in terms of problematic metas because the majority of players who do seasons do not perform at the winner's level at MATs, and consequently do not tend to use the same strats (nor coordination). > > > > > > I reckon that there are actually 2 metas, the seasonal conquest general player without coordination, and the MAT coordinated team metas. > > > > > > For the solo, perhaps DUO player, DH is quite effective. > > > > > > Guardian is pretty versatile, and if traps are too much, their role can change easily. > > > > > > Using the MATs for determining the outcome for a seasonal meta is like comparing strategies of the NBA to a pickup basketball game at the local gym. > > > > > > > > > > Totally agree, MAT and ranked are very different. > > > > The real difference lies within communication factor. > > Some builds are good in low communication factor ranked solo/duo, then some builds are good in high communication factor MAT teams on voice coms. Believe it or not it has less to do with low/mid/high tier differences in skill, and more to do with the difference in how solo no voice com is played vs. 5 man on voice coms. > > A couple good examples: > > * A side node bunker is strong in solo when the teams he is against are not in voice coms and people are not orchestrating immediate +ing to get him off nodes. But a side node bunker can rarely do its job in 5 man organized voice com play because players either ignore him and force him to leave the side node and go to the other two nodes so his team isn't being 5v4d, and when he goes to normal team fights, bunkers deal bad damage and their sustain doesn't count for much. > * A Power Herald in solo is mediocre because he rarely has supports that are wise enough to fuel him and players aren't coordinating combat engagements with him. But a Power Herald in organized 5 man voice coms is debatably the strongest class/build in the game. This is mainly because of its ability to frequently shift targets and actually get to the new target very quickly with teleports. With organized communication during targeting shifting/team damage burst, Power Herald secures the mark better than any other class in the game, but this mechanic it possesses is only truly useful when his entire team is in communication with each other. I said I agree... Whats your point?

The pet is indeed very strong, but restricting it to the corresponding XPAN does not fix the problem...

> @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > Were they? > > Burn DH is just over-performing for the general population. > > I have not really seen a connection between MATs and seasonal conquest in terms of problematic metas because the majority of players who do seasons do not perform at the winner's level at MATs, and consequently do not tend to use the same strats (nor coordination). > > I reckon that there are actually 2 metas, the seasonal conquest general player without coordination, and the MAT coordinated team metas. > > For the solo, perhaps DUO player, DH is quite effective. > > Guardian is pretty versatile, and if traps are too much, their role can change easily. > > Using the MATs for determining the outcome for a seasonal meta is like comparing strategies of the NBA to a pickup basketball game at the local gym. > > Totally agree, MAT and ranked are very different.

> @"ollbirtan.2915" said: > nothing confirmed unless you submit report to anet and at least share a screenshot. Proof please. This is ridiculous. This has been raised for a while. For such a huge bug, the devs should at least have a check.

wow, it seems thiefs 1v1 everything, both god of 1v1 and god of rotation~~

> @"Khalisto.5780" said: > i think best way to tell is recording your matches and watching them after, when you carried by emotions more games will look uncarriable. > Thats true and impractible.

> @"snoow.1694" said: > I think we can talk about the first sign of an unwinnable situation when you get +1ed somewhere, survive through kiting, bind them and your team still manages to lose the rest of the map in a 4v3. But then again, every game can be winnable - happens all the time that a team gets a grip halfway through the match in games that most would consider unwinnable I disagree that every game can be winnable. But its off topic. Yes, kiting 1v2 for a long time, yet you team still looses. But this is maybe because the other team also has a very good sidenoder and maybe kiting 1v3 for a long time. And in this case, maybe rotating to TFs might be a better option. Kiting 1v2 and still loosing can also be the fact that the opponent has a supporter (Thanks ANET for ignoring core support guard~) but you do not. In this case, that supporter can very well offset your effort in 1v2ing. IN this case, maybe also do something else.

> @"Avatar.3568" said: > Not Tru, when game ends 250 to 500 its because your team started hard snowballing Thats one possible explanation, but if you are in a team that does not understand regrouping, doesn't this mean its uncarriable? Also snowballing is relatively subjective, and need to be reviewed after the match. But the final score is objective. You say not 250, what about 200 - 500? 100 - 500?

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said: > i don't think people understand what they're saying when they say anet should balance for the top 100 players. if anet did that, the top 100 would create the most borkenested of all builds and not even a full team (if all goldies) could stop them. balance for g3/ p1 and let players own skill take them higher. Also, those builds will be available, op builds are always made public. Then get good and use it too~

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said: > i don't think people understand what they're saying when they say anet should balance for the top 100 players. if anet did that, the top 100 would create the most borkenested of all builds and not even a full team (if all goldies) could stop them. balance for g3/ p1 and let players own skill take them higher. Not top 100, but at least use statistics from at least high p1 or p2 (high g3 or p1 in NA.).

> @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Crozame.4098" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (...) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On another note: should ANET balance's focus on MAT or high level ranked? I think it might be better to balance based on high level ranked. Because the majority of games are ranked games. And in ranked only duo que is allowed. Uncoordinated games are very different from MAT games. Therefore, the meta on the metabattle might be slightly misguilded. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The majority of games are low ranked games. They should not be excluded either, maybe even considered first. When you kitten off your playerbase, nobody will care about the few good players. Saying something goes rampant in lower ranks does not make a build okay, when the people stop playing there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree about the first part, many things stayed untouched and at the same time, there were some poor decisions included. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, you cannot balance a game based on players do not have some level of knowledge. I am not saying 1800+ but p2 should be fine. MAT is just a different story. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I strongly disagree. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you allow all those toxic newbie-farmers to haress lower ranks nobody should be surprised there is a population problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mean, this game is out for 8 years. Of course experince players are better than newbies. If you focus on balancing on lower tiers then the game will be more kitten, personal skill does not matter, and what matters are class and comp. This bad trend has been in place for a while. This is why, when I play a fresh new accout despite winning 1v1 and 1v2 at far, yet I still lost my second placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This game has good pvp system. And if you balance according to gold1-2 players, then skill does not matter, then more and more ppl will quit. I realy dont understand your logic.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never said **only** balance for lower ranks. I said **include every single rating range**. And ATs, if you like. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you ignore the situation in lower ranks, why would anyone be surprised about low population? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lower ranks means : they dont care or they are new or they dont understand the game, or they are just very bad mechaincally for example, click all abilities by mouse. Tell me how to balance base on these players? This will only make the game worse. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet 90% of the players are in those rating ranges. If you have toxic builds which leads to 50% of those to quit the game, nobody will be happy. People already complain about low population, we all - and Anet first - need to start considering why that is. > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you mean by toxic builds? I think there will be more toxic builds if balance based on lower rank,. > > > > > > > > > > All those one-shot builds before February like FA weaver and power mesmer. > > > > > All those stealth-condi builds like condi thief or - currently - burn DH (which is strong even in higher brackets, but way less prevalent). > > > > > All those AI builds like MM necros. > > > > > > > > > > Buffing because of lower ranks might be difficult to do, but nerfing needs to be done. Otherwise it would be like doing tax regulations only for the super rich. Surprise - the people are not happy with it. Or, in our case, we have low population. > > > > > > > > based on my impression, high players do not play those builds. At least not the majority of them, The majority of them play other builds~ Brun DH should be gone in high rating matches. But trapper condi soulb~~ its also cancer~ > > > > > > You are mostly right (burn DH sees some play up into highest ranks), but those are - or have been - haressing lower ranks and were complained about. :smile: Those builds might not be objectively OP and have their hard counters in higher ranked play, but when they make lower ranked people abandon PVP, nobody should be surprised about the low population situation we are having. > > > > You really cant balance based on golds. Because another important part of pvp is map rotation, and know how to kite around. These has nothing to do with balance. > > You can. And it has. > > You should **consider** (not as your only source!) it for reasons mentioned above. I am not going to repeat myself. Just think about where this low population comes from. .... i am pretty confident that you are wrong, but do not want to waste more time on this. ok..Maybe one last note: > You can. And it has. In which patch does dumping down the game acutally benefitted game? The Thief adjustment of angle to chagne the distance of dagger 2; the nerf on portal etc... These dumping down changes do not help the game. Think about 2-3 years ago. How many low effort high reward builds you see? There is no condi druid, condi thief, trapper DH, flamethrower Scrapper. All these retarded builds emerge after the half done patch. Further dump things down, then there is no incentive to get good, because it does not matter, and the pvp will be truely dead. It's already sad to see p1 p2 games, ppl do not know how to rotate, how to kite, and tunnel vision on mid and close....

> @"Shroud.2307" said: > @ those discussing Full Counter- > It's an evade, grants Stability, is unblockable, Dazes, is on a very low cooldown, and deals damage in an area around the Spellbreaker. With traits it has various other effects, but just looking at the baseline it's still pretty frigging strong. Honestly, it should lose the Daze all together as it is already an extremely strong effect. Giving it a little damage back in compensation would be fine. > > Personally I don't have much of a problem with Full Counter. I know how to deal with it, and on Necro even how to make it work against them with Corrupt. But objectively speaking, it is a very low risk/high reward skill that even if in its substantially reduced in strength state, is still very strong. > Removing the Daze entirely wouldn't destroy the skill assuming it isn't accompanied by any other nerfs. The way I see it, removing the Daze would level it out, adding a little damage back would still be at a good balance. Anything further and it would start to become bad. > > Spellbreaker as a whole, and Warrior in general tbh, are a whole other story. It isn't in great shape and could use buffs here and there, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have things that aren't overtuned either. A class/spec can still have overperforming aspects even if much of the class/spec is the opposite. Are you kitten serious? FC Deals DMGGGG, wow that 100 something dmg must be soo high. In many duels, it does not matter whether the opponent triggers all the FC yet war cannot win the matchup.

> @"Bazsi.2734" said: > I was expecting DH to be nerfed in some way, but I'm actually glad that it didn't happen. The problem isn't with DH, it's clearly Rune of the Trapper. CMC please! I still do not understand, after such a long time, ppl still have faith in CMC... CMC might be good at PvP, but how you know that he understand all the classes and can balance properly?

> @"Falan.1839" said: > Yeah, everything fixed. Rev still a premium class with 4 meta builds, resistance rune nerf making condi sider builds more obnoxious than ever, Burn DH untouched except for a bugfix, the META IS FIXED GUYS. > > The bug fix significantly reduces the chance of landing the elite trap? And of course, I still think the patch is really bad, and trapper rune is just ... but after the bug, I see less burn DH in p1-p2 games, but who knows what will happen in the next few weeks.