Megametzler.5729

> @"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: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"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 kitten 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.... Damn, I can't stop. 1. it is not about dumbing down the game. 2. Nerfing toxic builds in low ranks has zero effect on the higher ranked players. Those builds simply don't work there. 3. We need to stop only regarding the top 5% of the players for balancing. If the other 95% have no fun in PVP, we will keep our population problem. That is a major issue. 4. Stop the chauvinism. 95% are more important than 5%. If any sports loses its playerbase, it loses all relevance. Why should Anet only cater the top 100 players, when they are the only ones left? Why should they invest any balancing effort into those 100 players, when there are 100.000 in PVE?

Anet: *brings in a patch where 90% of adjustments are nerfs to sustain* People on the forum: Oh my gawd, you introduced bunker meta!!!

> @"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.

> @"KrHome.1920" 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. > The builds you mentioned are a result of design decisions, not of balancing. The reason why they work against low skill players is that these players lack the awareness of them. Having the awareness can be called skill and skill should decide the outcome of a fight. > > No balance patch will solve the issue that bronze division is another game than plat division. Classes would require a complete rework to equal that. > > The game went into this direction with the release of the first addon. Before that the overall complexity was that low that design reworks were realistic options. It's too late now and it gets worse with every new addon. That... doesn't really address my point though, does it? Of course lower ranked players play very different playstyles, builds and have very different experiences than higher ranks. Nobody would ever deny that, I hope.

> @"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.

> @"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.

> @"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.

> @"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?

> @"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.

> @"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 piss 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.

> @"mixxed.5862" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"mixxed.5862" said: > > > > @"Ryan.9387" said: > > > > In case you were sleeping renegade might just got deleted. > > > > > > > > Also speed runes nerfed. > > > > > > > > You should be complaining that minion necro and herald escaped this. > > > > > > Yep, I think you're correct. > > > > > > And minionmanacer just got a small fix to the most obnoxious part of it. I don't think it was enough - but it's a start. So really, a pretty good balance patch overall. Although we're still waiting for a REAL balance update. Well, they're probably spending most of that time on trying to figure out new and innovative ways of making the new set of elite specs even more fundamentally broken than the last one ... So that'll be fun! > > > > > > Also, herald being broken is the state of the game for over 6 years now (although occasionally there's something even more broken!). Best to just accept it as is for our mental health's sake. For the moment I'm happy herald will be more broken than renegade, so we won't see as much of that kitten anymore. Yay!? > > > > Just noticed myself: There is a, well, let's call it a tweak, to power herald in the rune. So it is something, I guess. > > Ohh wow, you're right! They nerfed the rune! Them nerfing herald _slightly_, just imagine the possibilities - well, anything is possible now! No, no, that just can't be right ... it must have been an accident. Better give them another low CD block to make up for it. :wink:

> @"mixxed.5862" said: > > @"Ryan.9387" said: > > In case you were sleeping renegade might just got deleted. > > > > Also speed runes nerfed. > > > > You should be complaining that minion necro and herald escaped this. > > Yep, I think you're correct. > > And minionmanacer just got a small fix to the most obnoxious part of it. I don't think it was enough - but it's a start. So really, a pretty good balance patch overall. Although we're still waiting for a REAL balance update. Well, they're probably spending most of that time on trying to figure out new and innovative ways of making the new set of elite specs even more fundamentally broken than the last one ... So that'll be fun! > > Also, herald being broken is the state of the game for over 6 years now (although occasionally there's something even more broken!). Best to just accept it as is for our mental health's sake. For the moment I'm happy herald will be more broken than renegade, so we won't see as much of that kitten anymore. Yay!? Just noticed myself: There is a, well, let's call it a tweak, to power herald in the rune. So it is something, I guess.

It's power herald which gets free rides though. :lol: I guess it wins because good players play it or something along those lines...

> @"Grimjack.8130" said: > wow thx for telling me how bad fire weavers cleanse would be ive never played it before @"Megametzler.5729" A pleasure, but I did not quote you. :smile:

> @"Shao.7236" said: > @"Grimjack.8130" Unless most Weavers I have faced didn't play Smoothering Aura's I don't think they need to touch it with the condition output all around in the game. > > Barrier is however very prominent and does tank a lot of damage for how accessible it is back to back in between mistakes that would normally punish, waiting is not always an option either. > > Does it honestly need 2 charges to begin with? Cuz in my personal experience, it's possible to out damage the skill but at very high damage investment which is fair, given we also have the passive that can kick in in most situations. > > If charges are part of what makes the specialization what it is then sure, 50% barrier deduction would probably be the best action to take so that most punishes can actually matter when they happen.. > > Maybe the problem is also just in Lesser happening too often in fights at 70 seconds as a passive alone, give 90 seconds instead to start with, in between that maybe if not with that icd increase, the lesser should be lesser at it therefor be the one to have 50% barrier reduction first before the actual Stone Resonance takes a hit. Without Smothering Auras, fire Weavers have extremely poor cleanses. They should be no issue at all with just a little counterplay, the low damage of the other traits is not worth it. I would be very surprised if fire Weaver worked without that trait in higher levels. I would prefer the reduction of Lesser Stone Resonance. More active play, and a CD of 50 seconds should be long enough for such a barrier skill. If needed, reduce some more of the dodge spam or the dual skills. I would prefer the dodges, because tghat is just lazy playing. Weaving in as many dual skills as possible should be somehow rewarding, dodge spam should not.

> @"Khalisto.5780" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > The best I can think of is giving water sword 2 the same treatment Mesmer sword 2 got. > > > > > > That skill was actually a problem before and seeing the similarities here with Weaver, they could do the same to lightly tone down the uptime on evade without hurting much else. > > > > > > So really speeding it up. > > > > Lots of people suggested a shorter evade uptime and same CD, so you could still use the water field but needed to actually time the evades. They decided to increase the CD of a weapon skill 2 to 18 seconds... > > > > > @"FrownyClown.8402" said: > > > Too much access to barrier. Too much untellable burning with sunspot and flame expulsion. Giving those an internal cd might help. Weaver has a rough range of 300 so staying outside that range severly reduces burn output. I think its a problem with their defences and not their offense since it can be played around. > > > > Flame expulsion applies 1 single burning stack. Yes, the duration can be extended, but the tell is incredibly obvious. > > Weaver has nothing like a range of 300. Most weapon skills have a range of 130. Primordial stance has a radius of 180. Pyro Vortexes have a radius of 90... > > > > I do agree about some random burning decrease if you add the burning to burst skills. But do we really want condi bursts back? > > Also some barrier and/or projectile denial could be reduced. A solution would be not to force ele into focus anymore. :angry: > > But **only** if all the other good builds get nerfs too. Otherwise it would be extremely unreasonable. > > God no, i want more proctile denials, i want something that would reflect mauls, pets, shiro ports and thieves in general But, good sir! pEoPlE cOuLd JuSt StOp AttAcKiNg AgAiNsT sUcH aN iNsTaNt CaSt!!!111 So easy to counter!

> @"Shao.7236" said: > The best I can think of is giving water sword 2 the same treatment Mesmer sword 2 got. > > That skill was actually a problem before and seeing the similarities here with Weaver, they could do the same to lightly tone down the uptime on evade without hurting much else. > > So really speeding it up. Lots of people suggested a shorter evade uptime and same CD, so you could still use the water field but needed to actually time the evades. They decided to increase the CD of a weapon skill 2 to 18 seconds... > @"FrownyClown.8402" said: > Too much access to barrier. Too much untellable burning with sunspot and flame expulsion. Giving those an internal cd might help. Weaver has a rough range of 300 so staying outside that range severly reduces burn output. I think its a problem with their defences and not their offense since it can be played around. Flame expulsion applies 1 single burning stack. Yes, the duration can be extended, but the tell is incredibly obvious. Weaver has nothing like a range of 300. Most weapon skills have a range of 130. Primordial stance has a radius of 180. Pyro Vortexes have a radius of 90... I do agree about some random burning decrease if you add the burning to burst skills. But do we really want condi bursts back? Also some barrier and/or projectile denial could be reduced. A solution would be not to force ele into focus anymore. :angry: But **only** if all the other good builds get nerfs too. Otherwise it would be extremely unreasonable.

> @"Akilles.4320" said: > > @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > > > The game has always been balanced based the "feedback" coming from the top....if not for that you would not be here as whatever you're playing right now would have been nerfed to the ground a long long time ago, if things would be balanced around anything but the top then : **guardian-necromancer-engineer-ranger** would sit at the bottom of the food chain and not the opposite being true > > > And the feedback always been balanced around top, where it brought us? > You consider this PvP mode successful? > Perhaps is time to change, no? > > People complaining around guardians, necros, engis and rangers are new to the game or completely clueless how to PvP, everyone of those got a counter, Weaver not. > I will not disagree saying Weaver is weak. It is good, situational, but a good side noder. It is in no way opressive though. It has counters. Strong burst and CC spam being two of them. Druid usually wins on side nodes over time due to knockback-immob spam. Revenant and Thief can be very deadly. If the other outliers are adjusted, Weaver needs adjustments too. Less projectile hate, some less random barrier spam. Dodges are not the issue though - they have gotten huge CD increases (ToF is on a 75 seconds CD!). I like that they shiftet the sustain away from those, locking Weaver into the water/earth spam. But **only** if lots of other builds are adjusted too. There is indeed some burning spam. Some is quite sustainable, but the major bursts are detectable (Primordial Stance, Pyro Vortex). What class are you playing? Maybe one can help you?

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" > > @"Sobx.1758" > > they linger if you have drac. echo chosen. And still, my point was just how annoying the 5pip elite facet has become. > > And "low energy costs" doesnt mean you play with glint only. There you dont really have much options to make use of ur energy. > > Both the other Grandmaster traits are literally never used on power Herald... :tongue:

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > Renegade would play with swords then. Also theres no need to nerf shiro anymore. Simply reduce the might of renegade > > > And herald isnt in a good state atm to call for nerfs. > > > > ...how is herald not good atm? :D > > Energy costs too high, might too low, needs to use dmg traitlines for that ,which already got nerfed extremely, extremely easy to counter etc > > btw have you every placed ur herald into the pvp lobby and just activated the protection facet? Herald has incredibly low energy cost. You don't have to keept the Facet activated, you usually use them immediately. They linger for 6 seconds anyways. There are a lot of Heralds in Top100 games.

First rev. Then healwarrior, necro, burn DH, weaver, ranger and holo. Thief and mesmer need to finally get deleted too.

> @"Ovark.2514" said: > Phase Traversal requires LoS and only grants the quickness and unblockable on strike > Song of the Mists no longer deals damage SotM barely does any damage. I think there is significantly more needed. :wink:

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > GLICKO is fine. How else do you explain why it is always the same people in high ranks? > > Glicko is the worst system that could have been chosen for a 5v5 game mode, for every reason. > > People show up in the same relative rankings each season not because Glicko is working, but because the same people cheat each season, same people who get targeted each season, and the same people who only ever play fairly each season. Doesn't mean Glicko is working, doesn't mean there isn't match manipulation. > > > > > Ranked gives me way more even matches than unranked. That is part of the matchmaking algorithm, which allows higher rating deviations between players in unranked. Add in the fact of teamQ, people playing troll builds and learning new ones and you have actually random resulty. I am experiencing way **way** more blow outs in unranked than in ranked. > > I was 1599 rated in ranked this season and r24 or something like that in NA. Then about 80 games in, I pissed off some certain group of players, and now for the last 30 games or so, I've been playing at 1400-1420 range and can barely stay out of gold 2. > > It just depends on how much you are ignored/overlooked or targeted in ranked. > > > > > Usually people are just not as good as they think or their build is terrible. Play for fun, not for rating, and learn from mistakes and losses. You will climb ranks with time. > > (And when tryharding, play anything with revenant. Because, you know, it is a class favoured by good players...) > > That's actually not true, in all honestly. There are walls of social stigma to surprass. Anyone can rise to about 1500 normally or organically. But going past 1500 into 1600 or higher, requires either being ignored completely by everyone in the community or becoming favored by everyone, so throw play doesn't target you. If you've ever given the match manipulators any reason to not like you, you will never see top 100 placement ever again. > > > > > A suggestion: Would it help if the skill rating only showed at the end of the season? Seeing these results seems to lead to a lot of toxicity and frustration, even though the values are - from a GLICKO-point of view - perfectly fine. > > Glicko is botched and so is solo/duo only synch queue throwing that has no administrative action being take against it. > > What would help is if Arenanet did an actual real ban phase. One where accounts were removed permanently for match manipulation. Literally not a single point has to do with GLICKO...? Proper penalties for bad manners, cheating, match manipulation, botting and all that would be great though, yeah.

> @"Kuma.1503" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Stallic.2397" said: > > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > > @"Kachros.4751" said: > > > > > > @"Filip.7463" said: > > > > > > Why would holo and weaver get nerfs? > > > > > > Where did u get info about damage nerf? > > > > > > > > > > (...) Weaver deserves nerf since its a simple build with insane value that doesnt lose any 1v1 right now. (...) > > > > > > > > **Assuming** all the other major outliers are severly nerfed: > > > > > > > > I kind of agree. I still want changes of the fire traitline into not giving this much condi cleanse, or at least not AoE-wide (looking at you, Smothering Auras). It forces eles into focus which in turn leads to the huge projectile denial potential and fire aura spam. Make dagger offhand great again! > > > > > > > > However, I do not think it is high on the priority list and would need some more tweaking of other traitlines. I doubt it will happen. > > > > > > > > Simple adjustments would be reduction in some barrier values and some projectile denial duration. Would hurt and change nothing about the lack of options on ele, but adjust the strengths. > > > > > > > > If revenant does not get major nerfs, druid stays the way it is and all these: No need to change weaver at all. > > > > > > Nerfing smothering auras would be a huge core nerf and take away perhaps the best ligitimate cleanse option they have. If sustain is too strong on tempest and weaver, then nerf those classes. Ex. Barrier or aura spam, etc. > > > > > > Smothering auras and transmuting auras was probably the best thing Anet did for core ele in years. But core doesn't have an overpowered sustain problem and shouldn't get nerfed for it. > > > > > > But I agree, offhand Dagger should definitely be a thing and needs some love > > > > I do not want to see it deleted. But make it more egoistic - stop cleanses for allies. Core ele can not really use that anyways, but it forces tempest into fire (and therefor focus) and weaver some team fight presence. It is basically better cleansing than with water in almost any situation. > > > > The fire aura spam with the cleanses and focus is what once again deleted ele's options. Water is not competitive anymore due to the necessary nerfs to the rest of ele - weaver and tempest both. > > You don't need smothering auras on auramancer tempest. It's nice, make no mistake, but you can have plenty of teamfight presence while running the earth or air traitlines. > > Earth/Water gives you access to elemental shielding. AoE prot is arguably stronger into power heavy compositions. You also gain passive toughness, reduced CD on obsidian flesh and Stone Heart for some personal survivability. > > The benefits of running Air/Water are less immediately obvious. It's a more aggressive take, allowing you to grant allies near-permenant uptime on fury and swiftness. This is team comp specific, but it can make a large difference in certain compositions. Reapers will greatly appreciate both boons, while your guardians will appreciate the swiftness you give them. You can also spam Overload air, which not only does good damage even when running mender's, but it also applies AoE vuln, and allows you to spam out shocking Aura. You can optionally pair this with rune of radiance for an oppressive amount of AoE shocking Aura uptime. You can also consider running this varient if your comp has 2 supports. Especially one who can cover you on cleanse. > > While I agree it can be composition related: Smothering Auras on tempest allows you to take Aura Share in water and even the aura duration rune. This has been the main reason for the obnoxious shocking aura spam. Also enables stability in the tempest traitline, which water tempest cannot take. None of the other builds have been as strong and way more situational. However, tempest is not a big offender right now. It is strong, yes, but I would still like to see this change or some other idea to change the current tempest situation.

> @"Stallic.2397" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Kachros.4751" said: > > > > @"Filip.7463" said: > > > > Why would holo and weaver get nerfs? > > > > Where did u get info about damage nerf? > > > > > > (...) Weaver deserves nerf since its a simple build with insane value that doesnt lose any 1v1 right now. (...) > > > > **Assuming** all the other major outliers are severly nerfed: > > > > I kind of agree. I still want changes of the fire traitline into not giving this much condi cleanse, or at least not AoE-wide (looking at you, Smothering Auras). It forces eles into focus which in turn leads to the huge projectile denial potential and fire aura spam. Make dagger offhand great again! > > > > However, I do not think it is high on the priority list and would need some more tweaking of other traitlines. I doubt it will happen. > > > > Simple adjustments would be reduction in some barrier values and some projectile denial duration. Would hurt and change nothing about the lack of options on ele, but adjust the strengths. > > > > If revenant does not get major nerfs, druid stays the way it is and all these: No need to change weaver at all. > > Nerfing smothering auras would be a huge core nerf and take away perhaps the best ligitimate cleanse option they have. If sustain is too strong on tempest and weaver, then nerf those classes. Ex. Barrier or aura spam, etc. > > Smothering auras and transmuting auras was probably the best thing Anet did for core ele in years. But core doesn't have an overpowered sustain problem and shouldn't get nerfed for it. > > But I agree, offhand Dagger should definitely be a thing and needs some love I do not want to see it deleted. But make it more egoistic - stop cleanses for allies. Core ele can not really use that anyways, but it forces tempest into fire (and therefor focus) and weaver some team fight presence. It is basically better cleansing than with water in almost any situation. The fire aura spam with the cleanses and focus is what once again deleted ele's options. Water is not competitive anymore due to the necessary nerfs to the rest of ele - weaver and tempest both.