Reasons to balance for top Tier only

[Leonidrex.5649]

you balance for both, if you fail you try untill you succeed, if you cant they you should find another job.

[Starbreaker.6507]

> @"Xenon.4537" said:

> "If you can't play correctly, then git gud or leave pvp"

> Okay well... don't be surprised when people leave and the game mode becomes a ghost town lol.

 

Pandering to the lowest common denominator has worked out well so far for the game mode, right?

 

The only reason there's an influx of players now is due to a PvE item, and the overwhelming number of those people couldn't care less about learning the game mode or what it takes to be successful.

 

Much like the daily low tier players.

[Swagg.9236]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

 

* This game's minimap is one of the most egregiously generous info-dumps in videogames. This sort of hand-holding gameplay aspect singlehandedly destroys such a huge amount of otherwise necessary gamesense development, that it becomes very difficult to balance attacks and movement abilities around "being high skill level."

* While most classes are technically "different," they aren't necessarily "unique" in any particular way. This is evidenced in how everyone who plays [Class X] throws a fit when [Class X] receives a nerf to one of its generic means of teleporting or negating enemy damage or effects, but people generally learn to live with raw damage nerfs or let it slide when random things get buffs to baseline damage. The entirety of GW2's gameplay cycle is effectively based around the few, mostly identical skills in each class respectively which allow them to move instantaneously or take actions/move during periods of protracted invulnerability (i.e. blocking, evading, being "invulnerable"). These abilities are so narrow in scope, so generic, so game-definining, yet **so limited in raw execution** that it's an utter brain-melter that anybody associated with GW2's development even dared to think that this game deserved more than 3-4 unique classes. This is how Thief has always been meta, and why everybody screamed bloody murder when Ele focus lost its "hahaha, I can do anything I want for 3 seconds now" button.

* The problem with basing GW2's gameplay cycle around such myopic, auto-pilot abilities is that players *can* technically become good at GW2, but when it comes to two "good" players in GW2 fighting each other, the only reason that anyone loses a fight is when someone makes a mistake. How does one outmaneuver somebody with teleports and a super-helpful minimap which goes so far as to show potential class match-ups at any given location in real time? How does one out-play a player who can't receive damage while attacking? How does one use raw movement to dodge a player who can just teleport to selected targets (sometimes even through terrain)? While there are concrete answers to these questions (playing super passive, just rotating to other locations, using no-teleport spots, etc), most of the replies to the metagame-defining aspects of GW2 generally put all of the game's combat onto predictable rails rather than allowing players to improvise and iterate.

* What this means is that, as a player approaches the "top levels" of GW2 PvP, the skill ceiling clamps down on them very, *very* quickly. Victories and losses often come down to a tally of mistakes made by one side rather than instances of players mechanically outplaying opponents. This game's skill ceiling is suffocating, and therefore, pushing the game to new heights is not the defining factor for wins and losses at the apex of competition. It's not about player expression; it's about patch notes and watching the minimap. That's not fun to grind; that's not fun to watch; it's not fun to play.

 

**tl;dr: Balance all you want to the "top tier" of GW2. You'll see zero changes outside of maybe just culling 80% of the game's skills, gear and weapon sets (which, honestly, isn't really that much of a loss). The problem isn't that the game isn't balanced towards "good players," it's that "being good" in GW2 doesn't mean a lot on the scale of pushing player creativity and raw execution.**

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

I wouldn't worry about this too much.

 

With how unwelcoming Ranked is; especially for new to average players, eventually top players will represent the majority of players playing. At which point balancing will have to center around them, so it'l be all gravy.

 

I don't think it's the best idea though. Top players, players with ~~debatable~~ expertise at playing this game represent an extreme that can perform well in almost every setting because of their ability to adapt and understanding of the game in general.

 

Meanwhile new-average players are much more representative of what is over or under performing. If a player low on the skill-gap suddenly starts playing all godlike, that's an easy tell that what they're playing might be broken. Whereas if that player was already high on the skill-gap, it would be much harder to tell if it was their build/class combination being busted, or if it were just their skill showing through.

 

I like the politician analogy though

[Ovark.2514]

> @"Swagg.9236" said:

> > @"Avatar.3568" said:

> > - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> > this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> > - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> > - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

>

> * This game's minimap is one of the most egregiously generous info-dumps in videogames. This sort of hand-holding gameplay aspect singlehandedly destroys such a huge amount of otherwise necessary gamesense development, that it becomes very difficult to balance attacks and movement abilities around "being high skill level."

> * While most classes are technically "different," they aren't necessarily "unique" in any particular way. This is evidenced in how everyone who plays [Class X] throws a fit when [Class X] receives a nerf to one of its generic means of teleporting or negating enemy damage or effects, but people generally learn to live with raw damage nerfs or let it slide when random things get buffs to baseline damage. The entirety of GW2's gameplay cycle is effectively based around the few, mostly identical skills in each class respectively which allow them to move instantaneously or take actions/move during periods of protracted invulnerability (i.e. blocking, evading, being "invulnerable"). These abilities are so narrow in scope, so generic, so game-definining, yet **so limited in raw execution** that it's an utter brain-melter that anybody associated with GW2's development even dared to think that this game deserved more than 3-4 unique classes. This is how Thief has always been meta, and why everybody screamed bloody murder when Ele focus lost its "hahaha, I can do anything I want for 3 seconds now" button.

> * The problem with basing GW2's gameplay cycle around such myopic, auto-pilot abilities is that players *can* technically become good at GW2, but when it comes to two "good" players in GW2 fighting each other, the only reason that anyone loses a fight is when someone makes a mistake. How does one outmaneuver somebody with teleports and a super-helpful minimap which goes so far as to show potential class match-ups at any given location in real time? How does one out-play a player who can't receive damage while attacking? How does one use raw movement to dodge a player who can just teleport to selected targets (sometimes even through terrain)? While there are concrete answers to these questions (playing super passive, just rotating to other locations, using no-teleport spots, etc), most of the replies to the metagame-defining aspects of GW2 generally put all of the game's combat onto predictable rails rather than allowing players to improvise and iterate.

> * What this means is that, as a player approaches the "top levels" of GW2 PvP, the skill ceiling clamps down on them very, *very* quickly. Victories and losses often come down to a tally of mistakes made by one side rather than instances of players mechanically outplaying opponents. This game's skill ceiling is suffocating, and therefore, pushing the game to new heights is not the defining factor for wins and losses at the apex of competition. It's not about player expression; it's about patch notes and watching the minimap. That's not fun to grind; that's not fun to watch; it's not fun to play.

>

> **tl;dr: Balance all you want to the "top tier" of GW2. You'll see zero changes outside of maybe just culling 80% of the game's skills, gear and weapon sets (which, honestly, isn't really that much of a loss). The problem isn't that the game isn't balanced towards "good players," it's that "being good" in GW2 doesn't mean a lot on the scale of pushing player creativity and raw execution.**

 

Very well spoken. I hadn't really thought about the mini-map that much before and how you COULD have a game without it. If the minimap were disabled in sPvP then how would people who hadn't died much in a map be able to tell if someone was afking in the base? (not a big problem but one that came to mind)

[otto.5684]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

 

What is the group to ur talking about? Like 10 people total? LMAO. Also, there is no “avg” platinum player. You are already on top 10% by skill base in platinum. And needless to say, skill does not equal knowledge. It never is. That is like saying that Tom Brady sets the NFL rules and determine The team game plan. There are people far more knowledge in these areas than he is. Heck, many analyzers and commentators probably understand football better than him.

 

The notion of balancing around top play is correct, however, it is far from the only factor. And clearly don’t do it based on the top 10-15 players only. That is such a small sample that any results would completely skewed.

[DanAlcedo.3281]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> > @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:

> > > @"Avatar.3568" said:

> > > > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > > Balancing around the top percentage would result in removing balance for people around the average, which are a significantly bigger number.

> > > > Just because something works for a top percentage player with 1/10 of the average human reaction time, doesn't mean it works for everyone or even the majority.

> > > > It should be a no-brainer to design a game for as much people as possible, not for a very small minority.

> > >

> > > So you think it's fair to directly unbalance things because the majority of the game is unable to play their chars correctly?

> >

> > Whats more important?

> >

> > 95% of the playerbase having fun who are also the pleople who keep the game alive?

> > OR

> > The 5% of "Top players".

> >

> > Answer? Both.

> >

> > But the 95% having fun MUST come first.

>

> "Player vs. Player in Guild Wars 2 is an exciting game mode that pits you against other players from around the world in the ultimate test of skill." - the first sentence of "new in pvp? Start here"

>

>

> Is there anywhere standing for 95% of the unabled playerbase? No?

 

And what had this todo with anything?

 

My point stands that a game needs to be fun for the majority of the playerbase first before you go the route of hyper balance for the top tier.

 

The people that are below top level are more important then high level players, because without them, the gamemode is dead.

 

Just like a CEO of a big corpuration cant make millions without the 1000 small people doing the work.

 

These "pvp noobs" are what keeps the gamemode running.

 

 

[RedAvenged.5217]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

 

Well according to this logic, you will only listen to a few ppl who plays opinion. I just wanna point out how these ppl don’t represent 100% of what’s happening in the game. If anet balances that way something’s that over perform will maybe be not nerfed just becuz they don’t like it or vise versa something will be nerfed becuz they don’t like it.

It’s just an even less healthy thing, as we want balance across the board just just in 2 direction

[hotte in space.2158]

Balance for top tier only : buff thief ! :'( :'( :'(

 

[Raiden The Beast.3016]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

 

Fully agree ?

[Raiden The Beast.3016]

> @"RedAvenged.5217" said:

> > @"Avatar.3568" said:

> > - git gud. Balance discussions can only work when there players have reached a point when they uses their dodges correctly, don't spam their condi cleanse for every single stack of burn, etc... This are all player based errors what can not be discussed with some kind of "UHHHHH CLASS X Y KILLED ME WITH X Y" while you was doing kitten.

> > this is not Pve, we can't scale the players down because reason 1

> > - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

> > - (edit) there will be always a person that is better than someone else, somethings are rock, paper, Shotgun things, some player skill and mostly not unbalance

>

> Well according to this logic, you will only listen to a few ppl who plays opinion. I just wanna point out how these ppl don’t represent 100% of what’s happening in the game.

 

If anet balances that way something’s that over perform will maybe be not nerfed just becuz it is not op

or vise versa something will be nerfed becuz it is op

 

I like this approach

 

[Revolution.5409]

You can't balance a game based on the opinion of people who don't know how to play or on what players think is "fun", in this way you will only create more problems.

 

[viquing.8254]

> @"Avatar.3568" said:

> - high end top tier players R55, Team USA etc... Have waaaaaay more knowledge than the Avarage Plat player and a hole human brain more knowledge than Pve plebs, so they can make decisions and think about things that some of you never heard about, just like politicians

 

Like sind who want to buff thief while there is 8 thieves over 10 in top 10 ? (seems mobility and rotation is more useful than damage in 5v5.)

Mean they clearly know better how to rotate, have good reflexes etc but sometimes they are biased on their class. I can't count the amount of mesmer is op from vast majority of top streamers while they very rarely play this and are unable to perform with it.

So no even high end top players haven't the absolute balance globality.

 

[hotte in space.2158]

> @"viquing.8254" said:

> Like sind who want to buff thief while there is 8 thieves over 10 in top 10 ? (seems mobility and rotation is more useful than damage in 5v5.)

> Mean they clearly know better how to rotate, have good reflexes etc but sometimes they are biased on their class. I can't count the amount of mesmer is op from vast >majority of top streamers while they very rarely play this and are unable to perform with it.

> So no even high end top players haven't the absolute balance globality.

^True words from a top player^^

According to your recent buff mesmer posts I presume you know what you are talking about ;)

 

 

[Khalisto.5780]

then you'd have some very dominant classes in lower levels and that would lead to new players quitting massively

 

Id like to see the balancing should aim primarily on what's being playing on mAT, if they want to grow their esports scene again.

 

but they also have to adress what's overperforming bracket by bracket to bring new players in

 

I see ppl want to try the game first concern they have is population, second is game balancing.

 

Oh well, we all know how's the game population

 

and balancing, hum, if we take your idea only 50 players will decided about balance, but when this new player asks about balacing he will most likely be answered by gold players, and imagine how game will be in their tier if the game is only balanced in super high tier

 

 

 

 

 

[viquing.8254]

> @"hotte in space.2158" said:

> > @"viquing.8254" said:

> > Like sind who want to buff thief while there is 8 thieves over 10 in top 10 ? (seems mobility and rotation is more useful than damage in 5v5.)

> > Mean they clearly know better how to rotate, have good reflexes etc but sometimes they are biased on their class. I can't count the amount of mesmer is op from vast >majority of top streamers while they very rarely play this and are unable to perform with it.

> > So no even high end top players haven't the absolute balance globality.

> ^True words from a top player^^

> According to your recent buff mesmer posts I presume you know what you are talking about ;)

>

>

 

I'm not a top player, I'm a pleb carried by builds. (And recently I get a lucky strike.)

[hotte in space.2158]

> @"viquing.8254" said:

> I'm not a top player, I'm a pleb carried by builds. (And recently I get a lucky strike.)

Comon dude you´ve been rank 8 a few days ago, this is not that bad. But of course season still lasts long. Anyway good luck to you^^

 

[Twilight Tempest.7584]

If we begin with the presumption that the best players will always be fine, should balance not prioritize a good experience for the majority, you know, so there's actually enough people playing?

 

Keep in mind balance and fun are two separate, though not mutually-exclusive goals. One-shots from stealth may technically be balanced, but aren't fun or healthy for the game mode. Same with immortal bunkers, excessive CC, evades, and condi bursts. All can theoretically be considered balanced, but they are universally unfun to play against.

 

Focus should be on reigning in unfun mechanics, while not deleting entire play styles, and preserving build variety. That's a balancing act in itself.

[Ryan.9387]

Balance around top tier players.

 

Low tier players who play an effective build will gain mmr until they fight players who counter their build with greater skill. They will then level off.

 

When you balance around mid tier, the best players will gravitate towards the best builds and will run rampant. Since the matchmaker wont be able to even out their games, you'll get people who run around with 80-90% win rates who ruin everyones games.

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:

> If we begin with the presumption that the best players will always be fine

This isn't even a presumption.

Unless Arenanet chooses to literally ruin the game for everyone, we can safely say it's a fact.

 

> @"Ryan.9387" said:

> When you balance around mid tier, the best players will gravitate towards the best builds and will run rampant. Since the matchmaker wont be able to even out their games, you'll get people who run around with 80-90% win rates who ruin everyones games.

You are aware this is already happening, right?

 

The constant win-trading with secondary accounts (which **is** happening), along with their assumed higher skill level, is enough for them to stay on top.

There is no reason to give them **another** edge above everyone else by tailoring to game towards them.

 

[Ryan.9387]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:

> > If we begin with the presumption that the best players will always be fine

> This isn't even a presumption.

> Unless Arenanet chooses to literally ruin the game for everyone, we can safely say it's a fact.

>

> > @"Ryan.9387" said:

> > When you balance around mid tier, the best players will gravitate towards the best builds and will run rampant. Since the matchmaker wont be able to even out their games, you'll get people who run around with 80-90% win rates who ruin everyones games.

> You are aware this is already happening, right?

>

> The constant win-trading with secondary accounts (which **is** happening), along with their assumed higher skill level, is enough for them to stay on top.

> There is no reason to give them **another** edge above everyone else by tailoring to game towards them.

>

 

If you balance around top tier you remove their edge. Currently balance opinion at anet is something like "rev isn't op at the top tier because only good players play rev".

[Stand The Wall.6987]

what does it even mean to balance for top players lol? I sorta have half a grasp but not really.

[ArlAlt.1630]

While they should be balancing around top tier play, they should also ensure classes are playable to some extent on all tiers. Meta builds should dominate top tier play, that's why they're Meta.

The progression should look something along the line of pool of 30 builds (just an imaginary number I came up with for cohesion) at Bronze/Silver and reduce diversity towards Meta builds from there and up. This way you ensure that the new player get to play what the class they initially envisioned playing the game with and lets them build up the understanding of why they are transitioning to a META spec as they progress.

Doing the opposite leaves the impression new players are shoehorned into playing just a specific spec instead of experimenting and picking build options that compliment their own playstyle.

 

@"Eurantien.4632" I'd love to hear your stance on this one, since you love throwing the "Top Tier" line in all your posts. Wouldn't you agree this is a healthier approach?

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> what does it even mean to balance for top players lol? I sorta have half a grasp but not really.

 

Top player _usually_ refers to the players with the highest ranking, be it due to win trading, MMR abuse, Meta build abuse, physiological advantage (like better reaction times) or sometimes even actual skill.

Whether people use it to refer to 1%, 5% or even more percentage does not matter though, as they aren't a viable representation of the actual playerbase.

[Leonidrex.5649]

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> what does it even mean to balance for top players lol? I sorta have half a grasp but not really.

 

you create character that is uber hard to play to the point where general population is incapable of even reaching 45% winrate with it, but if piloted near perfectly its overpowered, in that scenarion you can leave it as be, its bad for average joe, really bad for bad timmy, and op for henry the pro.

you can nerf it to the point of unplayability for timmy, make it garbage for joe while making it balanced for henry.

Or you can buff it so its balanced for joe, ok for timmy and utterly broken for henry.

The closes thing I can give you RN would be mesmer RN, its shit for average player, its super shit for bad player but the best player could make it work due to portal.

 

EDIT.

If you play league akali works like this, she was so broken that they had to rip several mechanics from her kit and she remained broken still, all the while having negative winrate due to the skill required to play the champion consistently, she is not something SUPER amazing hard but to actually understand her you gotta play 100hours+ with the champion. Most others play itself.