buff > nerf

[cyberzombie.7348]

One of the underlying issues is there's no set-in-stone benchmark as to how each class or weapon should perform. There are just too many variables between stats, classes, weapon functions, armor, hp, and playstyles to establish.

[Kuma.1503]

> @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > I'd argue that there are more clearly **underperforming** specs right now than there are clearly overperforming specs. Druid, Chrono and Warrior could all use some help. It's true that we could continue to nerf until these classes become playable again (which, I must remind everyone is still power creep) but do we really want every class to feel as clunky and unsatisfying as Druid or Chrono?

> >

> > In this case, I'd say we've reached a point where we can focus on giving out some buffs. See how the meta shifts to accommodate Druid and Chrono, then if any major outliers arise, we can nerf accordingly.

> Over/underperforming compared to what? The very top? You can't do balance if your baseline is constantly shifting; it invites power creep. If you balance against the top, then as soon as you buff a few things, the previous top becomes the middle and it repeats. That's how we got to the current state.

>

 

Looks like we agree on this. You need to balance with a clear goal in mind, that goes without saying, but it seems many would simply like to see the builds they disliked nerfed with no regard for the long term consequences. My goal is simply to encourage others to think about those consequences.

 

> The better approach is to set a metric or example of what power level is considered appropriate for the game; i.e. what has the right level of damage/survival/CC? You'll want at least one example of each. Once you define that, you quantify everything else and compare it to your example. I'd argue that the ideal power level is pre-HoT or even pre-trait-rework. Based on that, we still need nerfs, but they need to be to specific traits/abilities and not across-the-board reductions.

>

 

Pre-HoT days were indeed nice, but as I said, games evolve. In a game like Gw2 where things constantly evolve, and new expansions are released, Devs are posed with a difficult task of giving players something which feels impactful. Something that is worth the purchase. One way to do that is to give the players something which increases their power in a meaninful way. This isn't inherently bad in and of itself, but additional measures must be taken to ensure that the health of the game is not compromised.

 

I'd argue that Anet did not do a good job of taking the appropriate measures. In fact, they did the opposite of what they should have done, often times nerfing core specs in order to bring down Elites. This only widened the gap between Elites and Core over time. This is why I propose Anet begin reworking core traitlines. These need to feel impactful in the similar way that elites feel impactful. Naturally, this will result in certain elites being significantly buffed. An appropriate nerf here and there will ensure that these changes do not cause things to get out of hand.

 

In other words I agree, we will need to nerf more, but nerfs are only one small piece of the puzzle.

 

> It's also fallacious to think that everything can be useful at every role and that every trait or ability will be good. My ideal "good enough" is to revive the original core builds or at least the feel of them, as well as ensuring that each elite spec has a role.

>

 

You're right. That is fallacious. This is a straw man argument though.

[Quadox.7834]

> @"Kuma.1503" said:

> People do realize that an imbalanced amount of buffs OR nerfs can bring about power creep right?

>

> Simplified example. You decide that cleanses are too available. You believe that players should put more thought behind when they cleanse. You nerf cleanses.

> You've just power crept every condition build in the game.

>

> You decide that evades and blocks are too strong. You nerf them. You've just power crept burst oriented builds because they have an easier time baiting out your defensive options.

>

> We've seen it happen. Anet's gamewide nerfs to damage have power crept Necro into unkillable tanks. Renegade's forgettable damage from life siphon looks OP. Burn Guard, which has been nerfed itself, has advanced from a noob killer build, to "new OP must be nerfed asap"

>

> I'd argue that there are more clearly **underperforming** specs right now than there are clearly overperforming specs. Druid, Chrono and Warrior could all use some help. It's true that we could continue to nerf until these classes become playable again (which, I must remind everyone is still power creep) but do we really want every class to feel as clunky and unsatisfying as Druid or Chrono?

>

> In this case, I'd say we've reached a point where we can focus on giving out some buffs. See how the meta shifts to accommodate Druid and Chrono, then if any major outliers arise, we can nerf accordingly.

 

you are wrong, that is not what powercreep means

[xp eke xp.6724]

> @"Quadox.7834" said:

> > @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > People do realize that an imbalanced amount of buffs OR nerfs can bring about power creep right?

> >

> > Simplified example. You decide that cleanses are too available. You believe that players should put more thought behind when they cleanse. You nerf cleanses.

> > You've just power crept every condition build in the game.

> >

> > You decide that evades and blocks are too strong. You nerf them. You've just power crept burst oriented builds because they have an easier time baiting out your defensive options.

> >

> > We've seen it happen. Anet's gamewide nerfs to damage have power crept Necro into unkillable tanks. Renegade's forgettable damage from life siphon looks OP. Burn Guard, which has been nerfed itself, has advanced from a noob killer build, to "new OP must be nerfed asap"

> >

> > I'd argue that there are more clearly **underperforming** specs right now than there are clearly overperforming specs. Druid, Chrono and Warrior could all use some help. It's true that we could continue to nerf until these classes become playable again (which, I must remind everyone is still power creep) but do we really want every class to feel as clunky and unsatisfying as Druid or Chrono?

> >

> > In this case, I'd say we've reached a point where we can focus on giving out some buffs. See how the meta shifts to accommodate Druid and Chrono, then if any major outliers arise, we can nerf accordingly.

>

> you are wrong, that is not what powercreep means

 

If you just say something is wrong, without a normal argue, you dont help him to understand and maybe you feed strawmans or other manipulations.

 

Back to topic, here some basics:

- If you nerf the op things, you buff the rest.

- Nerfing is easyer cause you only need to nerf few things

- Its hard to balance if the biggest issue are the playerskills. Means you have some god tier player and the potatoe, if you balance the way both are on the same skill lvl is pretty hard, outside of lets say by running the game automatical and noone has an option to controll the match.

- There are mechanics that are also harder to balance cause they abuse playershabits like: Bad reaction vs Burst, bad removal management vs condis/cc, Stealthburst vs good ears and more.

- But we also have outside of mechanical issues on players, also mental issues like: Toxity, different understanding of mechanicals, self districtions, experience

- Every good game itself need to be a little unbalanced at all:

- Not everyone wants to play the good stuff but it allways will be a good stuff to play! HF on balance these players...

- We all need to selfreflect, like asking ourselfs what we like about the game and why or why we want that something changes

- Gw2 just begann to balance all modes different: if we look back, every specs was good. just some where better at pvp others at pve or wvw. They just started to work a way to also balance the traitlines inside a gamemode and to be onest, thats like trying to fix the issue between a god and a potatoe. just think about every class that can play a duellist and know add all classes that are bad at it but still want to be played as one.

 

I hope i didnt miss something, just correct me if you want.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

>@"Quadox.7834"

> Snips

> @"xp eke xp.6724" said:

> I hope i didnt miss something, just correct me if you want.

 

I like Extra Credit, and everything he said in the video is 100% correct. But he’s sort using his own terms to define what is really going on.

 

What’s really happening is that games are no different than Complex and Chaotic systems exhibited in Nature. Natural Selection is the same process as Extra Credits “imperfect balance.”

 

In addition to watching that EC video I suggest everyone watch this one too.

 

On a fundamental level, powercreep is an artificial construct...a consequence of trying to balance things forcefully...by upsetting the natural balance that these complex systems naturally procure.

 

 

[Kuma.1503]

> you are wrong, that is not what powercreep means

 

My post was getting long enough without delving into legnthy discussion about the definition of power creep vs reverse power creep. I've already made multiple threads on the topic, so I gave the footnotes version. All power creep is is when developers introduce something stronger into the game causing older options to become he more underpowered.

 

Buffs are the most obvious way that you can cause that to happen, but as I described, nerfs can achieve the same effect.

 

Consider two scenarios. You buff Necro. Suddenly Necro dominates the meta and crowds out other options.

 

Consider another scenario. You nerf the classes which countered Necro. Suddenly necro dominates the meta and crowds out other options.

 

In both scenarios, something was introduced to the game which made Necromancer stronger, either directly or indirectly. A power shift occured, one might say power creeped in a certain direction, up or down, and other options were made underpowered by comparison.

 

Many seem to believe that if you simply avoid buffing anything, power creep will not happen. Attempt to apply that philosophy and you'll create just as many problems as you were trying to avoid.

 

[Quadox.7834]

@"Kuma.1503" powercreep is when the absolute power level in the game creeps up because the devs favor buffing over nerfing (usually related to profit reasons and/or loss aversion).

[Stand The Wall.6987]

this is from Wikipedia:

> power creep

> The gradual unbalancing of a game due to successive releases of new content. The phenomenon may be caused by a number of different factors and, in extreme cases, can be damaging to the longevity of the game in which it takes place. Game expansions are usually stronger than previously existing content, giving consumers an incentive to buy it for competitions against other players or as new challenges for the single-player experience. While the average power level within the game rises, older content falls out of balance and becomes regressively outdated or relatively underpowered, effectively rendering it useless from a competitive or challenge-seeking viewpoint.

 

power creep can also mean individual options within a class, or certain classes being stronger than others. pretty sure there isn't one concrete specific definition, as long as there is buffing going on and that buffing makes something stronger then everything else.

[Kuma.1503]

> @"Quadox.7834" said:

> @"Kuma.1503" powercreep is when the absolute power level in the game creeps up because the devs favor buffing over nerfing (usually related to profit reasons and/or loss aversion).

 

What I just described was reverse power creep, which can cause just as many balancing issues as power creep.

 

It usually occurs as a result of two things.

 

1. A desire to lower the difficulty curve of a game, making it more accessable to newcomers.

2. In a game that suffers from power creep in an attempt to avoid it.

 

Unfortunately, In the latter scenario, Devs often take the easy path when it comes to nerfing, which causes issues.

 

Consider why the game became power crept in the first place. It wasn't simply numbers that crept up. Mechanics were changed. Abilities were reworked. Odds are no small amount of reworks too place to accommodate the new additions into the class's kit. Changes like these usually happen as a result of large expansions or major patches, so a lot of work went into them.

 

When attempting to nerf in order to undo what was done, Devs will typically try to hit numbers, or flat out remove what is considered problematic. Why this causes issues is because the class may have been reworked in such a way that it relied on whatever was just removed or overnerfed (Smiter's Boon'ed). It needed the nerfed ability or trait in order to either function or play fluidly. In other words, when attempting do undo power creep the easy way, you often make classes clunky or cause it not to function as intended.

 

In other cases, the problematic ability or trait is left alone, and the class is nerfed around it, leaving the rest of the kit feeling weak and unsatisfying.

 

I'd argue Scrapper, Druid, and Chrono each suffer from this to a degree.

 

If you want to undo power creep, the easy path of simply refusing to buff will not make the game healthier. You need an equally high-quality patch which addresses the new additions that the class relies on to function. If that new addition is deemed to be problematic, then before nerfing or removing it, the class must be reworked in order to no longer rely on it.

 

In Chrono's case, the equivalent would have been either reworking Chronophantasma and CS, or reworking mesmer skills in such a way that these traits no longer break them. I'm not sure if the latter is possible, so the prior option is most likely the appropriate choice.

 

If you want an example of what reverse power creep looks like, you need only search "World of Warcraft class design". Look at the trends regarding player feedback. It goes beyond loss aversion, even new players coming into the game complain that classes have become clunky, sometimes not functioning as intended because the Devs figured

 

"If adding things into the game causes power creep, then removing things from the game will make the game healthy."

 

If you're curious I can go into detail about which classes suffer from these nerfs the most, and which were made the most clunky as a result (Shadow Priest), but this post is long enough as is.

 

 

[Axl.8924]

> @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > @"Quadox.7834" said:

> > @"Kuma.1503" powercreep is when the absolute power level in the game creeps up because the devs favor buffing over nerfing (usually related to profit reasons and/or loss aversion).

>

> What I just described was reverse power creep, which can cause just as many balancing issues as power creep.

>

> It usually occurs as a result of two things.

>

> 1. A desire to lower the difficulty curve of a game, making it more accessable to newcomers.

> 2. In a game that suffers from power creep in an attempt to avoid it.

>

> Unfortunately, In the latter scenario, Devs often take the easy path when it comes to nerfing, which causes issues.

>

> Consider why the game became power crept in the first place. It wasn't simply numbers that crept up. Mechanics were changed. Abilities were reworked. Odds are no small amount of reworks too place to accommodate the new additions into the class's kit. Changes like these usually happen as a result of large expansions or major patches, so a lot of work went into them.

>

> When attempting to nerf in order to undo what was done, Dev's will typically try to hit numbers, or flat out remove what is considered problematic. Why this causes issues is because the class may have been reworked in such a way that it relied on whatever was just removed or overnerfed (Smiter's Boon'ed). It needed the nerfed ability or trait in order to either function or play fluidly. In other words, when attempting do undo power creep the easy way, you often make classes clunky or cause it not to function as intended.

>

> In other cases, the problematic ability or trait is left alone, and the class is nerfed around it, leaving the rest of the kit feeling weak and unsatisfying.

>

> I'd argue Scrapper, Druid, and Chrono each suffer from this to a degree.

>

> If you want to undo power creep, the easy path of simply refusing to buff will not make the game healthier. You need an equally high-quality patch which addresses the new additions that the class relies on to function. If that new addition is deemed to be problematic, then before nerfing or removing it, the class must be reworked in order to no longer rely on it.

>

> In Chrono's case, the equivalent would have been either reworking Chronophantasma and CS, or reworking mesmer skills in such a way that these traits no longer break them. I'm not sure if the latter is possible, so the prior option is most likely the appropriate choice.

>

> If you want an example of what reverse power creep looks like, you need only search "World of Warcraft class design". Look at the trends regarding player feedback. It goes beyond loss aversion, even new players coming into the game complain that classes have become clunky, sometimes not functioning as intended because the Devs figured

>

> "If adding things into the game causes power creep, then removing things from the game will make the game healthy."

>

> If you're curious I can go into detail about which classes suffer from these nerfs the most, and which were made the most clunky as a result (Shadow Priest), but this post is long enough as is.

>

>

 

This here guys and gals is what I'm talking about, he hit the nail on the head.

 

People Q_Q nerf necro all dmg all fear all life force gen etc.

 

Then necro gets deleted and necro cry we bad because we got deleted from over nerf due to overzealous nerfs.

 

The same happens to mesmers rangers guaranteed even to guardians and thieves. It doesn't matter what class you play, there is always some overzealous person who wants X class to be nerfed into the ground and has some class bias.

 

I don't the main mesmer but doesn't mean I can't sympathize or even respect a class that is hit with the nerf bat.

[Kulvar.1239]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> Buffs are way more hype than nerfs. And I totally agree that match quality would be better if there were less noob trap builds that draw new players in, and then then perform like totally garbaj in PvP. Berserker is a fan favorite archetype, perfect example.

>

> There's a whole ONLY NERFS squad and I get why they have that opinion - because innocent buffs turn into power creep very suddenly.

 

Imagine this...

Next patch : Berzerker Amulet removed in PvP

[Quadox.7834]

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> this is from Wikipedia:

> > power creep

> > The gradual unbalancing of a game due to successive releases of new content. The phenomenon may be caused by a number of different factors and, in extreme cases, can be damaging to the longevity of the game in which it takes place. Game expansions are usually stronger than previously existing content, giving consumers an incentive to buy it for competitions against other players or as new challenges for the single-player experience. While the average power level within the game rises, older content falls out of balance and becomes regressively outdated or relatively underpowered, effectively rendering it useless from a competitive or challenge-seeking viewpoint.

>

> power creep can also mean individual options within a class, or certain classes being stronger than others. pretty sure there isn't one concrete specific definition, as long as there is buffing going on and that buffing makes something stronger then everything else.

 

you linked a definition which agrees with me, was that the point?

[Quadox.7834]

> @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > @"Quadox.7834" said:

> > @"Kuma.1503" powercreep is when the absolute power level in the game creeps up because the devs favor buffing over nerfing (usually related to profit reasons and/or loss aversion).

>

> What I just described was reverse power creep, which can cause just as many balancing issues as power creep.

>

> It usually occurs as a result of two things.

>

> 1. A desire to lower the difficulty curve of a game, making it more accessable to newcomers.

> 2. In a game that suffers from power creep in an attempt to avoid it.

>

> Unfortunately, In the latter scenario, Devs often take the easy path when it comes to nerfing, which causes issues.

>

> Consider why the game became power crept in the first place. It wasn't simply numbers that crept up. Mechanics were changed. Abilities were reworked. Odds are no small amount of reworks too place to accommodate the new additions into the class's kit. Changes like these usually happen as a result of large expansions or major patches, so a lot of work went into them.

>

> When attempting to nerf in order to undo what was done, Devs will typically try to hit numbers, or flat out remove what is considered problematic. Why this causes issues is because the class may have been reworked in such a way that it relied on whatever was just removed or overnerfed (Smiter's Boon'ed). It needed the nerfed ability or trait in order to either function or play fluidly. In other words, when attempting do undo power creep the easy way, you often make classes clunky or cause it not to function as intended.

>

> In other cases, the problematic ability or trait is left alone, and the class is nerfed around it, leaving the rest of the kit feeling weak and unsatisfying.

>

> I'd argue Scrapper, Druid, and Chrono each suffer from this to a degree.

>

> If you want to undo power creep, the easy path of simply refusing to buff will not make the game healthier. You need an equally high-quality patch which addresses the new additions that the class relies on to function. If that new addition is deemed to be problematic, then before nerfing or removing it, the class must be reworked in order to no longer rely on it.

>

> In Chrono's case, the equivalent would have been either reworking Chronophantasma and CS, or reworking mesmer skills in such a way that these traits no longer break them. I'm not sure if the latter is possible, so the prior option is most likely the appropriate choice.

>

> If you want an example of what reverse power creep looks like, you need only search "World of Warcraft class design". Look at the trends regarding player feedback. It goes beyond loss aversion, even new players coming into the game complain that classes have become clunky, sometimes not functioning as intended because the Devs figured

>

> "If adding things into the game causes power creep, then removing things from the game will make the game healthy."

>

> If you're curious I can go into detail about which classes suffer from these nerfs the most, and which were made the most clunky as a result (Shadow Priest), but this post is long enough as is.

>

>

1. so it isn't powercreep (as i said), but "weakness creep".

2. i didn't read the whole thing but it is disingenous to call the recent changes in gw2 "reverse power creep" and then trying to equate it to the problems that power creep has caused in gw2. they have been nerfing things recently because a ton of players have been begging them to, for years years, and because they have finally gotten over their aversion to splitting pvp/pve. did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

[Kuma.1503]

> @"Quadox.7834" said:

 

> 1. so it isn't powercreep (as i said), but "weakness creep".

 

I suppose you can call it that, but you'll more often hear the phenomenon described as "reverse power creep".

 

> 2. i didn't read the whole thing but it is disingenous to call the recent changes in gw2 "reverse power creep" and then trying to equate it to the problems that power creep has caused in gw2. they have been nerfing things recently because a ton of players have been begging them to, for years years, and because they have finally gotten over their aversion to splitting pvp/pve. did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

 

I apologize for the long post but, it's precisely for the purpose of being ingenuous that I go into such detail. Either way, you must have also noticed the aftermath of Anet's recent balancing?

 

Anet nerfed damage across the board --> Necro became unkillable tanks

Anet nerfed stab and stunbreaks across the board --> CC is overbearing

Anet nerfed nearly every ability but left Engi kits alone --> Mortar kit became overbearing

 

Nerfs have consequences, often greater ones than we initially expect. As I said before, my goal is simply to get other players to look past the short term and think about the consequences. We need to make sure we're nerfing the correct things, and we have to open ourselves to the possibility that buffs and/or reworks will also be necessary to ensure that classes remain fluid and functional.

 

I see far too often, players are afraid of so much as mentioning the word "buff" for fear of re-introducing power creep into the game.

 

> did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

 

Again, apologies for the long post, but if you had read it you wouldn't have to ask that.

 

[Stand The Wall.6987]

> @"Quadox.7834" said:

> you linked a definition which agrees with me, was that the point?

 

there was no intent other then to provide a definition.

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

> @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > @"Quadox.7834" said:

>

> > 1. so it isn't powercreep (as i said), but "weakness creep".

>

> I suppose you can call it that, but you'll more often hear the phenomenon described as "reverse power creep".

>

> > 2. i didn't read the whole thing but it is disingenous to call the recent changes in gw2 "reverse power creep" and then trying to equate it to the problems that power creep has caused in gw2. they have been nerfing things recently because a ton of players have been begging them to, for years years, and because they have finally gotten over their aversion to splitting pvp/pve. did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

>

> I apologize for the long post but, it's precisely for the purpose of being ingenuous that I go into such detail. Either way, you must have also noticed the aftermath of Anet's recent balancing?

>

> Anet nerfed damage across the board --> Necro became unkillable tanks

> Anet nerfed stab and stunbreaks across the board --> CC is overbearing

> Anet nerfed nearly every ability but left Engi kits alone --> Mortar kit became overbearing

>

> Nerfs have consequences, often greater ones than we initially expect. As I said before, my goal is simply to get other players to look past the short term and think about the consequences. We need to make sure we're nerfing the correct things, and we have to open ourselves to the possibility that buffs and/or reworks will also be necessary to ensure that classes remain fluid and functional.

>

> I see far too often, players are afraid of so much as mentioning the word "buff" for fear of re-introducing power creep into the game.

>

> > did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

>

> Again, apologies for the long post, but if you had read it you wouldn't have to ask that.

>

Lol.

Necro became unkillable because it wasn't nerfed together with other classes with balance patch as it should.

CC were always a problem but then powercreep boon came around and it was "fixed", it wasn't solved since like beginning of the game.

*clapclapclap* you finally got it?

Let's say:

We have ability X that in core game would get around 100 points.

HoT was released and all e-spec abilities would be around 140-160 points.

Ability X is weak, A-net decides to buff it/rework it and it's around 150 points.

PoF was released and all 2nd gen e-spec abilities are around 190-210 points.

Ability X is weak again, A-net decides to buff it/rework it again and it's around 200 points.

Big Nerf Bat Hit: abilities from HoT and PoF are nerfed. to around 120-150 points.

Ability X was forgotten and wasn't hit by nerfs - meaning it's now "broken and no one knows why".

Do you understand? A lot of things were buffed as well to match-up with powercreeped elite specializations and after some of them were nerfed, the forgotten ones become "strong" out of nowhere.

Reason for that is "buff>nerfs" mentality since HoT release, which now creates so many problems with pin-pointing the really unbalanced stuff after so many stupid unneeded changes.

It's like adding over and over again band-aids to fix a problem for years and then after understanding that it was a mistake, now you're trying to peel off just 2-3 of them from hundreds.

Buffs have consequences as well, we've witnessed how "good and healthy" they were for the game since HoT release and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people were enjoying that, especially those that quit the game.

Game is still in need for nerfs, not buffs. It's very far from needing any kind of buffs.

Reworks are fine and dandy, as long as they're not another version of powercreep to just keep up with other powercreeped things(waving at phantasm rework).

 

[Swagg.9236]

The problem with buffing things in GW2 is that the game is completely dominated by a very narrow selection of surface-level mechanics. Everything overpowered in GW2 is often prompted by the simple press of a button, and the number of mechanics that one generally associates with "being too strong for so little risk" can be listed on a single hand. If you buff things, the only thing that you're going to end up really working toward is the same paradigm that has ruled GW2 for its entire PvP lifespan: remove risk while taking offensive actions; undermine positioning and timing via scripted movement.

 

The only way to make GW2 PvP "better" is to create side-grades, generate roles through class-specific support, and put more emphasis on manual movement options. Those things aren't going to appear if all you do is "buff" things as they are. You're just going to make the game more insufferable than it already is.

[Kuma.1503]

> @"TrollingDemigod.3041" said:

 

> Lol.

> Necro became unkillable because it wasn't nerfed together with other classes with balance patch as it should.

 

Yes, you just restated what I said in a different way

 

> CC were always a problem but then powercreep boon came around and it was "fixed", it wasn't solved since like beginning of the game.

> *clapclapclap* you finally got it?

> Let's say:

> We have ability X that in core game would get around 100 points.

> HoT was released and all e-spec abilities would be around 140-160 points.

> Ability X is weak, A-net decides to buff it/rework it and it's around 150 points.

> PoF was released and all 2nd gen e-spec abilities are around 190-210 points.

> Ability X is weak again, A-net decides to buff it/rework it again and it's around 200 points.

> Big Nerf Bat Hit: abilities from HoT and PoF are nerfed. to around 120-150 points.

> Ability X was forgotten and wasn't hit by nerfs - meaning it's now "broken and no one knows why".

 

> Do you understand? A lot of things were buffed as well to match-up with powercreeped elite specializations and after some of them were nerfed, the forgotten ones become "strong" out of nowhere.

 

I understand how power creep works, and addressed it in my post. Unfortunately what you're describing is an over simplified version of what power creep actually looks like.

 

Quoting myself here:

 

_"Consider why the game became power crept in the first place. It wasn't simply numbers that crept up. Mechanics were changed. Abilities were reworked. Odds are no small amount of reworks too place to accommodate the new additions into the class's kit. Changes like these usually happen as a result of large expansions or major patches, so a lot of work went into them."_

 

If you introduce a mechanic with very strong synergy with the rest of a class's kit. You didn't just buff a skill from 100 points to 200 points.

You've just created a multiplier which buffs every skill that mechanic interacts with.

 

Using Chronophantasma as an example. It gives you 2 phantasms for the price of one. So if Mesmer's phantasms were previously all sitting at 100 points, suddenly they all jump to 200 points (not factoring in the mini daze into the equation for simplicity).

 

If we simply nerf phantasms to rectify this issue, say we nerf Phantams to 50 points from 100. Now with Chronophantasma Phantasms sit at 100 instead of 200. Balanced, yes?

 

Well, as we've seen... No. You've just left phantasms mechanically weak on every build not running Chronophantasma. You've just dealt a hefty blow both Mirage and Core, and you've potentially created two dead traits since the other two cannot compete.

 

Now you introduce continuum split. Another 2x multiplier to Phantasms as well as the rest of the Mesmer's kit. If you simply nerf every ability down to a reasonable number to accomidate that, you're left with a class that is incredibly weak when not in CS. Additionally, You must nerf every phantasm down to 25 points baseline just to get back to 100 under ideal scenarios.

 

If that all sounds a tad bit convoluted, that's because the reality of power creep is almost always more than a simple increase of numbers. Multiple factors are at play, and each must be dealt with.

 

> Buffs have consequences as well, we've witnessed how "good and healthy" they were for the game since HoT release and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people were enjoying that, especially those that quit the game.

 

Every balancing decision has consequences, buffs **and** nerfs. I'm showing the other half of the picture.

 

> Game is still in need for nerfs, not buffs. It's very far from needing any kind of buffs.

 

It is in need of both. Some traits and abilities are left laughably weak, others are too strong. Some don't function as they should, others (Surge of the Mists) Hardly function at all.

 

> Reworks are fine and dandy, as long as they're not another version of powercreep to just keep up with other powercreeped things(waving at phantasm rework).

 

Reworks in this context serve the purpose of removing a class's reliance on whatever power creeped them in the first place. You change the class so that it no longer depends on whatever it is you're nerfing in order to function, then you nerf (or buff) if necessary.

 

 

[Khalisto.5780]

sorry

 

but the current state of the game still needs more nerfs than buffs

 

till everything gets to warrior/SpB ppwer level

[Quadox.7834]

> @"Kuma.1503" said:

> > @"Quadox.7834" said:

>

> > 1. so it isn't powercreep (as i said), but "weakness creep".

>

> I suppose you can call it that, but you'll more often hear the phenomenon described as "reverse power creep".

yes, which is _not_ power creep, which is what my point was from the start -> that you _do not_ get power creep from nerfing things, by definition.

>

> > 2. i didn't read the whole thing but it is disingenous to call the recent changes in gw2 "reverse power creep" and then trying to equate it to the problems that power creep has caused in gw2. they have been nerfing things recently because a ton of players have been begging them to, for years years, and because they have finally gotten over their aversion to splitting pvp/pve. did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

>

> I apologize for the long post but, it's precisely for the purpose of being ingenuous that I go into such detail. Either way, you must have also noticed the aftermath of Anet's recent balancing?

>

> Anet nerfed damage across the board --> Necro became unkillable tanks

> Anet nerfed stab and stunbreaks across the board --> CC is overbearing

> Anet nerfed nearly every ability but left Engi kits alone --> Mortar kit became overbearing

>

> Nerfs have consequences, often greater ones than we initially expect. As I said before, my goal is simply to get other players to look past the short term and think about the consequences. We need to make sure we're nerfing the correct things, and we have to open ourselves to the possibility that buffs and/or reworks will also be necessary to ensure that classes remain fluid and functional.

>

> I see far too often, players are afraid of so much as mentioning the word "buff" for fear of re-introducing power creep into the game.

>

> > did you miss how much stronger every class got after specialization rework, HoT and PoF? apparently so.

>

> Again, apologies for the long post, but if you had read it you wouldn't have to ask that.

>

 

i mean yes it is obvious that we should "make sure to nerf the correct things".