Let's talk about design instead of balance!

[Dadnir.5038]

> @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> > @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > > @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> > > 2. Reaper's Shroud (Good)

> >

> > I stoped here.

> >

> > The shroud whether it's DS or RS is bad design. They are defensive stances in nature yet also happen to be the main damage/burst source of the necromancer. That shouldn't be a thing, as a design it is a toxic one. If you want something that's well designed in the game, I'd say that warrior's shield is the best candidate, both _shield stance_ and _shield bash_ are well balanced skills.

>

> Reaper's Shroud is not designed to be a defensive stance, quite the opposite, which makes it work better than Core Shroud.

> However, there will of course always be different preferences in terms of how the game should play!

 

It might not be designed like a defensive stance but since it is the main defensive tool of the reaper it stay a defensive stance. This is an undeniable truth and the whole reason why, like I said it is bad design. It's not a matter of preference, it's just an objective statement that no skill carrying the sustain of a profession should be designed to also carry it's offense.

[KrisHQ.4719]

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> > > @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > > > @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> > > > 2. Reaper's Shroud (Good)

> > >

> > > I stoped here.

> > >

> > > The shroud whether it's DS or RS is bad design. They are defensive stances in nature yet also happen to be the main damage/burst source of the necromancer. That shouldn't be a thing, as a design it is a toxic one. If you want something that's well designed in the game, I'd say that warrior's shield is the best candidate, both _shield stance_ and _shield bash_ are well balanced skills.

> >

> > Reaper's Shroud is not designed to be a defensive stance, quite the opposite, which makes it work better than Core Shroud.

> > However, there will of course always be different preferences in terms of how the game should play!

>

> It might not be designed like a defensive stance but since it is the main defensive tool of the reaper it stay a defensive stance. This is an undeniable truth and the whole reason why, like I said it is bad design. It's not a matter of preference, it's just an objective statement that no skill carrying the sustain of a profession should be designed to also carry it's offense.

 

I don't follow your logic, but feel free to suggest other changes :)

[Revolution.5409]

FB is certainly the example not to be followed for future specializations.

Having a different style of play for your profession is already more than enough reason to buy an expansion, they don't have to be OP.

[coro.3176]

> @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> Most threads on the forum and reddit are about balance and people shouting for nerfs. While this is certainly important, I don't feel it really addresses some of the major problems with GW2's PVP. Therefore, keep in mind that balance (number tweaks) would necessarily have to follow some of the changes discussed here.

>

> So what do I mean by "design"?

> I think it's easiest to illustrate it with examples:

>

> 1. Traps (Bad)

> In general traps are bad design. They have no real counterplay and require no thought or skill to use.

 

Hoooold up. There's nothing wrong with traps in principle. They absolutely can have counterplay. For instance:

* watch where they are placed and don't stand in them

* if caught, use a stun or cc/immob break if applicable and move out of them

* use some other damage mitigating effect

 

In fact, there's a lot more counterplay available for traps compared to many skills and a lot of thought that could go into trap placement since they are stuck in place once used.

 

>Traps could potentially work as a concept, but in GW2 traps are REALLY badly designed.

> Guardian traps deal high amounts of physical damage (some of them), most give some kind of movement-impairing condition and they can be traited to inflict slow as well.

 

I don't really see a problem with these. A trap inflicting damage & some movement condition is pretty much what I expect a trap to do. The extra boons are annoying, but GW2 is full of boon-spam and it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon. Boon-spam is a very Guardian thing to have as well, so it fits the class.

 

 

> Second problem with traps is the way the cooldown is designed. Right now, the cooldown begins when the trap is placed. This promotes a playstyle, where placing the traps on a node is the best option. This reasoning is straight forward. By the time you have to engage in a fight, your traps will already be recharged so you can spam them again. Effectively this means that you often get a double use of your traps. This is ridiculous and promotes stale gameplay where people just stand and wait on a node, you can't really do anything about it.

> A solution would simply be to initiate the cooldown recharge when the trap triggers. However, naturally this leaves a problem: If I wrongly place a trap, how do I "cancel" it?

> A simple solution to this problem would be to give the traps a cancel skill that would remove it but either give it a full or reduced cooldown. This way you actually have to think about your trap placement and when to use them. It would punish the trap-spam we currently see.

>

 

Yeah I don't know why they don't use this model. It'd be way better.

 

>

> 3. Too much spam

> Most bad designs promote spam. The skill-inflation in GW2 is insane. With every expansion classes have gotten even more skills readily at hand.

> Firebrand: 15 extra skills. Holosmith: 5 extra skills. Even elementalist received additional skills.

> This is not necessarily only bad, but it needs to be done in a way where the extra skills come with a cost. For Reaper this is the inability to use utility skills. Imo this is a really good choice and should probably be the norm for all "additional" skillbars. Of course, as I stated in the beginning, this would require number balancing.

> But think about it. Holosmith receives "Photon Forge", an additional skillbar with 5 new and powerful skills. There is even some energy managment connected to it (heat). This is awesome. However, Holosmiths can still easily access all their utility skills. It would have been much better to follow the Reaper-concept, where utility skills are inaccessible in this form. It would heavily enforce thoughtful play and reduce skill-spam. The loss of utilities can be accounted for by e.g. granting a massive barrier, since Reaper's Shroud also has an "extra healthbar" to compensate (as pointed out by a comment). For Firebrand it's the same story. Give the tomes some powerful skills, but give them a drawback as well.

> Right now Tomes are something you flip through, you spam 5-1 and that's it. No drawback, no counterplay.

>

> There are countless other examples one could bring up, but I hope these outline the general intention well enough. Feel free to comment with your suggestions of good and/or bad design, and let me know if you agree or I'm just "a freaking noob that wants DH or Holo nerfs".

>

>

 

Yeah I don't know why they haven't given Holo any real tradeoffs for the ridiculous amount of power it gets from Photon Forge. I'm assuming the devs still think that the overheat mechanic is an actual risk to the player. It 100% is not. Any holo with a room-temperature IQ can easily manage it and basically never overheat. That makes photon forge effectively a powerful free kit - the equivalent of an extra skill slot. It's actually way better than that, since PF is easily the best set of damage + CC skills engi has access to.

 

 

[Dadnir.5038]

> @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> > @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > It might not be designed like a defensive stance but since it is the main defensive tool of the reaper it stay a defensive stance. This is an undeniable truth and the whole reason why, like I said it is bad design. It's not a matter of preference, it's just an objective statement that no skill carrying the sustain of a profession should be designed to also carry it's offense.

>

> I don't follow your logic, but feel free to suggest other changes :)

 

Sure,

Reduce shrouds damages by modifying the current _while in shroud_ traits effects into "For 9 seconds after leaving shroud" traits effects. This will simply push the damage out of the shroud where the player health isn't shielded while still promoting the active use of the shroud. The shroud, by it's nature, is a defensive stance because it shield the character health. A good design don't focus the profession damage into it's defensive stance. A good design sacrifice the defensive stance for offense in a non defensive stance.

 

NB.: It's ridiculous to say that core shroud is more defensive that reaper shroud when there is just a 1% difference in decay and reaper shroud actually have more damage mitigation than core shroud via _infusing terror_.

[Luthan.5236]

I think AoE missing when "blind" is a bad design. Doesn't make sense. :D

[Bazsi.2734]

> @"KrisHQ.4719" said:

> 1. Traps Bad

> In general traps are bad design. They have no real counterplay...

 

LoL what? Every time the enemy has a trapper, you port/leap over choke points on the map and dodge through capture points if you're unsure if they are pretrapped. And that's it, total counterplay. "Follow these 2 steps and never get hit by a trap again! Condirangers hate him!"

By the way I am also pro good things and anti bad things.