What kind of mechanics could increase class/build diversity in raids?

[CptAurellian.9537]

To me, it always feels as if Deimos is almost universally hated for the hand kiter role.

[npmis.7860]

Diversity shouldn't be enforced by mechanics, but rather by balancing classes. As @"CptAurellian.9537" said, having a class for only one mechanic is unpopular and that's because it's a bad way to establish or increase the diversity within raid-comps.

 

For your suggestion: All it would do is exclude certain builds from the encounter. And since you obviously want to have your Rev viable: War, Renegade and Nec are probably better for that job. Also it is a group content and dueling a boss, even a mini boss, should not be part of such content.

 

There will always be a best build/comp for a boss, but it can't be the only way to do the boss. \*cough* KC \*cough*

 

 

[Walhalla.5473]

> @"npmis.7860" said:

> Diversity shouldn't be enforced by mechanics, but rather by balancing classes.

 

I would say this is the most important factor of build diversity. Looking at the Snow Crows website we can already see that build diversity is quite high for DPS builds but there is still much to be done for support builds and I would say Anet is on a good way here. Right now they are working to take the last remnants of the mirror comp down. ( for every who doesn't know. Mirror comp was 2 Chronos, 2 Druids, 2 PS Warriors and 4 DPS ( or just 4 Tempests thanks to balance and prejudice ), and it was really bad for the game ) I think that one the next 2 Balance patches will remove the need for 2 chronos and then Anet can work to make them ( and druid and warrior ) not mandatory anymore for the buffs.

 

> @"npmis.7860" said:

> There will always be a best build/comp for a boss, but it can't be the only way to do the boss. \*cough* KC \*cough*

>

 

Tbh KC is a really bad boss, and not just because class stacking is the best way to kill it. And it should never be used as an example of bad build diversity on the whole of raids.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Answer me this, why do they need "build diversity" I mean, really, so what if the best make up is a Druid,Crono, PS Warrior, and 7 max DPS classes. So what if half the classes in the game are not optimal, every MMO is like that with some classes just being better There is no need for diversity really. In fact, having optimal classes makes it easier for people to build those classes and play them, and thus easier for them to get into raids. Less choices means easier choices.

 

That's a truth that most people want to ignore ... and it's important because if we don't need it, what is the compelling reason for Anet to ensure we get it? I can't see one.

[ReaverKane.7598]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> If Anet stayed true to their 'no holy trinity' philosophy, they would have done it.

 

They are actually getting there. The no holy trinity was meant not as not having tanks or healers at all, but that most, if not all classes could conceivably fill any of those roles.

For a while this was almost true. You could tank with a lot of classes, you could DPS with a lot of classes, and you had some pretty good support classes, but you really couldn't heal that much.

Now, with elite specs, we're arguably getting there. The problem is that Arena Net are content with releasing one elite spec every two years, while for this to work, you need at least 3-4 elites per class, probably more, since a some of them have purely damage oriented specializations so far.

What we need is better balance, and **more elites** to diversify the roles, and if done right they can actually even introduce more balance by instead of having to tweak numbers, adding counters to Specializations with other specializations.

 

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > Answer me this, why do they need "build diversity" I mean, really, so what if the best make up is a Druid,Crono, PS Warrior, and 7 max DPS classes. So what if half the classes in the game are not optimal, every MMO is like that with some classes just being better There is no need for diversity really. In fact, having optimal classes makes it easier for people to build those classes and play them, and thus easier for them to get into raids. Less choices means easier choices.

>

> That's a truth that most people want to ignore ... and it's important because if we don't need it, what is the compelling reason for Anet to ensure we get it? I can't see one.

 

Well, it's not really true is it?

I mean you need diversity for actual balance, like i explained earlier. Also diversity makes everything more interesting. If anything, history has taught game developers that lack of diversity leads to stagnation. There's literally no RPG game being released in the last 10 years, with classes (not stuff like the Witcher and Fallout) that doesn't boast much more than 4 classes. Even games like Archeage that aren't supposed to be about classes, in the end **is** and has a ton of them.

[Obtena.7952]

I think that very much depends on what your definition of balance actually is, or more specifically, what Anet's version is. What is clear is that their version is not dominated by a concern about performance equivalence between classes, so the link between balance and diversity doesn't really make much sense.

 

To be completely honest, no I don't think diversity follows balance. I think it's the other way around, because believe it or not, there is a section of the population that don't choose classes based on performance; they choose based on theme. Unless the theme is completely ridiculous, then overall, there is a good portion of people playing all the classes. If you want to choose class based on performance, then you don't really care that much about theme in the first place because it's not your primary factor for choosing the class.

 

I won't argue that there isn't a path to diversity because of Anet dolling out roles to specific classes, but it IS the more complicated and forced route ... they would have done themselves much better to get to diversity to stick with what the game originally sold people on in the first place. In fact, I would argue they were already there ... and then took a step back when they created especs specialized in healing. I can't actually see how making a few specific, optimal healing classes promotes diversity. If you build teams with a core of healing because it's needed for harder encounters, then you simply reinforce an optimal play environment.

[thrag.9740]

Just spit ballin ideas:

-2 bosses at the same time. This one is mostly so that epi is finally removed from the game, and necro can be balanced for real.

-boss where you don't regenerate any endurance, but there are often insta down attacks you cant block but can dodge (quite a few unused team endurance skills).

-a boss that constantly moves away from you. It moves fast enough that 100% swiftness uptime is necessary to keep up, movement skills are necessary to catch back up to it if you fall behind.

-a boss that has very little health, and the majority of the fight is your squad maneuvering on mounts, there is some sort of mini game where by proper positioning of your mounts, you set up traps to hinder the boss's movements, until it finally comes to a halt long enough to burn and kill it.

-a boss where stealth is used in a tactical way as a meta strategy.

-a boss that will one shot you with any of its attacks, but it has no break bar, and is completely susceptible to all cc/conditions such as stun, blind, etc. You know, basically fractal trash mobs.