Ballance patch will anet get it right or not whats your opinion?

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"sniperman.1738" said:

> > @"Vulf.3098" said:

> > They are going to try and nerf Scourge for PvP/WvW which is going to make them completely useless in PvE.

>

> Thats actually not true at all, since PvE and PvP/WvW code is split. Remember PvE and Pvp/WvW have there own Coding sections now so that they no longer effect one or the other so they can make changes accordingly in the game modes they see fit.

 

The problem is they mess with PvE when they mess with PvP and WvW.

Different coding but they still nerfing the PvE ones in the end too which is brahamskritt.

[Sarrs.4831]

Everybody else's build is too strong and mine is too weak. ANet will not buff mine. bad balance

[sniperman.1738]

Simple solution would be no more nerfing, just buff the trait lines and areas in the current professions that fall short of being competitive with the current "Meta ones" and that would solve the issue. Nerfing something doesn't truly fix an issue it only ever causes more, while slowly buffing the weaker ones little by little will eventually get them to the results they want which is less whining.

[Ayakaru.6583]

I have no reason to believe there will be a balance patch to orrow. They come when ready regardless of whatever content is live (or not)

[Blockhead Magee.3092]

They'll tweak something here or there and wvw will still remain incredibly out of balance.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"sniperman.1738" said:

> Simple solution would be no more nerfing, just buff the trait lines and areas in the current professions that fall short of being competitive with the current "Meta ones" and that would solve the issue. Nerfing something doesn't truly fix an issue it only ever causes more, while slowly buffing the weaker ones little by little will eventually get them to the results they want which is less whining.

 

This I can be all for.

[Cynn.1659]

Necros will complain like always

[Charrbeque.8729]

No matter what they do, there's always going to be some players unhappy with the changes. It's impossible to please everybody.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"Cynn.1659" said:

> Necros will complain like always

 

I more hear people complaining about Necros and wanting them nerf for some weird reason.

[Crossaber.8934]

Every class now only has 1 skill, either rock, scissors or cloth, now we are prefectly balanced.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"Wanze.8410" said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > A more interesting discussion question would be: what should ANet use as the baseline for balancing? Some people seem to think that ANet should go entirely by what shows up as "meta" on a benchmark site. Some think it should go by what "casuals" play or need. Should it go by raid meta? or Fractal meta? or PvP meta? Some people think ANet should go strictly by what their data shows is over-used or under-powered. Some say ANet should follow what the strongest critics say (and some want the loudest critics to be heard). Which of those, if any, would make for the best possible playing experience?

>

> I think as soon as there is a meta, its unbalanced by default.

>

>

 

that is what Anet developers think meta means....

[Nuka Cola.8520]

To do proper balance (like what gw1 had. real changes that made big differences) patch you need a balance team that plays the game. That is simply not present in gw2.

[Zaklex.6308]

> @"Markus.9162" said:

> Ben Phongluangtham.1065

> There is no balance patch tomorrow. There is currently a balance patch in the works for mid-season.

>

> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/24679/season-starts-16th-so-when-balance-patch/p1

>

> Nothing more to say.

 

Mid-season could mean anything really, it doesn't necessarily mean right in the middle of the season. Also, balance in any online game is ongoing...it will never be perfect unless they stop adding new skills, conditions, etc., only then could they possibly balance the game, but there will probably still be some outliers.

[Ameepa.6793]

Even if there was only one class, one build, one gear, people would still complain about balance because player skill is one big factor affecting everything and that can never be balanced.

 

Also there's too many people around who think that balance means that they should win 100% instead of 50%.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"Ameepa.6793" said:

> Even if there was only one class, one build, one gear, people would still complain about balance because player skill is one big factor affecting everything and that can never be balanced.

>

> Also there's too many people around who think that balance means that they should win 100% instead of 50%.

 

To be fair it's not really that...

...

...

...it's more that, "My favourite class should be the top class and everything else should be below them."

[Carighan.6758]

Honestly, I think they have too little resources to be able to **do** things about the balance. I picked the "don't know" option as a result, but I don't mean it in a "they're stupid" way, rather a "I don't know what to do either, sorry"-way.

 

GW2 has a few pretty big and deeply seated issues which make balance ~impossible:

 

* Incredible power creep since release permeating everything and invalidating many mechanics.

* One importantly invalidated mechanic is the reliance on a shared condition / boon system which normalized the access and variety of these buffs. Instead they have become normality and 15 million class-specific/-unique buffs and debuffs have been added on top.

* Furthermore, the way evade interacts with combat has forced their hand in decreasing TTL (the wrong fix to this, IMO), resulting in initiative playing a huge part in combat and hence invalidating a whole slew of mechanics based on low-percentage "overall advantages".

* The trait-system is **largely superfluous**. I feel you could flat out **remove** ~50% of the traits with no significant loss to balance or gameplay, and frankly if it's that low-impact, just get rid of it. I'd go one step further and remove the selectable traits from inside each traitline entirely. We pick traitlines, each representing one aspect of the class, and each traitline internally is set up uniquely to facilitate a focus on that aspect. Maybe there is a choice inside it. Maybe it's 4 fixed traits. Maybe it's 5 new skills you get, a whole category, but nothing else. All uniquely balanced for this aspect of your class.

* Stats, Sigils, Runes, Traitlines, Traits, Weapons, Skills... I never thought I'd say this in a MMORPG, but we have too much character customization. I'd rather have 75% less, but the remaining 25% are meaningful **and** valid. Instead of 15 gazillion untaken and unnecessary possible combinations. No one likes a spinach chocolate shrimp mayo smoothie, stop selling it!

* Many many elements have become too spammable over the years. This in turn forced their individual impact down. For a really good example of this, look at Burning. It used to be a high-damage-per-second DoT which stacks in duration instead of count. Dangerous, but you cannot be overloaded on it. Instead of balancing this further and in fact applying this to other conditions, we saw a normalization which frankly should have just removed either Bleeding or Burning.

[Henry.5713]

There should have been the option **No matter what they do, people will still complain.**

[Feanor.2358]

One thing is 100% certain - a lot of players will be unhappy about it.

[Dawdler.8521]

I am sure they will overdo it somewhere. Because if you look at balance history, thats what they *always* do.

 

Its like, the community yell "X on class Y is strong and A on class B is weak, nurf and burf plox! Thats all, the rest is fine.".

 

Anets response: " We have nerfed X, Z, C and V on class Y, also buffed A, E and D on class B. We also deleted U on class O and increased damage by 250% on autoattack K. Enjoy your requested buffs and nerfs."

[Carighan.6758]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> I am sure they will overdo it somewhere. Because if you look at balance history, thats what they *always* do.

 

Curious that you say this, I'd say their #1 problem is that even their most sweeping changes (change to the trait system with the fully specced lines, removal of trait-stats) were too little. A mere drop in an ocean. The game needs far bigger and far more sweeping changes to **enable** the type of miniscule balance changes other MMOs do 5+ years in. Because those got rid of the systemic issues already.

 

Or not. Depends on the game. See WoW changing its spec-system entirely with MoP. That was pretty late in its life, too. Happens. Has to be done. And it's these types of changes GW2 is desperately in need of, as the big issues are all caused by or seated in absolutely crucial issues with the underlying combat system or engine or class design (and in this case I mean the way all classes work, not a specific one).

[Shirlias.8104]

Dude we do have the scourge class and unskilled condition classes.

How could it possibily get better?

 

> Will they remove scourge from SPvP?

They can't, because they can't ban a class from the game.

 

>Will they fix conditions?

They can't, because SPvP team has no power at all, and skills are shared between SPvP, WvW and PvE because stupid reasons like "Eh... we don't want to give players different skills because they will have to learn many of them depends the game more..."

 

Well ofc, it's way better to have a ruined SPvP and WvW instead!

 

> Will the patch be SPvP oriented?

 

Obviously not, so it won't probably do much in terms of balancing the game.

[mauried.5608]

Balancing classes in MMOs is close to an impossible task because you can never please everyone , and in most cases players will argue that the class that I play the most needs buffing and all the other classes that I dont play must be nerfed.

 

[Meridian.9103]

Interesting thread. People complain about balance and people complain about people complaining, and then people complain about that again.

 

On a more serious note: Many people have very different opinions about what "balance" actually means, because we have 3 different major game modes which are all played on vastly different skill levels. But what we don't have is a clue about what Anet themselfs actually think should be understood under "balance" in their game. Before we do not know about such a thing, all such topics are irrelevant because there is no basis to discuss. And hence everyone will be frustrated because his/her view of balance is different from what we see in the game.

[vesica tempestas.1563]

> @"Meridian.9103" said:

> Interesting thread. People complain about balance and people complain about people complaining, and then people complain about that again.

>

> On a more serious note: Many people have very different opinions about what "balance" actually means, because we have 3 different major game modes which are all played on vastly different skill levels. But what we don't have is a clue about what Anet themselfs actually think should be understood under "balance" in their game. Before we do not know about such a thing, all such topics are irrelevant because there is no basis to discuss. And hence everyone will be frustrated because his/her view of balance is different from what we see in the game.

 

If the focus was on the balancing model and not the balance changes themselves you can more effectively debate these problems. As mentioned in the other thread, Daily tiny incremental changes (think skill x by 0.1% a day) is the most effective way to gradually normalize balance over time in a controlled manner. The opposite of this is ineffective slow monolithic changes which will never be fit for purpose.

[Ayakaru.6583]

So.. two pages of chaos and discussion about a balance patch that didn’t come?