Game balance as a whole is broken.

[Eme.2018]

> @"Tommo Chocolate.5870" said:

> Oh, I see. But neither of those is explicitly pronouncing the gaming term: one is pronouncing the English prefix meta-, and the other is pronouncing the Greek word meta.

Yes, you are correct. The English prefix has got the same pronunciation as META (it is basically the "no accent" way to pronounce the letters in the order that they appear in the word meta). And of course, I made the distinction between the gaming term META and the greek word that means "after".

 

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > > As for all classes performing exactly as well as the others, regardless of the players using them: I want what yer smoken'.

> > >

> > > The goal wasn't to balance them all to the point of perfection, I already covered that in the original post. My intention was to say that things need to be more balanced in the way that things are not too absurdly easy, in both PvP and PvE content. I just want it so that nothing is so far beyond another thing that it's an obvious choice.

> >

> > Problem is that's a REALLY subjective thing to ask for. Frankly, while I stand corrected (I agree that they do consider performance, but it's not the primary balancing factor), I truly believe that balance is irrelevant in this game, because of how it's designed and the (low) threshold of 'winning' in PVE; basically, you can play what you like and be successful. metapushers proved that years ago, playing crap specs and STILL soloing dungeons. The expectation for player skill is REALLY low in this game and so it should be ... that's the market it appeals to. It just so happens that the market it appeals most to isn't so concerned about performance to the level where they actually care about what they need to do to achieve anything but the lowest level of 'winning'. That's actually a really smart business decision ... or a really lucky twist of events. Either way, I'm pretty sure this game would have tanked years ago if it followed a 'standard' MMO model for game design and balancing; those market segments of players already have games that provide that experience to them. GW2 offers something different, and it works.

>

> We all know you can technically do every bit of PvE content with whatever you want, but it won't change the fact there's content where you can get consistently kicked out for using a "weak class".

 

That has nothing to do with balance. I've played balanced games and players STILL demand certain compositions because of how they want to play ... and that's what you see here ... and that's exactly what this game was sold on ... allowing people to play how they want. If a team wants a certain comp, they can demand it. If players that want to play open comps, they can advertise and play that to.

 

Players that want optimized comps (whatever they define that to be) will always demand it; it doesn't even need to be based on performance. I believe that in fact, if the optimized comp is obvious like in the case of performance, then it makes it EASIER for players that don't care about optimization to find groups, not harder. This is because it's way easier to deferentiate between black and white than it is to grey #200 and grey #201 and Com-driven teams will police themselves.

 

You've talked yourself into the trap that if we get balance, there isn't any optimized comps to hit people over the head with ... you couldn't be more wrong.

 

 

[Ephemiel.5694]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > > > As for all classes performing exactly as well as the others, regardless of the players using them: I want what yer smoken'.

> > > >

> > > > The goal wasn't to balance them all to the point of perfection, I already covered that in the original post. My intention was to say that things need to be more balanced in the way that things are not too absurdly easy, in both PvP and PvE content. I just want it so that nothing is so far beyond another thing that it's an obvious choice.

> > >

> > > Problem is that's a REALLY subjective thing to ask for. Frankly, while I stand corrected (I agree that they do consider performance, but it's not the primary balancing factor), I truly believe that balance is irrelevant in this game, because of how it's designed and the (low) threshold of 'winning' in PVE; basically, you can play what you like and be successful. metapushers proved that years ago, playing crap specs and STILL soloing dungeons. The expectation for player skill is REALLY low in this game and so it should be ... that's the market it appeals to. It just so happens that the market it appeals most to isn't so concerned about performance to the level where they actually care about what they need to do to achieve anything but the lowest level of 'winning'. That's actually a really smart business decision ... or a really lucky twist of events. Either way, I'm pretty sure this game would have tanked years ago if it followed a 'standard' MMO model for game design and balancing; those market segments of players already have games that provide that experience to them. GW2 offers something different, and it works.

> >

> > We all know you can technically do every bit of PvE content with whatever you want, but it won't change the fact there's content where you can get consistently kicked out for using a "weak class".

>

> That has nothing to do with balance. I've played balanced games and players STILL demand certain compositions because of how they want to play ... and that's what you see here ... and that's exactly what this game was sold on ... allowing people to play how they want. If a team wants a certain comp, they can demand it. If players that want to play open comps, they can advertise and play that to.

>

> Players that want optimized comps (whatever they define that to be) will always demand it; it doesn't even need to be based on performance. I believe that in fact, if the optimized comp is obvious like in the case of performance, then it makes it EASIER for players that don't care about optimization to find groups, not harder. This is because it's way easier to deferentiate between black and white than it is to grey #200 and grey #201 and Com-driven teams will police themselves.

>

> You've talked yourself into the trap that if we get balance, there isn't any optimized comps to hit people over the head with ... you couldn't be more wrong.

>

>

 

It DOES have to do with balance since the reason why people don't want certain classes is because they're either quite weaker or have no group utility compared to the rest.

 

Btw, NO GAME IS EVER BALANCED, so that little "I've played balanced games" is a huge lie you're making to try to push your point. When the game has decent balance, then, even if there's a meta, other classes can still happily be used. Look at Overwatch's first few seasons compared to the "better balanced" current game. Back then, you could do any comp and there would be no issues, yet this past year, we've only been able to use Dive comps because of how badly they balanced everything in the end.

 

I didn't walk into any trap, YOU walked into the trap of not understanding and trying to use lies to get your point across.

[coro.3176]

So, hypothetically, how much imbalance are you willing to tolerate here?

 

There is an important difference between the top build being 100% effective and the rest being 95% effective

.. compared with the top build being 100% effective and the rest being 50% effective.

 

If one build/style/weapon/whatever does 50kdps and all others do 20kdps, is that okay? If that is the case, then no one (except the really dedicated RP-ers) will play the other specs. It's not just about the hardcore pve raiders. No one wants to be letting down their friends by performing massively worse than what they could be.

 

This is, in fact, what we see in PvP, where the current balance dictates that everyone mostly just plays scourge and mesmer all the time because they are a solid 30-50% more effective than anything else a player could be running.

 

This is boring, and worse, it's wasteful. It throws away most of the skills, most of the professions, most of the traitlines, most of the weapons in the game .. even some entire classes are considered too sub-par to play in some game modes. Why even have those skills/weapons/traits/classes if they're going to be so much worse.

 

I mean, sure, this could be a design goal. If so, it's fundamentally against what the GW name has always stood for. You could absolutely go the way of BDO or B&S or whatever and have ONE TRUE BUILD for each class, and ONE TRUE CLASS for each game mode and just balance around that. I sincerely hope that is not the goal though, because variety is what keeps this game fresh.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > > > > As for all classes performing exactly as well as the others, regardless of the players using them: I want what yer smoken'.

> > > > >

> > > > > The goal wasn't to balance them all to the point of perfection, I already covered that in the original post. My intention was to say that things need to be more balanced in the way that things are not too absurdly easy, in both PvP and PvE content. I just want it so that nothing is so far beyond another thing that it's an obvious choice.

> > > >

> > > > Problem is that's a REALLY subjective thing to ask for. Frankly, while I stand corrected (I agree that they do consider performance, but it's not the primary balancing factor), I truly believe that balance is irrelevant in this game, because of how it's designed and the (low) threshold of 'winning' in PVE; basically, you can play what you like and be successful. metapushers proved that years ago, playing crap specs and STILL soloing dungeons. The expectation for player skill is REALLY low in this game and so it should be ... that's the market it appeals to. It just so happens that the market it appeals most to isn't so concerned about performance to the level where they actually care about what they need to do to achieve anything but the lowest level of 'winning'. That's actually a really smart business decision ... or a really lucky twist of events. Either way, I'm pretty sure this game would have tanked years ago if it followed a 'standard' MMO model for game design and balancing; those market segments of players already have games that provide that experience to them. GW2 offers something different, and it works.

> > >

> > > We all know you can technically do every bit of PvE content with whatever you want, but it won't change the fact there's content where you can get consistently kicked out for using a "weak class".

> >

> > That has nothing to do with balance. I've played balanced games and players STILL demand certain compositions because of how they want to play ... and that's what you see here ... and that's exactly what this game was sold on ... allowing people to play how they want. If a team wants a certain comp, they can demand it. If players that want to play open comps, they can advertise and play that to.

> >

> > Players that want optimized comps (whatever they define that to be) will always demand it; it doesn't even need to be based on performance. I believe that in fact, if the optimized comp is obvious like in the case of performance, then it makes it EASIER for players that don't care about optimization to find groups, not harder. This is because it's way easier to deferentiate between black and white than it is to grey #200 and grey #201 and Com-driven teams will police themselves.

> >

> > You've talked yourself into the trap that if we get balance, there isn't any optimized comps to hit people over the head with ... you couldn't be more wrong.

> >

> >

>

> It DOES have to do with balance since the reason why people don't want certain classes is because they're either quite weaker or have no group utility compared to the rest.

>

> Btw, NO GAME IS EVER BALANCED, so that little "I've played balanced games" is a huge lie you're making to try to push your point. When the game has decent balance, then, even if there's a meta, other classes can still happily be used. Look at Overwatch's first few seasons compared to the "better balanced" current game. Back then, you could do any comp and there would be no issues, yet this past year, we've only been able to use Dive comps because of how badly they balanced everything in the end.

>

> I didn't walk into any trap, YOU walked into the trap of not understanding and trying to use lies to get your point across.

 

Nope, that's completely a player perception problem ... performance balanced games have the same issue. I've never had a problem getting a team in this game ... it's not because of anything to do with balance.

 

 

[Ephemiel.5694]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > > > > > > @"Diak Atoli.2085" said:

> > > > > > > As for all classes performing exactly as well as the others, regardless of the players using them: I want what yer smoken'.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The goal wasn't to balance them all to the point of perfection, I already covered that in the original post. My intention was to say that things need to be more balanced in the way that things are not too absurdly easy, in both PvP and PvE content. I just want it so that nothing is so far beyond another thing that it's an obvious choice.

> > > > >

> > > > > Problem is that's a REALLY subjective thing to ask for. Frankly, while I stand corrected (I agree that they do consider performance, but it's not the primary balancing factor), I truly believe that balance is irrelevant in this game, because of how it's designed and the (low) threshold of 'winning' in PVE; basically, you can play what you like and be successful. metapushers proved that years ago, playing crap specs and STILL soloing dungeons. The expectation for player skill is REALLY low in this game and so it should be ... that's the market it appeals to. It just so happens that the market it appeals most to isn't so concerned about performance to the level where they actually care about what they need to do to achieve anything but the lowest level of 'winning'. That's actually a really smart business decision ... or a really lucky twist of events. Either way, I'm pretty sure this game would have tanked years ago if it followed a 'standard' MMO model for game design and balancing; those market segments of players already have games that provide that experience to them. GW2 offers something different, and it works.

> > > >

> > > > We all know you can technically do every bit of PvE content with whatever you want, but it won't change the fact there's content where you can get consistently kicked out for using a "weak class".

> > >

> > > That has nothing to do with balance. I've played balanced games and players STILL demand certain compositions because of how they want to play ... and that's what you see here ... and that's exactly what this game was sold on ... allowing people to play how they want. If a team wants a certain comp, they can demand it. If players that want to play open comps, they can advertise and play that to.

> > >

> > > Players that want optimized comps (whatever they define that to be) will always demand it; it doesn't even need to be based on performance. I believe that in fact, if the optimized comp is obvious like in the case of performance, then it makes it EASIER for players that don't care about optimization to find groups, not harder. This is because it's way easier to deferentiate between black and white than it is to grey #200 and grey #201 and Com-driven teams will police themselves.

> > >

> > > You've talked yourself into the trap that if we get balance, there isn't any optimized comps to hit people over the head with ... you couldn't be more wrong.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > It DOES have to do with balance since the reason why people don't want certain classes is because they're either quite weaker or have no group utility compared to the rest.

> >

> > Btw, NO GAME IS EVER BALANCED, so that little "I've played balanced games" is a huge lie you're making to try to push your point. When the game has decent balance, then, even if there's a meta, other classes can still happily be used. Look at Overwatch's first few seasons compared to the "better balanced" current game. Back then, you could do any comp and there would be no issues, yet this past year, we've only been able to use Dive comps because of how badly they balanced everything in the end.

> >

> > I didn't walk into any trap, YOU walked into the trap of not understanding and trying to use lies to get your point across.

>

> Nope, that's completely a player perception problem ... performance balanced games have the same issue. I've never had a problem getting a team in this game ... it's not because of anything to do with balance.

 

Ah, so Necromancer being a laughing stock for years was "player perception" and they were actually fine, same with Rangers and currently same with Revenant and their glorious bugs. Elementalist being at the top of the DPS charts for years was also "player perception", my bad.

[Obtena.7952]

Yup, it is your bad because a lack of balance doesn't prevent you from playing the class you want with the builds you want. You just need to find people who think the same way and team with them ... just like people who want to play optimized comps do. Being rejected from a team isn't a balance issue, it's a player comfort level issue. 5 years ago you would be hard pressed to get a PUG dungeon team with a necro ... now, you can take that SAME build and join any dungeon PUG you want, even though we have the same level of balance performance we did 5 years ago. This is NOT a balance problem.

 

You're trying to force your desires for how to play on others because you want them to accept you ... then you complain when they use that same desire to reject you. That makes no sense. If you want to play _a whatever_, you better find groups that are willing to let you play _a whatever_ with them. The sad part is that those groups exist ... because LOTS of people want to play _a whatever._ You just have to go find them.

 

 

[coro.3176]

Look. If class A does 50k dps and class B does 10kdps, and the objective is to deal enough damage in the shortest amount of time, then class A is 5x better than class B at that task.

 

That really is a balance issue. It is a quantifiable, objective balance issue.

 

The fact that you *can* complete a fractal or raid or whatever on an underperforming build is no more relevant than the fact that you *can* complete a Formula 1 race on a bicycle.

 

The fact that you *can* attempt to compete in a PvP match with an undeperforming build is no more relevant than the fact that you *can* compete in heavyweight boxing match when you are a featherweight.

 

If you have some classes/builds/weapons/traitlines/etc that are F1 cars and Heavyweights and others that are Bicycles and Featherweights, your game is UNBALANCED. That's a bad thing.

 

 

If you insist on keeping this imbalance (for whatever inexplicable reason), the least you could do is have different divisions that respect this state of the game: eg. PvP ranked divisions allowing only core builds, or fractals/raids with nerfed bosses but only open to classes that do lower dps.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"coro.3176" said:

> Look. If class A does 50k dps and class B does 10kdps, and the objective is to deal enough damage in the shortest amount of time, then class A is 5x better than class B at that task.

>

> That really is a balance issue. It is a quantifiable, objective balance issue.

 

Sure, but that's not a relevant PVE objective in this game for a single player in the first place, so the issue of DPS inbalance based on this concocted objective is completely self-serving and fabricated. I can't offhand think of a SINGLE time in this game I had to beat a DPS timer to win.

 

Even if there are a handful of instances where there is some kind of timer for DPS to win ... there are ways for a single player (no matter how bad their damage is) to win those scenarios.

 

If players, as single individuals, were encountering 'rage timers' in PVE, you might have a point. The fact is that Anet has designed this game with very low 'success' thresholds for PVE content (especially for single player stuff) in this game. They know if they were to stray from that, they would lose their market because their whole market is the casual player.

 

Different divisions to respect competitive aspects of play? That's got some reason to it and I wouldn't object. Personally, I can only think that unless Anet completely revamps PVP to something like what SWTOR did for it's classes in PVP (which it's too late to do), the game simply isn't designed for balance there either. I have yet to see a game studio provide balanced class families with significant diversity to satisfy a wide range of players; it is simply too subjective and too fine a point to attempt to get to and stick with.

[coro.3176]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"coro.3176" said:

> > Look. If class A does 50k dps and class B does 10kdps, and the objective is to deal enough damage in the shortest amount of time, then class A is 5x better than class B at that task.

> >

> > That really is a balance issue. It is a quantifiable, objective balance issue.

>

> Sure, but that's not a relevant PVE objective in this game for a single player in the first place, so the issue of DPS inbalance based on this concocted objective is completely self-serving and fabricated. I can't offhand think of a SINGLE time in this game I had to beat a DPS timer to win.

>

> Even if there are a handful of instances where there is some kind of timer for DPS to win ... there are ways for a single player (no matter how bad their damage is) to win those scenarios.

 

That's true. In higher-level pve, it is certainly a concern though. I just mean that overall, PvE is about dealing damage. Those that deal more damage are simply doing pve better and, in effect, "carrying" those that deal less. I see no reason why some classes/builds/weapons/traits/etc. should be privileged over others in that respect.

 

>

> If players, as single individuals, were encountering 'rage timers' in PVE, you might have a point. The fact is that Anet has designed this game with very low 'success' thresholds for PVE content (especially for single player stuff) in this game. They know if they were to stray from that, they would lose their market because their whole market is the casual player.

>

> Different divisions to respect competitive aspects of play? That's got some reason to it and I wouldn't object. Personally, I can only think that unless Anet completely revamps PVP to something like what SWTOR did for it's classes in PVP (which it's too late to do), the game simply isn't designed for balance there either. I have yet to see a game studio provide balanced class families with significant diversity to satisfy a wide range of players; it is simply too subjective and too fine a point to attempt to get to and stick with.

 

That balance *did* nearly exist in this game though (for pvp). Mid-2015, you had a few builds that were slightly better than others (maybe 10% at most) but overall, there was a very wide range of viable classes and builds. The game was designed for balance that way, and it seemed the devs did care. Then the expansion happened and it became suspiciously buy-to-win. Then the next expansion happened and it became suspiciously-buy-to-win again.. both times with a narrow field of meta builds that were a solid 50% or more better than every other option.

[Obtena.7952]

The only concern at higher level content is that players find groups with others that share the same ideas about how to play ... meta players did, now it's time for non-meta players to do the same. That is not a problem with the game; that's a player problem. If you don't see a reason why there is damage dealing disparity, then I can only think it's because you simply don't want to acknowledge the reasons it could be. There are many and they span different categories. One reason for example, it simply could be the fact they don't need to do it; honestly, they don't. This game has persisted and is even still being developed for 6 years without PVE performance balance ... so what do they get if they do it? What is the return on that effort? Anyone that unbalanced PVE performance bothers THAT much has already left .. the players that are here now don't care enough to leave.

 

IF that balance did exist at some earlier point in time ( I wouldn't know about PVP balance), then I can only suspect that with the massive addition of all the new especs and weapons and skills ... it's become an insurmountable task to maintain it if it no longer exists now.

[ReaverKane.7598]

The reason for the term "meta" is applied to stuff that happens "beyond" the scope of something, so a movie reference is meta when it's beyond the 4th wall or self-referencing, meta-gaming (as in builds and balance, and whatever) is the part of the gaming activity that is done outside the actual gaming world (researching builds, theorycrafting, etc). It's not much about going beyond options, but something that is "metaphysical" within the medium.

 

"Meta build" is the term used for a build that is deemed the theoretical best for a specific goal, and that evolves with and from the meta-game. Also, i'd like to remind you that there's more than one meta-build, since there's a number of activities within the game. Sadly the tying of elite specializations to expansions means that we don't have enough elites for all classes to have enough variation within their options for having several meta-options per game type.

Usually you have 1, 2 at most meta builds per elite, and that's in the best cases.

The lack of variability and the slow churning of the balance team is the only reason that there's poor balance, it has little to do with meta-builds.

Also, the dreaded "power treadmill" is just player perception most of the times. And you'll always have better, stronger and more efficient builds as time goes.

Problem with GW2 is that instead of maintaining a power level throughout, Arena Net regularly oversteps the more recent elites to sell more, which tied to their inability to achieve balance in a timely fashion just breaks the game constantly.

 

And then there's the problem of Core builds, core builds were no where near balanced when they released elite specs, and the only thing that new elites do is simply exaggerate the discrepancies.

 

The game needs a revision of core builds, which should be made as proper Specializations, on par with Elites, selling point or no. Then they need to revise a ton of mechanics, namely epidemic, shades, stealth (maybe something like camouflage in League would work wonders in gw2), Revenant as a whole needs a lot of love, etc.

When that's done, then maybe we'll have some decent balance.

The problem is, at one patch every three months, we'll all be living in retirement homes by the time it gets done, because in, what? 5 patches from now? That's the window for the next expansion, and another set of elites will be brought in to snowball and compound the issue.

 

It's all down to the slow balance patches, nothing else.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> It's all down to the slow balance patches, nothing else.

 

That is a very good observation ... the 'amount and frequency' of balance patches simply can't keep up with the task, especially as more skills/weapons/elite specs get added to the game. People need to come to this realization REALLY fast. What you got is probably really close to what your going to be for a long time. Performance inbalance has been here since day 1 ... and it's here to stay.

 

[Allarius.5670]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

Some of us always have our heads in the clouds, focus too much on a fictional could be, and imagine a better, but non-existent, place. I am pretty sure I do this constantly when thinking about this game and how I would like it to change. The frank insight you have provided in this thread is refreshing and enormously helpful. I feel brought back to reality. Thank you for this.

[serialkicker.5274]

I'm not saying Anet couldn't do better job with balancing, but big part of the issue is community and will always be. There are too many players who think the only way to play the game is with meta builds. Some even think if you don't have meta, then you are inefficient. And some think if they have meta build, they are automatically good players.

How many people you think come up with their own builds for raids for example? Or fractals?

Unless you make all classes identical, there will always be class or build that will be meta and people will demand that in their parties, even if others builds can do the job as well, maybe takes just few moments longer to kill.

[coro.3176]

> @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> I'm not saying Anet couldn't do better job with balancing, but big part of the issue is community and will always be. There are too many players who think the only way to play the game is with meta builds. Some even think if you don't have meta, then you are inefficient. And some think if they have meta build, they are automatically good players.

> How many people you think come up with their own builds for raids for example? Or fractals?

> Unless you make all classes identical, there will always be class or build that will be meta and people will demand that in their parties, even if others builds can do the job as well, maybe takes just few moments longer to kill.

 

Sort of.. If that meta build is only 5% better than everything else, it's not a problem. If that meta build is 50% better .. big problem. That's not just a few seconds off a fractal or raid. It's minutes. That's not a slight advantage in PvP, that's guaranteed victory.

 

Same problem if the off-meta builds are 5% worse vs 50% worse.

 

 

[Cerioth.7062]

> @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > @"Eme.2018" said:

> > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > Whoa, whoa, slow down, you acting like everyone who follows the META has some psychological problem or inferiority syndrome but that's obviously far from the truth.

>

> Look, if you are playing a game, and you go well out of you way to optimize yourself to be as effective as possible, your own enjoyment is bound to suffer. Either one does not care because the concept of classes, builds, balance, etc. does not interest them, and they only see it as an unfortunate necessity to a game they could otherwise play even without classes, or, you are not making your choices based on what interests you in favor of what makes you perform well. However you look at it, at the end of the day, this thought-process hurts your own enjoyment, the enjoyment of others, and video game going forward. If you ask me, it sounds like a psychological problem enforced by the community's standards, and that, to "do well" in, you must prove yourself competent by playing the same way everyone else does.

 

This is false. You cannot make claims like this for other people. Sure it might hurt YOUR enjoyment and the enjoyment of some people but not everyone's. Some of us multi-class and love optimization. It takes effort to actually find the most effectvive/optimal build for various situations and that road there can be very fun - theorycrafting and build testing applies to META same as it does everywhere else. META wont be automatically figured out, people put in effort to see what works the best.

 

Some of us, like myself, enjoy playing both META builds and off-META builds. It does not taake my enjoyment away at all, in fact it increases the diversity of the builds I can play and I can find something fun in all of them! If I am in a mood for fast and efficient raid/fractal clears I'll be using meta builds, if I want to excel well in ranked PVP I will go for the most effective builds that work for that season, if I want to play organized WvW I will go for what my commander prefers etc. This does not kill my enjoyment in any sort of way. Similarly I can mess around in open world with various fun builds, go have fun or try something new in more relaxed fractal/raid groups, use a troll build in unranked PVP etc...

[DanAlcedo.3281]

M.E.T.A : Most Effectiv Tactic Available.

The important part here is the word Effectiv which depends on the Skill Level of the Player.

A Noob is not "most effectiv" on a Pro build. While a Pro is not "most effectiv" on a noob build.

 

In real life the "Meta" for getting Nails into a wall is the Hammer.

Is it the Most effetiv Tactic?

 

For the Normal Person yes.

But if you work at a job where you have to put alot of Nails into a Wall each day then a "Nail Gun" is most effectiv.

 

The Meta Builds are Builds that work "the most effectiv" for the avarage Player. [Hammer]

People who want speedruns aka Pro Guilds have there own special Builds. [Nail Gun]

 

People who have problems with the Meta often want to use builds that are the equivalent of trying to get a Nail into the wall with a Rock.

Sure , it works but it takes more time , looks bad and you can hurt yourself easely.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Undead Unicorn.1238]

> @"coro.3176" said:

> So, hypothetically, how much imbalance are you willing to tolerate here?

>

> There is an important difference between the top build being 100% effective and the rest being 95% effective

> .. compared with the top build being 100% effective and the rest being 50% effective.

>

> If one build/style/weapon/whatever does 50kdps and all others do 20kdps, is that okay? If that is the case, then no one (except the really dedicated RP-ers) will play the other specs. It's not just about the hardcore pve raiders. No one wants to be letting down their friends by performing massively worse than what they could be.

>

> This is, in fact, what we see in PvP, where the current balance dictates that everyone mostly just plays scourge and mesmer all the time because they are a solid 30-50% more effective than anything else a player could be running.

>

> This is boring, and worse, it's wasteful. It throws away most of the skills, most of the professions, most of the traitlines, most of the weapons in the game .. even some entire classes are considered too sub-par to play in some game modes. Why even have those skills/weapons/traits/classes if they're going to be so much worse.

>

> I mean, sure, this could be a design goal. If so, it's fundamentally against what the GW name has always stood for. You could absolutely go the way of BDO or B&S or whatever and have ONE TRUE BUILD for each class, and ONE TRUE CLASS for each game mode and just balance around that. I sincerely hope that is not the goal though, because variety is what keeps this game fresh.

 

You are exactly right, and I whole-heartedly agree. This was my point from the very beginning. What's the point of a game about choices, when your only choice is to play the most powerful thing, simply because it increases your chances of success -especially over other players- to the point of making content trivial? I cannot, for the life of me, understand why people love this idea of making games as easy as possible, thus diminishing challenge and fun for both themselves and everyone else, that, to take on fairly, must play the same or similarly meta builds/classes.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

> @"Ephemiel.5694" said:

> The biggest problem is simple: Anet simply cannot balance their game correctly.

 

This. This. This.

The BIGGEST threat to this game was ALWAYS going to be Anet. Not some new amazing MMO but Anet because as we have all seen time and time again, when it comes to balance. They are either insanely bias or insanely clueless as to what balance is. So many changes that weren't needed. So many changes that were needed but not made. Then they went the P2Win route with the expansions. Something i am pretty sure they said wouldn't happen.

 

The problem is, this wont change. It can't change. Anet are set in their ways and it pays.

 

 

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

> @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:

> M.E.T.A : Most Effectiv Tactic Available.

 

Actually, a reference to the "meta-game", as in the game about the game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

 

That is, the "meta-game builds" are the builds that use knowledge outside the game itself to achieve a specific goal. (Typically, maximum damage or support output.)

 

> The Meta Builds are Builds that work "the most effectiv" for the avarage Player. [Hammer]

> People who want speedruns aka Pro Guilds have there own special Builds. [Nail Gun]

 

I would strongly disagree with this, at least for the meta raid builds: they are designed specifically to achieve maximum damage output, and assume fairly close to perfect execution *and* a very specific support environment including things like constant quickness uptime, might stacks, etc.

 

They are not optimized for the average player, they are optimized to be as mathematically powerful as possible, mostly disregarding human limits. A great many players would significantly benefit from playing builds with more forgiving rotation/priority lists, since human error is far and away the biggest cause of damage output variability in MMOs, pretty much across the board.

[DanAlcedo.3281]

> @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:

> > M.E.T.A : Most Effectiv Tactic Available.

>

> Actually, a reference to the "meta-game", as in the game about the game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

>

> That is, the "meta-game builds" are the builds that use knowledge outside the game itself to achieve a specific goal. (Typically, maximum damage or support output.)

>

> > The Meta Builds are Builds that work "the most effectiv" for the avarage Player. [Hammer]

> > People who want speedruns aka Pro Guilds have there own special Builds. [Nail Gun]

>

> I would strongly disagree with this, at least for the meta raid builds: they are designed specifically to achieve maximum damage output, and assume fairly close to perfect execution *and* a very specific support environment including things like constant quickness uptime, might stacks, etc.

>

> They are not optimized for the average player, they are optimized to be as mathematically powerful as possible, mostly disregarding human limits. A great many players would significantly benefit from playing builds with more forgiving rotation/priority lists, since human error is far and away the biggest cause of damage output variability in MMOs, pretty much across the board.

 

The Problem i have here is this:

Are the "Meta Builds" that 80% of people(the average player) use and say that these ARE the meta build the absolute best builds around?

I would say no.

 

Are the best guilds actually using the "Meta" Builds?

 

Is a Meta Build the 100% best build possible and only 0.001% of player have the skill/knowledge to use it aka The build is undepended on player skill level or do we include player skill level ?

 

[Edit] I find the discussion "what is the meaning of the word meta" facinating. You can ask 100 people and get 100 different asnwers.

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

> @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:

> > @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > > @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:

> > > M.E.T.A : Most Effectiv Tactic Available.

> >

> > Actually, a reference to the "meta-game", as in the game about the game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

> >

> > That is, the "meta-game builds" are the builds that use knowledge outside the game itself to achieve a specific goal. (Typically, maximum damage or support output.)

> >

> > > The Meta Builds are Builds that work "the most effectiv" for the avarage Player. [Hammer]

> > > People who want speedruns aka Pro Guilds have there own special Builds. [Nail Gun]

> >

> > I would strongly disagree with this, at least for the meta raid builds: they are designed specifically to achieve maximum damage output, and assume fairly close to perfect execution *and* a very specific support environment including things like constant quickness uptime, might stacks, etc.

> >

> > They are not optimized for the average player, they are optimized to be as mathematically powerful as possible, mostly disregarding human limits. A great many players would significantly benefit from playing builds with more forgiving rotation/priority lists, since human error is far and away the biggest cause of damage output variability in MMOs, pretty much across the board.

>

> The Problem i have here is this:

> Are the "Meta Builds" that 80% of people(the average player) use and say that these ARE the meta build the absolute best builds around?

> I would say no.

 

...and I'd generally agree, if it were not for the fact that there are various sources that do **not** simply take popular builds and call them meta. Metabattle, SnowCrows, and previously qtfy, all generate heavily researched, carefully curated "meta" builds. So, we are not talking about what "80% of players" think is the best, other than when they are referencing those same carefully curated builds.

 

> Are the best guilds actually using the "Meta" Builds?

 

It is possible, but I think unlikely, that qtfy and snowcrows are advertising builds different from what they are using in raids. As I am not a member I cannot, of course, verify that, but ... what advantage do they have in putting out false information in that regard? It isn't like we are in a world first raid clear race or anything, so there is no particular competitive advantage that I can see to that secrecy.

 

[atheria.2837]

> @"Hoodie.1045" said:

> > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > The bottom line? Don't ever let a game get to the point where it forgets what it is, chasing people that have as much loyalty to it as they have to any other game. Quit making things easy for the sake of catering to casuals; both the ones that don't spend any time playing a game, and the ones that truly believe the meta is a literal manifestation of their own abilities in a virtual world.

>

> I too want build variety. The problem is that ArenaNet has no idea how to balance elite specializations in order for them to be on par with the previous elite specialization or core specializations. If you want a good example of how ArenaNet caters to casuals, look no further than the Holosmith. I'm just going to say this, I hate the Holosmith.

>

> As someone who's been playing core power engineer since 2013, I've never been so disappointed in ArenaNet and how they managed to neuter the engineer. Core engineer whether it's power or condition is the most difficult adventurer profession, if not the most difficult profession in general. Way back in the day, before elite specializations, a core engineer was capable of dealing with almost every single profession in a 1v1 situation. A good engineer who knew how to use the kits effectively was guaranteed to be deadly. Core engineers were the Yasuo players from League of Legends at launch; difficult to play, but very deadly once you got the hang of it and learned how to use the kits (I don't play LoL, I just know some of the champions).

>

> Nowadays, we have this pathetic excuse for an "engineer" profession. One that caters to casuals that don't want to acknowledge the difficulty that comes with playing core engineer, that don't want to be bothered to learn how to play the profession. It's a glass cannon specialization that deals the most amount of damage, yet it has the ability to use healing and utility skills. In my opinion, the best way to make the Holosmith on par with core engineer and even Scrapper is to either nerf Photon Forge and make it like necromancers' Shroud form where you can't use healing and utility skills or buff core engineers' kits.

>

> That's the only way core engineer can be buffed in my opinion. Buffing traits is pointless because it would benefit the Scrapper and the Holosmith. We already had the Med Kit reworked, so why not rework/buff the other kits?

 

If those who built the game actually played the game as much as some of us, things might not be so imbalanced and there certainly couldn't be 'undentable' toons in PvP and WvW.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"atheria.2837" said:

> > @"Hoodie.1045" said:

> > > @"Undead Unicorn.1238" said:

> > > The bottom line? Don't ever let a game get to the point where it forgets what it is, chasing people that have as much loyalty to it as they have to any other game. Quit making things easy for the sake of catering to casuals; both the ones that don't spend any time playing a game, and the ones that truly believe the meta is a literal manifestation of their own abilities in a virtual world.

> >

> > I too want build variety. The problem is that ArenaNet has no idea how to balance elite specializations in order for them to be on par with the previous elite specialization or core specializations. If you want a good example of how ArenaNet caters to casuals, look no further than the Holosmith. I'm just going to say this, I hate the Holosmith.

> >

> > As someone who's been playing core power engineer since 2013, I've never been so disappointed in ArenaNet and how they managed to neuter the engineer. Core engineer whether it's power or condition is the most difficult adventurer profession, if not the most difficult profession in general. Way back in the day, before elite specializations, a core engineer was capable of dealing with almost every single profession in a 1v1 situation. A good engineer who knew how to use the kits effectively was guaranteed to be deadly. Core engineers were the Yasuo players from League of Legends at launch; difficult to play, but very deadly once you got the hang of it and learned how to use the kits (I don't play LoL, I just know some of the champions).

> >

> > Nowadays, we have this pathetic excuse for an "engineer" profession. One that caters to casuals that don't want to acknowledge the difficulty that comes with playing core engineer, that don't want to be bothered to learn how to play the profession. It's a glass cannon specialization that deals the most amount of damage, yet it has the ability to use healing and utility skills. In my opinion, the best way to make the Holosmith on par with core engineer and even Scrapper is to either nerf Photon Forge and make it like necromancers' Shroud form where you can't use healing and utility skills or buff core engineers' kits.

> >

> > That's the only way core engineer can be buffed in my opinion. Buffing traits is pointless because it would benefit the Scrapper and the Holosmith. We already had the Med Kit reworked, so why not rework/buff the other kits?

>

> If those who built the game actually played the game as much as some of us, things might not be so imbalanced and there certainly couldn't be 'undentable' toons in PvP and WvW.

 

What makes you think that having the devs play the game would give a different result? You don't think the current situation could possibly exist if the devs understood how different each class performs in PVP/WvW? I don't think you could be more wrong.