nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aktium.9506 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. i can find these two builds tho that looks like two great builds for both power and condi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyninja.2954 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > Kitty, what people like you forget is, yes, players won't hit the top dps benchmark numbers from the golem but they also don't achieve(d) it with weavers etc. anyways. Still, if you're going into a raid/fractal/open world scenario and your skill level hasn't significantly changed over the past days, you will do a lot more dps with this brainless rotation even though it's not the optimum. And that's the reason why it is favored by so many players right now. > > I can easily execute 25k dps on certain bosses without having to care about a rotation and that number will put me to the top in most pug runs - and it's enough to have a good phasing & killing time. Even Mirage pre-patch was harder for me personally. > > This still implies that it should somehow be relevant _to damage_ whether or not a rotation is complex. It should at least to some extent. There has always been differences in complexity and output to varying degree. Deadeye just pushes this to the maximum as far as output reward for minimal input goes. Now either a ton of people got really really good at the game by simply switching classes, or the more likely scenario, Deadeye is vastly outperforming its complexity. I personally view the games performance versus result in brackets, for example: **bracket A** might consist of pure auto attack on the one end, to some minor rotation and skill use on the other end (like say mirage or the old core power mesmer). Input requirements are overall simplistic, so let that be reflected in the output. Does this mean that say Deadeye and Mirage need to be exactly equal even though there are minimal differences in their complexity? No. **bracket B** might consist of proper weapon swaps, utilizing synergies of skills and having to stick to a proper rotation. Again, having different classes perform differently with variance within the bracket is fine. Output of bracket B should outperform bracket A as often as possible. **bracket C**, high end near perfect rotation. Requires synergy with possibly alacrity, skills need to be executed timely and mistakes can cost damage as well as intricate knowledge of encounters to allow the player to utilize the maximum effect of their damage at the correct time. Output here should be the highest IF properly executed though very often we have classes from bracket B contest with classes from bracket C. Under no circumstances should classes from bracket A outperform classes from bracket C. That's strait up power creep at the bottom or mid end. The problem here, some classes from bracket A are in the territory of bracket C. Deadeye is not the only one mind you, it's just the newest most over the top. > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > Anet already put everyone (except poor Necros) near the ~35k to ~38k range, and players can now actually choose what they want without hurting the group simply for their choice (they will still hurt the group if they suck at their preferred class). Yes, and that power creep has made much of the content trivial already. Waings 1-4 are way way way easier now than they ever were during HoT. That is a different issue though but I agree, we need to tone down the power creep and around 5k dps need to get sliced off of every dps in game. > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > What now? Why are people complaining about Weaver instead of demanding that core Engie get the highest DPS? I don't even know what the problem even is in this topic anymore since most of the people giving answers probably have a static and no worries about their weekly completion being hurt by their favorite rotation dropping from very high levels to high levels of dps. I absolutely agree that engi or revenant given their current rotation on some builds should be higher up in the damage arena, yes. It does become an issue in statics when people who want to play the most efficient class have to resort to mindless Deadeye builds. People in statics at the highest level seldom care about their weekly completion. You are raising an interesting issue though: Should Arenanet keep introducing power creep to trivialize old content and is that in the best interest of the game? After all, every one wants their shot at getting legendary armor and raid rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxwelgm.4315 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxwelgm.4315 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > > Kitty, what people like you forget is, yes, players won't hit the top dps benchmark numbers from the golem but they also don't achieve(d) it with weavers etc. anyways. Still, if you're going into a raid/fractal/open world scenario and your skill level hasn't significantly changed over the past days, you will do a lot more dps with this brainless rotation even though it's not the optimum. And that's the reason why it is favored by so many players right now. > > > I can easily execute 25k dps on certain bosses without having to care about a rotation and that number will put me to the top in most pug runs - and it's enough to have a good phasing & killing time. Even Mirage pre-patch was harder for me personally. > > > > This still implies that it should somehow be relevant _to damage_ whether or not a rotation is complex. > > It should at least to some extent. There has always been differences in complexity and output to varying degree. Deadeye just pushes this to the maximum as far as output reward for minimal input goes. > > Now either a ton of people got really really good at the game by simply switching classes, or the more likely scenario, Deadeye is vastly outperforming its complexity. > > I personally view the games performance versus result in brackets, for example: > > **bracket A** might consist of pure auto attack on the one end, to some minor rotation and skill use on the other end (like say mirage or the old core power mesmer). Input requirements are overall simplistic, so let that be reflected in the output. Does this mean that say Deadeye and Mirage need to be exactly equal even though there are minimal differences in their complexity? No. > > **bracket B** might consist of proper weapon swaps, utilizing synergies of skills and having to stick to a proper rotation. Again, having different classes perform differently with variance within the bracket is fine. Output of bracket B should outperform bracket A as often as possible. > > **bracket C**, high end near perfect rotation. Requires synergy with possibly alacrity, skills need to be executed timely and mistakes can cost damage as well as intricate knowledge of encounters to allow the player to utilize the maximum effect of their damage at the correct time. Output here should be the highest IF properly executed though very often we have classes from bracket B contest with classes from bracket C. Under no circumstances should classes from bracket A outperform classes from bracket C. That's strait up power creep at the bottom or mid end. > > The problem here, some classes from bracket A are in the territory of bracket C. Deadeye is not the only one mind you, it's just the newest most over the top. > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > Anet already put everyone (except poor Necros) near the ~35k to ~38k range, and players can now actually choose what they want without hurting the group simply for their choice (they will still hurt the group if they suck at their preferred class). > > Yes, and that power creep has made much of the content trivial already. Waings 1-4 are way way way easier now than they ever were during HoT. That is a different issue though but I agree, we need to tone down the power creep and around 5k dps need to get sliced off of every dps in game. > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > What now? Why are people complaining about Weaver instead of demanding that core Engie get the highest DPS? I don't even know what the problem even is in this topic anymore since most of the people giving answers probably have a static and no worries about their weekly completion being hurt by their favorite rotation dropping from very high levels to high levels of dps. > > I absolutely agree that engi or revenant given their current rotation on some builds should be higher up in the damage arena, yes. > > It does become an issue in statics when people who want to play the most efficient class have to resort to mindless Deadeye builds. People in statics at the highest level seldom care about their weekly completion. > > You are raising an interesting issue though: > Should Arenanet keep introducing power creep to trivialize old content and is that in the best interest of the game? After all, every one wants their shot at getting legendary armor and raid rewards. Alright, I think I get where this is going now, and I do feel the power creep. So much for a game that claimed to have no vertical progression lol. I'd say trivializing content is not so good for a game that poses itself as being entirely made of endgame, but I'm also hesitant to say they should fix this immediately, because it ironically seems to be 'working' insofar as population goes (as you said, everyone wants their shot at rewards, which goes for since long trivialized content too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aktium.9506 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. couldn't the same argument be made for builds like sbsbsb out-dpsing scourge and all other necro builds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? > > Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. If you want them to be doable by only a handful of hardcore statics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > i can find these two builds tho > > > > > that looks like two great builds for both power and condi > > They used to be on par with Staff on small hitbox even before patch, the reason people didn't use those is pretty obvious once you try these builds in a real scenarios on bosses that aren't static, or have adds, or breakbars. The builds do not have burst. They work fine on single target if the group is competent enough to minimize movement, once you bring adds into the equation, they're as bad at dealing with those as D/D DE, but without the option to bring cc by swapping one skill. Notice that I'm not even mentioning the damage once here. It's just that they suffer all the issues from Staff, without having the good sides of the staff: burst and cleave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aktium.9506 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 it sounds like those sword builds have trade-offs. imagine that a build that doesnt do burst, cleave, range and great sustained dps all in one. that almost sounds like _balance_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Aktium.9506" said: > it sounds like those sword builds have trade-offs. imagine that > > a build that doesnt do burst, cleave, range and great sustained dps all in one. that almost sounds like _balance_ So to put it short: a build that doesn't really do anything, but it complicated to do it. Much balance, so trade-off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > > > > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? > > > > Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. > > If you want them to be doable by only a handful of hardcore statics. 1 - Raiding and challenge motes were supposed to be hardcore. 2 - VG raw dps check to beat enrage is around 6k dps (on boss) per player in a squad of 10, accounting the split phases, realistic pug clears can consistently get 15~20k. Even if you do reach enrage, enrages in this game are a joke. 3 - When was the last time you killed any boss with less than 3~4 minutes left on clock in a relatively clean run? 4 - Fractal CM bosses don't even have a real enrage timer, you can just do mechanics and focus on survival to clear them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Aktium.9506" said: > it sounds like those sword builds have trade-offs. imagine that > > a build that doesnt do burst, cleave, range and great sustained dps all in one. that almost sounds like _balance_ It also doesn do cc, support, buffing, or anything additional at all.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > > > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > > > > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? > > > > > > Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. > > > > If you want them to be doable by only a handful of hardcore statics. > 1 - Raiding and challenge motes were supposed to be hardcore. > 2 - VG raw dps check to beat enrage is around 6k dps (on boss) per player in a squad of 10, accounting the split phases, realistic pug clears can consistently get 15~20k. Even if you do reach enrage, enrages in this game are a joke. > 3 - When was the last time you killed any boss with less than 3~4 minutes left on clock in a relatively clean run? > 4 - Fractal CM bosses don't even have a real enrage timer, you can just do mechanics and focus on survival to clear them. Golem dps != actual boss dps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? > > > > > > > > Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. > > > > > > If you want them to be doable by only a handful of hardcore statics. > > 1 - Raiding and challenge motes were supposed to be hardcore. > > 2 - VG raw dps check to beat enrage is around 6k dps (on boss) per player in a squad of 10, accounting the split phases, realistic pug clears can consistently get 15~20k. Even if you do reach enrage, enrages in this game are a joke. > > 3 - When was the last time you killed any boss with less than 3~4 minutes left on clock in a relatively clean run? > > 4 - Fractal CM bosses don't even have a real enrage timer, you can just do mechanics and focus on survival to clear them. > > Golem dps != actual boss dps. Only reason why players aren't reaching golem dps in some bosses is because they have invul phases and parsing in this game is done by checking boss dps without splitting. Individual phases dps get close to golem values, maybe a bit lower or a bit higher depending on how loaded the pre-cast gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > > Rotation complexity shouldn't be a factor on personal dps output when it comes to balance, it makes balancing way too hard just to boost some player's ego when what matters is the number being output. Fighting games don't do this for a reason, just saying. What they need to start accounting in balance is the damage given to the group by some specs in the form of boons and buffs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > > > > 31.6k, no cc, also squishy, bad (actually bad, not even sub-optimal) at more than half of the bosses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, this is a great way to promote build diversity, kill one build so players are forced to pick the next one. This way you go from 1 playable build to 1 playable build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Granted, I concede to your point about fighting games. However, GW2 is absolutely _not_ a competitive game at _any_ level of playing. Perhaps this is why this thread has taken ways that confuse me, since I'd absolutely never compare balancing this game to balancing an actual competitive fighting game or even a MMO with open PvP, let alone some PvE game with actual leaderboards. Build diversity however **is there** more than ever, even if they only exist DPS-wise (if you don't take a Chrono you are simply locked out of many boons, which is indeed where I agree that the balancing issue lies), since most builds lie in the same 30k-38k range and they are all _viable_. When was the last time anyone here reach an enrage timer in their static? > > > > > > > > > > Here's a hot take: even 30k is way too overtuned for the level of challenge the endgame bosses in this game offer. Heck, even 27k would probably be too much. > > > > > > > > If you want them to be doable by only a handful of hardcore statics. > > > 1 - Raiding and challenge motes were supposed to be hardcore. > > > 2 - VG raw dps check to beat enrage is around 6k dps (on boss) per player in a squad of 10, accounting the split phases, realistic pug clears can consistently get 15~20k. Even if you do reach enrage, enrages in this game are a joke. > > > 3 - When was the last time you killed any boss with less than 3~4 minutes left on clock in a relatively clean run? > > > 4 - Fractal CM bosses don't even have a real enrage timer, you can just do mechanics and focus on survival to clear them. > > > > Golem dps != actual boss dps. > Only reason why players aren't reaching golem dps in some bosses is because they have invul phases and parsing in this game is done by checking boss dps without splitting. Individual phases dps get close to golem values, maybe a bit lower or a bit higher depending on how loaded the pre-cast gets. A much bigger reason is that the majority of the teams are nowhere near perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. What happened to playing whats fun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"zealex.9410" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. > > What happened to playing whats fun? I'd love to, but I don't only play open world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsleep.7839 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > A much bigger reason is that the majority of the teams are nowhere near perfect. And those non-perfect teams are doing a bit less or around double of the dps checks at 50% percentile clears on Raidar (which is the only metrics site we have) except on Dhuum. By realistic standards there's clearly way too much dps to the point that many mechanics are skipped by damage. These teams also don't reach golem dps on golem, so that's an even worse metric to go by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > > > Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. > > > > What happened to playing whats fun? > > I'd love to, but I don't only play open world. If they jerf thief next patch (which is very likely to happen) what is gonna stop you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"zealex.9410" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > @"Aktium.9506" said: > > > > > > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > > > > > MS is getting fixed, then Elementalist will be dead > > > > > isn't condi sword weaver bench at like 34k-35k dps > > > > > > > > > > staff might be dead, but ele would still have a viable build > > > > > > > > Nah, no reason to play that when so much simpler builds perform at the same level, if not better. > > > > > > What happened to playing whats fun? > > > > I'd love to, but I don't only play open world. > > If they jerf thief next patch (which is very likely to happen) what is gonna stop you? I dunno. All I've heard for the next patch is MS is getting bugfixed, resulting in a loss of about 40% damage, which is pretty major. Thief is likely to remain OP AF. But even if they nerfed it, there still wouldn't be much point in playing sword weaver. It's much more complicated, not nearly as safe and won't outperform a Mirage. And before you raise the question again, I don't find it particularly fun either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"nsleep.7839" said: > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > A much bigger reason is that the majority of the teams are nowhere near perfect. > And those non-perfect teams are doing a bit less or around double of the dps checks at 50% percentile clears on Raidar (which is the only metrics site we have) except on Dhuum. By realistic standards there's clearly way too much dps to the point that many mechanics are skipped by damage. > > These teams also don't reach golem dps on golem, so that's an even worse metric to go by. > The ability to skip mechanics by having high damage output is something good. It's rewarding gameplay experience and it shouldn't be restricted to hardcore raiding guilds only. Besides, you're talking about routine clears. Think of how significantly lowered damage output would affect those same casual/semi-casual raiders when they are learning actual encounters. Dhuum took my static months to nail down as it is. How many of these teams and pugs do you think would give up if they couldn't even finish the new bosses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyninja.2954 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > > > Kitty, what people like you forget is, yes, players won't hit the top dps benchmark numbers from the golem but they also don't achieve(d) it with weavers etc. anyways. Still, if you're going into a raid/fractal/open world scenario and your skill level hasn't significantly changed over the past days, you will do a lot more dps with this brainless rotation even though it's not the optimum. And that's the reason why it is favored by so many players right now. > > > > I can easily execute 25k dps on certain bosses without having to care about a rotation and that number will put me to the top in most pug runs - and it's enough to have a good phasing & killing time. Even Mirage pre-patch was harder for me personally. > > > > > > This still implies that it should somehow be relevant _to damage_ whether or not a rotation is complex. > > > > It should at least to some extent. There has always been differences in complexity and output to varying degree. Deadeye just pushes this to the maximum as far as output reward for minimal input goes. > > > > Now either a ton of people got really really good at the game by simply switching classes, or the more likely scenario, Deadeye is vastly outperforming its complexity. > > > > I personally view the games performance versus result in brackets, for example: > > > > **bracket A** might consist of pure auto attack on the one end, to some minor rotation and skill use on the other end (like say mirage or the old core power mesmer). Input requirements are overall simplistic, so let that be reflected in the output. Does this mean that say Deadeye and Mirage need to be exactly equal even though there are minimal differences in their complexity? No. > > > > **bracket B** might consist of proper weapon swaps, utilizing synergies of skills and having to stick to a proper rotation. Again, having different classes perform differently with variance within the bracket is fine. Output of bracket B should outperform bracket A as often as possible. > > > > **bracket C**, high end near perfect rotation. Requires synergy with possibly alacrity, skills need to be executed timely and mistakes can cost damage as well as intricate knowledge of encounters to allow the player to utilize the maximum effect of their damage at the correct time. Output here should be the highest IF properly executed though very often we have classes from bracket B contest with classes from bracket C. Under no circumstances should classes from bracket A outperform classes from bracket C. That's strait up power creep at the bottom or mid end. > > > > The problem here, some classes from bracket A are in the territory of bracket C. Deadeye is not the only one mind you, it's just the newest most over the top. > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > Anet already put everyone (except poor Necros) near the ~35k to ~38k range, and players can now actually choose what they want without hurting the group simply for their choice (they will still hurt the group if they suck at their preferred class). > > > > Yes, and that power creep has made much of the content trivial already. Waings 1-4 are way way way easier now than they ever were during HoT. That is a different issue though but I agree, we need to tone down the power creep and around 5k dps need to get sliced off of every dps in game. > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > What now? Why are people complaining about Weaver instead of demanding that core Engie get the highest DPS? I don't even know what the problem even is in this topic anymore since most of the people giving answers probably have a static and no worries about their weekly completion being hurt by their favorite rotation dropping from very high levels to high levels of dps. > > > > I absolutely agree that engi or revenant given their current rotation on some builds should be higher up in the damage arena, yes. > > > > It does become an issue in statics when people who want to play the most efficient class have to resort to mindless Deadeye builds. People in statics at the highest level seldom care about their weekly completion. > > > > You are raising an interesting issue though: > > Should Arenanet keep introducing power creep to trivialize old content and is that in the best interest of the game? After all, every one wants their shot at getting legendary armor and raid rewards. > > Alright, I think I get where this is going now, and I do feel the power creep. So much for a game that claimed to have no vertical progression lol. I'd say trivializing content is not so good for a game that poses itself as being entirely made of endgame, but I'm also hesitant to say they should fix this immediately, because it ironically seems to be 'working' insofar as population goes (as you said, everyone wants their shot at rewards, which goes for since long trivialized content too). Exactly, the problem is now here and it's not easily solved. If Arenanet were to reduce performance by say 5k dps across the board, all raid and fractal content would become more challenging (slightly less than during HoT). Not to the extent that it would be un-completable but enough that some people would run into issues. The overall already perceived toxicity would increase as well (even if we'd basically just be returning to HoT levels of damage with way better classes and 1 extra dps slot). Post nerf players could then complain about others having had an easier time since classes were so much more powerful for such a long period of time (even if few people really complained that the power creep from HoT to PoF made this content a lot easier). It's always hard to take something away which was once given. This would all be fine and dandy if there wasn't a possible new expansion down the road. Now the power creep from vanilla to HoT was huge (probably a magnitude of 100-150% if you account for all the changes and alacrity etc.), way bigger than the power creep from HoT to PoF (30% after initial overpowered classes were nerfed/fixed). Even if the power creep with the next expansion were to be "only" half of what PoF introduced we are still looking at 40k+ dps benchmarks across the board. For fights which were designed for 6-10k per class (benchmarking maybe 20k). If the increase was again 30% we are looking at 45k dps performance on golems with a probable 30-35k on bosses. That's insane trivialization of content. Many mechanics already get skipped: - Vale Guardian going into phase almost immediately (2-3 greens maybe which can get ignored with heal or barrier) - Gorseval no updrafts has become the norm, not the static group performance - Matthias sacrificing maybe 3 people before he hits 40% and changes barely having all the pools get used - KC 2 or 3 orb damage phases because 5 aren't needed any more - Xera middle strat without clearing shards because she just melts - Cairn and MO just roll over and die - many encounters get a lot easier with shorter durations Many people do not even learn proper mechanics any more since they are never exposed to how the fight is supposed to be completed. I bet many people don't even know that Gorseval even HAS updrafts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > > @"Vinceman.4572" said: > > > > > Kitty, what people like you forget is, yes, players won't hit the top dps benchmark numbers from the golem but they also don't achieve(d) it with weavers etc. anyways. Still, if you're going into a raid/fractal/open world scenario and your skill level hasn't significantly changed over the past days, you will do a lot more dps with this brainless rotation even though it's not the optimum. And that's the reason why it is favored by so many players right now. > > > > > I can easily execute 25k dps on certain bosses without having to care about a rotation and that number will put me to the top in most pug runs - and it's enough to have a good phasing & killing time. Even Mirage pre-patch was harder for me personally. > > > > > > > > This still implies that it should somehow be relevant _to damage_ whether or not a rotation is complex. > > > > > > It should at least to some extent. There has always been differences in complexity and output to varying degree. Deadeye just pushes this to the maximum as far as output reward for minimal input goes. > > > > > > Now either a ton of people got really really good at the game by simply switching classes, or the more likely scenario, Deadeye is vastly outperforming its complexity. > > > > > > I personally view the games performance versus result in brackets, for example: > > > > > > **bracket A** might consist of pure auto attack on the one end, to some minor rotation and skill use on the other end (like say mirage or the old core power mesmer). Input requirements are overall simplistic, so let that be reflected in the output. Does this mean that say Deadeye and Mirage need to be exactly equal even though there are minimal differences in their complexity? No. > > > > > > **bracket B** might consist of proper weapon swaps, utilizing synergies of skills and having to stick to a proper rotation. Again, having different classes perform differently with variance within the bracket is fine. Output of bracket B should outperform bracket A as often as possible. > > > > > > **bracket C**, high end near perfect rotation. Requires synergy with possibly alacrity, skills need to be executed timely and mistakes can cost damage as well as intricate knowledge of encounters to allow the player to utilize the maximum effect of their damage at the correct time. Output here should be the highest IF properly executed though very often we have classes from bracket B contest with classes from bracket C. Under no circumstances should classes from bracket A outperform classes from bracket C. That's strait up power creep at the bottom or mid end. > > > > > > The problem here, some classes from bracket A are in the territory of bracket C. Deadeye is not the only one mind you, it's just the newest most over the top. > > > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > Anet already put everyone (except poor Necros) near the ~35k to ~38k range, and players can now actually choose what they want without hurting the group simply for their choice (they will still hurt the group if they suck at their preferred class). > > > > > > Yes, and that power creep has made much of the content trivial already. Waings 1-4 are way way way easier now than they ever were during HoT. That is a different issue though but I agree, we need to tone down the power creep and around 5k dps need to get sliced off of every dps in game. > > > > > > > @"maxwelgm.4315" said: > > > > What now? Why are people complaining about Weaver instead of demanding that core Engie get the highest DPS? I don't even know what the problem even is in this topic anymore since most of the people giving answers probably have a static and no worries about their weekly completion being hurt by their favorite rotation dropping from very high levels to high levels of dps. > > > > > > I absolutely agree that engi or revenant given their current rotation on some builds should be higher up in the damage arena, yes. > > > > > > It does become an issue in statics when people who want to play the most efficient class have to resort to mindless Deadeye builds. People in statics at the highest level seldom care about their weekly completion. > > > > > > You are raising an interesting issue though: > > > Should Arenanet keep introducing power creep to trivialize old content and is that in the best interest of the game? After all, every one wants their shot at getting legendary armor and raid rewards. > > > > Alright, I think I get where this is going now, and I do feel the power creep. So much for a game that claimed to have no vertical progression lol. I'd say trivializing content is not so good for a game that poses itself as being entirely made of endgame, but I'm also hesitant to say they should fix this immediately, because it ironically seems to be 'working' insofar as population goes (as you said, everyone wants their shot at rewards, which goes for since long trivialized content too). > > Exactly, the problem is now here and it's not easily solved. If Arenanet were to reduce performance by say 5k dps across the board, all raid and fractal content would become more challenging (slightly less than during HoT). Not to the extent that it would be un-completable but enough that some people would run into issues. The overall already perceived toxicity would increase as well (even if we'd basically just be returning to HoT levels of damage with way better classes and 1 extra dps slot). > > Post nerf players could then complain about others having had an easier time since classes were so much more powerful for such a long period of time (even if few people really complained that the power creep from HoT to PoF made this content a lot easier). It's always hard to take something away which was once given. > > This would all be fine and dandy if there wasn't a possible new expansion down the road. Now the power creep from vanilla to HoT was huge (probably a magnitude of 100-150% if you account for all the changes and alacrity etc.), way bigger than the power creep from HoT to PoF (30% after initial overpowered classes were nerfed/fixed). Even if the power creep with the next expansion were to be "only" half of what PoF introduced we are still looking at 40k+ dps benchmarks across the board. For fights which were designed for 6-10k per class (benchmarking maybe 20k). If the increase was again 30% we are looking at 45k dps performance on golems with a probable 30-35k on bosses. That's insane trivialization of content. > > Many mechanics already get skipped: > - Vale Guardian going into phase almost immediately (2-3 greens maybe which can get ignored with heal or barrier) > - Gorseval no updrafts has become the norm, not the static group performance > - Matthias sacrificing maybe 3 people before he hits 40% and changes barely having all the pools get used > - KC 2 or 3 orb damage phases because 5 aren't needed any more > - Xera middle strat without clearing shards because she just melts > - Cairn and MO just roll over and die > - many encounters get a lot easier with shorter durations > > Many people do not even learn proper mechanics any more since they are never exposed to how the fight is supposed to be completed. I bet many people don't even know that Gorseval even HAS updrafts. What stops them from going back and tunning content? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now