We really need rebalanced attributes

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > Stats are ok. Its the power creep that is the problem.

> >

> > Saying that not going to make it go away what should be done is to use stats update as a means of dealing with power creep.

> >

> > The ideal of "its power creep" being the end all be all argument used is not going to fix any thing nor will it move the talk forward at all. At best its just a means of trying to end a talk. There IS no going back from power creep once its added at best you can only work with the power creep. Updating stats is the end all be all to making power creep both attk and def not as bad.

> >

> > You need to update all of the stats numbers to make this work.

>

> But there is nothing wrong with them. I really don't understand how is this a problem.

>

> Defensive stats should not matter as much as offensive ones. Period. As I said earlier:

> **There is no alternative to offence, you either damage the foe, or you don't. But you can avoid the damage, if you don't you have toughness or vitality to soak up some of it.**

 

If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

[Zeivu.3615]

I doubt it is going to happen. Arenanet has already said they don't want a 'holy trinity'. Defense and Healing Power pretty much will lead to that. :/

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> Just because you don't think there's anything wrong with them doesn't mean there's not anything wrong with them. I profoundly disagree with you. If they were fine, Celestial would be the most desired set for solo play due to its versatility. But it sucks.

Celestial _was_ one of the most important stats in SPvP, up to the point it was used in almost every build, remember? That's why it got removed from there. And in PvE, it is indeed the most versatile. Only, you don't _need_ versatile. You need builds that are very good at something, and celestial, while not the worst at anything, isn't good at anything specific either. For every role there is a better stat combination - and in game where it's easy to respec, you don't need gearsets for _everything_. It's far better to carry few specialized sets for different occasions.

 

> @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

>

> If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

They matter a lot in PvP. And in PvE are useful in some types of content where you _need_ that tanking/damage sponge role (great for hand kiting at Deimos, for example). The truth (which you refuse to acknowledge) is that both toughness and vitality are actually _very good_ at what they do. It's just what they do is not needed in 90% of PvE content.

 

But no, they shouldn't be removed, because there's always that remaining 10%.

 

Unless of course you overhaul the whole stat system and remove _all_ of them, going back to the original design idea from GW1.

(but that one just isn't going to happen, it would be just way too massive amount of work for Anet to ever decide to do it, short of GW3)

[XenoSpyro.1780]

> @"Kalendraf.9521" said:

> A big problem with increasing toughness is that it puts a huge bullseye on your character in PvE by drawing aggro from more mobs

Sounds like the aggro function should be removed from armor. Duh. Hell, shouldn't have been there in the first place.

 

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"XenoSpyro.1780" said:

> > @"Kalendraf.9521" said:

> > A big problem with increasing toughness is that it puts a huge bullseye on your character in PvE by drawing aggro from more mobs

> Sounds like the aggro function should be removed from armor. Duh. Hell, shouldn't have been there in the first place.

>

>

 

Indeed, I was just going to say that it doesn't have to work that way to begin with.

 

To the op:

It's a shame really, because this is something that has been off from the start. It didn't take long back then that berserker stats were best for every single class. This was the first indication right there that something wasn't right. We had different armour sets with different stat sets and they were all meaningless because berserker ruled them all. Things might have become a little more nuanced right now but the basic problem is still the same. So I do agree there is an issue.

 

 

As for the comment that for PvE'ers who roam the world it doesn't matter much, well it does. I am one of those people I guess and I find it more interesting to have a bit more survivability but at the same time it does mean it takes longer to kill mobs and this is annoying as it already takes too long for my liking. I really do want to be able, at least with my guardian to have a more balanced build between offense and defensive. To me it fits the class that I wouldn't have to dodge away at the first signs of trouble. This dodge element is also overused, evidenced by the ridiculous amounts of circles on the ground. I'm sure some people love this aspect but I don't see a problem with having builds that have slower DPS but a decent trade off towards defensive strength. Currently that trade off doesn't feel that even and it's still the case that a lot of stat combinations are considered "useless". In fact I can probably safely state that most are a waste of space in the game.

 

Seeing comments that in PvP they are more powerful, bring us to the point that PvP and PvE are very different things and so it makes no sense to balance them the same way. In GW1 they already recognized this. Why not now?

 

I dunno, I hope they can do something that will change this, but at the same time, there's a lot of micro-management in builds. In a way it's about many small ones making a big change but it makes things a lot less transparent and more complicated also to make adjustments to. But it seems to me that this game has had a problem with class definition from the start and if certain stat types would've fit more clearly with specific classes and even specs, then at least we'd have had more definition. It's trickier for ArenaNet I'm sure because they'd have more trouble fine tuning boss fights in particular as people play the stories mostly solo. Those story bosses would have to be able to be beaten by a variety of builds then and not all rely on the same mechanics of just DPS'ing and dodging. Cause that side of it is rather simplistic again.

 

There really just isn't much variation when one stat type overrules the rest and it's worse if that then becomes the standard for balancing the fights. In the end one of the problems with defensive stats, I think, is the dodge mechanic and more importantly how much they use it in boss fight mechanics. The only way that defensive stats can become more meaningful is if it means you don't have to dodge as much but can clearly mitigate more damage. Perhaps even a skill that is a real dcd that you can use with certain specs or classes that takes away the need to dodge when used and has damage mitigation based on toughness for example could be a way of thinking.

 

But there are various things tied to stats and so it would be too simplistic to just lower the value of power. I think defensive stats need a better place in the game, where they can be used in functional way. Just some thoughts I guess.

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> Celestial _was_ one of the most important stats in SPvP, up to the point it was used in almost every build, remember? That's why it got removed from there. And in PvE, it is indeed the most versatile. Only, you don't _need_ versatile. You need builds that are very good at something, and celestial, while not the worst at anything, isn't good at anything specific either. For every role there is a better stat combination - and in game where it's easy to respec, you don't need gearsets for _everything_. It's far better to carry few specialized sets for different occasions.

>

 

I can't comment on PvP or sPvP in this matter but I'll take your word for it. In PvE it is versatile but it depends on what you do in PvE what you want or need. When you are more casual, and I am, the celestial stat set is interesting. I don't do raids or fractals at all. I mostly do story, open world and I join the zergs for events on the maps when I run into them. Now I will say it probably does depend on the class but my dragonhunter is getting celestial gear. I do feel I want to be versatile on the maps especially as it's my main that does everything first. So survivability is a thing next to DPS. At least for me. But solo or in group events, there really isn't much going on in the way of roles.

 

I do think that after I get it together I might also get myself a berserker set, even if it's just to compare how it plays, but in a way I'm happy I'm more casual in this game.

 

 

 

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > Just because you don't think there's anything wrong with them doesn't mean there's not anything wrong with them. I profoundly disagree with you. If they were fine, Celestial would be the most desired set for solo play due to its versatility. But it sucks.

> Celestial _was_ one of the most important stats in SPvP, up to the point it was used in almost every build, remember? That's why it got removed from there. And in PvE, it is indeed the most versatile. Only, you don't _need_ versatile. You need builds that are very good at something, and celestial, while not the worst at anything, isn't good at anything specific either. For every role there is a better stat combination - and in game where it's easy to respec, you don't need gearsets for _everything_. It's far better to carry few specialized sets for different occasions.

>

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> >

> > If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

> They matter a lot in PvP. And in PvE are useful in some types of content where you _need_ that tanking/damage sponge role (great for hand kiting at Deimos, for example). The truth (which you refuse to acknowledge) is that both toughness and vitality are actually _very good_ at what they do. It's just what they do is not needed in 90% of PvE content.

>

> But no, they shouldn't be removed, because there's always that remaining 10%.

>

> Unless of course you overhaul the whole stat system and remove _all_ of them, going back to the original design idea from GW1.

> (but that one just isn't going to happen, it would be just way too massive amount of work for Anet to ever decide to do it, short of GW3)

 

I don't PvP that much, but other people in this thread have noted they are undertuned in PvP as well.

[Blocki.4931]

I don't agree with the majority of this post. I like your suggestion regarding Healing Power though. It should just directly translate into a % increase.

 

I'd love a change to toughness, but it's such a minor thing that we all know it will never happen. It's not a very prevalent stat and while the point was brought up that higher toughness means you get focused by more mobs, it's not entirely how it works after all. The most notable situations for this are: Tower and Keep lords in WvW and a few raid bosses. Veeery few champions in open world content and even then they usually also look for targets who are 1. closer and 2. deal x amount of damage in the last few seconds. Only very few enemies actually hard focus one person, so you can just walk out of it most of the time.

 

If we want to go the easy route we just do the same thing as HP and translate into a % increase of armor. Few traits can be reworked so that toughness tanking can still be a thing, especially since Chrono loves doing that and we might run into a situation where heavy armor classes simply steal the boss focus due to the higher protection on their base armor.

 

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> Because i don't like to repeat myself, i will just repost what i said in the previous thread you have made about the [very same topic](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/608320/ "very same topic")

>

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > @"Haishao.6851" said:

> > > > The game was always about active defense. Passive defense is just there to allow more room for mistakes.

> > > > They're fine as they are.

> > >

> > > Except they don't do that to the degree they should for the amount of offense you give up. That's the point.

> > Yes. That's the unfortunate effect of defence being taken care of mostly outside of stats. You don't need stats to defend against attacks you dodged, blocked, or walked out of. That means those stats have minimal impact on fight. To change this, they'd need to become strong enough you would not need active defences at all - but if they were that strong, and you would add active defences on top of it, you would be completely unkillable.

> >

> > Basically, there can be no equality between offense and defense stats, because defense has an additional factor offense doesn't have.

> >

> > > As mentioned above, though, it's probably more an issue with overtuned offense than it is with undertuned defense.

> > No, it's a problem with mechanic mismatch. The stats we have and the combat mechanics just should never have been put in the same game. Stats were likely something that was added only after the combat system was already mostly designed (probably to appease the old-style MMORPG gamers, that were used to having stats on their gear). The rest is just a consequece of that decision - a consequence we'll have to live with unless they decide to redo the whole thing from scratch.

> >

> > So, basically, either go to more standard combat system, or drop the stats from gear completely.

> >

> > The chances of this happening in GW2 are near zero.

> >

> > Yes, the defensive stats could use a bit of improvement, but as long as the core systems remain as they are, that's not going to change the main issues at all.

> >

> >

>

>

 

Just quoting this post to highlight it, great post and completely agree.

 

Also, for other ideas on how to change stats, see my own comments in that same thread.

[Jski.6180]

> @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > Stats are ok. Its the power creep that is the problem.

> >

> > Saying that not going to make it go away what should be done is to use stats update as a means of dealing with power creep.

> >

> > The ideal of "its power creep" being the end all be all argument used is not going to fix any thing nor will it move the talk forward at all. At best its just a means of trying to end a talk. There IS no going back from power creep once its added at best you can only work with the power creep. Updating stats is the end all be all to making power creep both attk and def not as bad.

> >

> > You need to update all of the stats numbers to make this work.

>

> But there is nothing wrong with them. I really don't understand how is this a problem.

>

> Defensive stats should not matter as much as offensive ones. Period. As I said earlier:

> **There is no alternative to offence, you either damage the foe, or you don't. But you can avoid the damage, if you don't you have toughness or vitality to soak up some of it.**

 

Or changes how some of the dmg numbers work such as twerking condi dmg or even adding in a condi crit dmg effect. These numbers can be moded to deal with the power creep that every one seems to hate so.

 

If you want to deal with power creep this is one way of doing it.

[Imperadordf.2687]

> @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > > Stats are ok. Its the power creep that is the problem.

> > >

> > > Saying that not going to make it go away what should be done is to use stats update as a means of dealing with power creep.

> > >

> > > The ideal of "its power creep" being the end all be all argument used is not going to fix any thing nor will it move the talk forward at all. At best its just a means of trying to end a talk. There IS no going back from power creep once its added at best you can only work with the power creep. Updating stats is the end all be all to making power creep both attk and def not as bad.

> > >

> > > You need to update all of the stats numbers to make this work.

> >

> > But there is nothing wrong with them. I really don't understand how is this a problem.

> >

> > Defensive stats should not matter as much as offensive ones. Period. As I said earlier:

> > **There is no alternative to offence, you either damage the foe, or you don't. But you can avoid the damage, if you don't you have toughness or vitality to soak up some of it.**

>

> If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

 

What? Why? In PvE, people going full glass are usually confident with their reflexes, so they go full glass. If somebody thinks they can't dodge/block/invuln/evade mobs in HoT for example, the game offers you Marauder's gear, Soldier's gear, Rabid gear, Carrion gear, Trailblazer gear... there are tons of them. You are exaggerating.

 

> @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > Just because you don't think there's anything wrong with them doesn't mean there's not anything wrong with them. I profoundly disagree with you. If they were fine, Celestial would be the most desired set for solo play due to its versatility. But it sucks.

> > Celestial _was_ one of the most important stats in SPvP, up to the point it was used in almost every build, remember? That's why it got removed from there. And in PvE, it is indeed the most versatile. Only, you don't _need_ versatile. You need builds that are very good at something, and celestial, while not the worst at anything, isn't good at anything specific either. For every role there is a better stat combination - and in game where it's easy to respec, you don't need gearsets for _everything_. It's far better to carry few specialized sets for different occasions.

> >

> > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > >

> > > If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

> > They matter a lot in PvP. And in PvE are useful in some types of content where you _need_ that tanking/damage sponge role (great for hand kiting at Deimos, for example). The truth (which you refuse to acknowledge) is that both toughness and vitality are actually _very good_ at what they do. It's just what they do is not needed in 90% of PvE content.

> >

> > But no, they shouldn't be removed, because there's always that remaining 10%.

> >

> > Unless of course you overhaul the whole stat system and remove _all_ of them, going back to the original design idea from GW1.

> > (but that one just isn't going to happen, it would be just way too massive amount of work for Anet to ever decide to do it, short of GW3)

>

> I don't PvP that much, but other people in this thread have noted they are undertuned in PvP as well.

 

They are **FAR** from undertuned. Somebody who's trying to play serious **HAS TO** take an amulet with at least 1 defensive stat. Low health classes without Vitality are absolute garbage. Builds without toughness melt to power builds in seconds.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > > > Stats are ok. Its the power creep that is the problem.

> > > >

> > > > Saying that not going to make it go away what should be done is to use stats update as a means of dealing with power creep.

> > > >

> > > > The ideal of "its power creep" being the end all be all argument used is not going to fix any thing nor will it move the talk forward at all. At best its just a means of trying to end a talk. There IS no going back from power creep once its added at best you can only work with the power creep. Updating stats is the end all be all to making power creep both attk and def not as bad.

> > > >

> > > > You need to update all of the stats numbers to make this work.

> > >

> > > But there is nothing wrong with them. I really don't understand how is this a problem.

> > >

> > > Defensive stats should not matter as much as offensive ones. Period. As I said earlier:

> > > **There is no alternative to offence, you either damage the foe, or you don't. But you can avoid the damage, if you don't you have toughness or vitality to soak up some of it.**

> >

> > If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

>

> What? Why? In PvE, people going full glass are usually confident with their reflexes, so they go full glass. If somebody thinks they can't dodge/block/invuln/evade mobs in HoT for example, the game offers you Marauder's gear, Soldier's gear, Rabid gear, Carrion gear, Trailblazer gear... there are tons of them. You are exaggerating.

 

Exactly. The OP is making a mistake common to complaints on the forums about stats. The mistake is in assuming that every stat needs to be useful in every context, and to a wide range of players. The truth is that as long as a stat -- or a stat prefix -- is useful to some players in some context, its existence is justified.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > > > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > > > > @"Imperadordf.2687" said:

> > > > > > Stats are ok. Its the power creep that is the problem.

> > > > >

> > > > > Saying that not going to make it go away what should be done is to use stats update as a means of dealing with power creep.

> > > > >

> > > > > The ideal of "its power creep" being the end all be all argument used is not going to fix any thing nor will it move the talk forward at all. At best its just a means of trying to end a talk. There IS no going back from power creep once its added at best you can only work with the power creep. Updating stats is the end all be all to making power creep both attk and def not as bad.

> > > > >

> > > > > You need to update all of the stats numbers to make this work.

> > > >

> > > > But there is nothing wrong with them. I really don't understand how is this a problem.

> > > >

> > > > Defensive stats should not matter as much as offensive ones. Period. As I said earlier:

> > > > **There is no alternative to offence, you either damage the foe, or you don't. But you can avoid the damage, if you don't you have toughness or vitality to soak up some of it.**

> > >

> > > If they don't matter as much, then they should be removed. Period. Even then, we'd still have a lot of other problems to address.

> >

> > What? Why? In PvE, people going full glass are usually confident with their reflexes, so they go full glass. If somebody thinks they can't dodge/block/invuln/evade mobs in HoT for example, the game offers you Marauder's gear, Soldier's gear, Rabid gear, Carrion gear, Trailblazer gear... there are tons of them. You are exaggerating.

>

> Exactly. The OP is making a mistake common to complaints on the forums about stats. The mistake is in assuming that every stat needs to be useful in every context, and to a wide range of players. The truth is that as long as a stat -- or a stat prefix -- is useful to some players in some context, its existence is justified.

 

Wrong. I am asserting that _basic offense and defense stats_ should be useful in the most common context, which is open world PvE. Everything else should be balanced from there.

 

I don't see how it's anything but common sense that offense should have a higher floor and a lower ceiling than defensive in terms of how it is affected by stats due to the nature of offense vs defense - specifically how offensive helps your defense while defense undermines your offense. If anything, the mechanics of the game are designed in way that makes the opposite is true, which makes zero sense and leads to a meta that is way over-heavily skewed toward sacrificing defense for more offense.

 

By this reasoning, most if not all offensive stats and boons are overtuned while most if not all defensive stats are undertuned.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> >

> > Exactly. The OP is making a mistake common to complaints on the forums about stats. The mistake is in assuming that every stat needs to be useful in every context, and to a wide range of players. The truth is that as long as a stat -- or a stat prefix -- is useful to some players in some context, its existence is justified.

>

> Wrong. I am asserting that _basic offense and defense stats_ should be useful in the most common context, which is open world PvE. Everything else should be balanced from there.

>

> I don't see how it's anything but common sense that offense should have a higher floor and a lower ceiling than defensive in terms of how it is affected by stats due to the nature of offense vs defense - specifically how offensive helps your defense while defense undermines your offense. If anything, the mechanics of the game are designed in way that makes the opposite is true, which makes zero sense and leads to a meta that is way over-heavily skewed toward sacrificing defense for more offense.

>

> By this reasoning, most if not all offensive stats and boons are overtuned while most if not all defensive stats are undertuned.

 

Then it's a good thing that both offensive and defensive stats are useful in open world PvE. The point was that both don't have to be equally useful to all players to justify their existence. Someone who needs more TBD (time before dying) can choose that, someone who does not need it can choose more (i.e., shorter) TTK (time to kill). The idea of applying meta considerations to open world PvE is ludicrous. It is simply not needed.

 

Using OWPvE as the baseline for stats is not going to be healthy for the game as a whole. The effectiveness of offensive and defensive stats should _balance_ in PvP/WvW, where that balance actually matters. Now, if you want to make the case that there should be split effectiveness, that might be viable, though I very much doubt the payoff would be worth the effort.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > @"Einlanzer.1627" said:

> > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > >

> > > Exactly. The OP is making a mistake common to complaints on the forums about stats. The mistake is in assuming that every stat needs to be useful in every context, and to a wide range of players. The truth is that as long as a stat -- or a stat prefix -- is useful to some players in some context, its existence is justified.

> >

> > Wrong. I am asserting that _basic offense and defense stats_ should be useful in the most common context, which is open world PvE. Everything else should be balanced from there.

> >

> > I don't see how it's anything but common sense that offense should have a higher floor and a lower ceiling than defensive in terms of how it is affected by stats due to the nature of offense vs defense - specifically how offensive helps your defense while defense undermines your offense. If anything, the mechanics of the game are designed in way that makes the opposite is true, which makes zero sense and leads to a meta that is way over-heavily skewed toward sacrificing defense for more offense.

> >

> > By this reasoning, most if not all offensive stats and boons are overtuned while most if not all defensive stats are undertuned.

>

> Then it's a good thing that both offensive and defensive stats are useful in open world PvE. The point was that both don't have to be equally useful to all players to justify their existence. Someone who needs more TBD (time before dying) can choose that, someone who does not need it can choose more TTK (time to kill). The idea of applying meta considerations to open world PvE is ludicrous. It is simply not needed.

>

> Using OWPvE as the baseline for stats is not going to be healthy for the game as a whole. The effectiveness of offensive and defensive stats should _balance_ in PvP/WvW, where that balance actually matters. Now, if you want to make the case that there should be split effectiveness, that might be viable, though I very much doubt the payoff would be worth the effort.

 

Good post, agreed.

 

---

 

The more I think about the stats in an action combat system with skills and combinations etc, the more I find that the stats as they are only serve to undermine themselves and the action combat system. I'd honestly prefer if they just flat out removed them, and re-balanced the game around that. We already have damage multipliers and defense multipliers around in traits and boons that honestly do more than enough.

 

That would work better on many levels, except for one: And that is to let players that doesn't feel comfortable with the action combat build themselves tanky to feel more secure, and survive a bit better in group content. So some changes to traits, and possibly runes (with the removal of stats from them) would probably be in order.

 

---

 

I also think there are just flat out too many item slots with stats on them, it's confusing for new players, and even players that has been around the block for a while just gives up and stuffs zerk into all of them and never bother changing stats because it's too much effort.

 

---

 

But realistically speaking, the best we can expect is a slight tweaking of effect, which honestly has more potential for disaster than benefit. If ANet starts tweaking and making defensive stats stronger, we're going to have some disgusting bunker meta's in pvp/wvw again, until they remove ALL defensive stats from the last remaining pvp amulets, and then it's only wvw thats been hosed over (again).

 

Balanse should start with PvP/WvW, OW-Tyria shouldn't even be on the balance radar. And thus, as others have mentioned, the interaction between Active and Passive defenses locks how efficient the passive defenses can be before they break the system.

 

You're better off asking for making specific PvE only runes/sigils that gives defense multiplications, like -10% damage, protection duration, resistance duration etc.

 

/sleep-induced-semi-coherent-rant