if necro is the least popular class

[Swamurabi.7890]

> @"Dace.8173" said:

 

> > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

>

> Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

 

What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

 

If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

 

In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

All these can be shown and tracked.

 

We, the players, never hear anything about this.

 

What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

[TheDevice.2751]

I have a feeling it depends on the game mode. In pvp I doubt necros are played as much as mesmers or warriors or guards. Reapers are almost all gone, the only thing being played in pvp are some scourge.

[Lily.1935]

Necromancer is the most turbulent class with the biggest out cry from the fans over it's strange design choices. It is extremely popular. Part of that has to do with nostalgia for the gw1 necromancer and the other part has to do with how easy it is to play. And all the edge lords seem to love it. The necromancer just has the most divided fan base. You have the reaper players with their edge and the gw1 necromancer mains who hate most the class design but much prefer the scourge design. Both sides have at least some hostility toward the other spec and want the other spec removed from the game and replaced with something to fit their vision of the necromancer.

 

Personally I'm on the scourge's side. I despise reaper. But I'm a bit more levelheaded about it. I think it should be buffed in pve to have competitive dps. And I also want scourge improved to have more synergies outside of curses and soul reaping. Especially improvements to spite, blood and death to better facilitate support on the scourge. Core necromancer is the biggest issue for both reaper and scourge. So fixes need to start there.

[Dace.8173]

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > @"Dace.8173" said:

>

> > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

> >

> > Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

>

> What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

>

> If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

>

> In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

> Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

> Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

> All these can be shown and tracked.

>

> We, the players, never hear anything about this.

>

> What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

 

None of what you said addresses anything I have said or was even talking about. However, exactly what I said, not really as in it will not change the numbers. Necromancer is so far ahead of Engineer and Revenant that is very unlikely that if you broke it down by game mode that we would see different placing for Necromancer. Breaking it down by game mode wouldn't really tell us anything new about how popular each profession. There are about 30k more Necro characters than there are Engineers and 40k more on Revenant. Necromancer clocks in at twice the number of play hours for Engineer and it doesn't look much better for Revenant. Breaking it down by game mode doesn't suddenly change that data. Based on those numbers we already know exactly who is more popular.

 

Also, as someone who has used data sets to answer questions, I can tell you without breaking it down by game mode that the raw data of player hours will never be able to answer the question of why. Why questions are qualitative type in origin and raw numbers won't give us any of the insights you think it might. Everything you suggest are inferences that play hours will never be able to tell us. As a matter of fact the data that ANet likely tracks doesn't answer those questions either. They could make inferences from their data set, and I imagine their data is more precises than the data we have that tells us who is more popular but even what they track in the game doesn't answer questions like why.

 

Play hours data simply does not work like that.

[Swamurabi.7890]

> @"Dace.8173" said:

> > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> >

> > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

> > >

> > > Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

> >

> > What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

> >

> > If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

> >

> > In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

> > Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

> > Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

> > All these can be shown and tracked.

> >

> > We, the players, never hear anything about this.

> >

> > What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

>

> None of what you said addresses anything I have said or was even talking about. However, exactly what I said, not really as in it will not change the numbers. Necromancer is so far ahead of Engineer and Revenant that is very unlikely that if you broke it down by game mode that we would see different placing for Necromancer. Breaking it down by game mode wouldn't really tell us anything new about how popular each profession. There are about 30k more Necro characters than there are Engineers and 40k more on Revenant. Necromancer clocks in at twice the number of play hours for Engineer and it doesn't look much better for Revenant. Breaking it down by game mode doesn't suddenly change that data. Based on those numbers we already know exactly who is more popular.

>

> Also, as someone who has used data sets to answer questions, I can tell you without breaking it down by game mode that the raw data of player hours will never be able to answer the question of why. Why questions are qualitative type in origin and raw numbers won't give us any of the insights you think it might. Everything you suggest are inferences that play hours will never be able to tell us. As a matter of fact the data that ANet likely tracks doesn't answer those questions either. They could make inferences from their data set, and I imagine their data is more precises than the data we have that tells us who is more popular but even what they track in the game doesn't answer questions like why.

>

> Play hours data simply does not work like that.

 

The criteria used in this thread to determine popularity is questionable.

Numbers of characters is irrelevent, so is hours played. Necro is an excellent bot farmer so its character total and hours played will be higher, just like bear bow rangers of old. Revanent is only available since HoT.

 

Even if you changed the criteria to the last week I'd question it because it still includes open world PvE and the many bots as well as the AFK. Looking at each game mode separately removes bots and most of the AFK crowd.

 

Once you look at data per game mode, then you can see the differences between classes and from there ask why one class is used more and why one class is used less. Anet already looks at why some weapons are used more/less, why some traits are used more/less and why some utilities are used more/less.

 

Medium armor classes are very rare in WvW. Everyone who plays WvW knows it. It's been that way since the beginning of the game. Having data that proves this would be the reason Anet changed those classes to allow them to move from solo roamers to the zerg.

 

You can do the same thing for sPvP, PvE raids and PvE fractals and make more intelligent decisions regarding balancing based on popularity of classes

[Dace.8173]

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > >

> > > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

> > > >

> > > > Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

> > >

> > > What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

> > >

> > > If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

> > >

> > > In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

> > > Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

> > > Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

> > > All these can be shown and tracked.

> > >

> > > We, the players, never hear anything about this.

> > >

> > > What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

> >

> > None of what you said addresses anything I have said or was even talking about. However, exactly what I said, not really as in it will not change the numbers. Necromancer is so far ahead of Engineer and Revenant that is very unlikely that if you broke it down by game mode that we would see different placing for Necromancer. Breaking it down by game mode wouldn't really tell us anything new about how popular each profession. There are about 30k more Necro characters than there are Engineers and 40k more on Revenant. Necromancer clocks in at twice the number of play hours for Engineer and it doesn't look much better for Revenant. Breaking it down by game mode doesn't suddenly change that data. Based on those numbers we already know exactly who is more popular.

> >

> > Also, as someone who has used data sets to answer questions, I can tell you without breaking it down by game mode that the raw data of player hours will never be able to answer the question of why. Why questions are qualitative type in origin and raw numbers won't give us any of the insights you think it might. Everything you suggest are inferences that play hours will never be able to tell us. As a matter of fact the data that ANet likely tracks doesn't answer those questions either. They could make inferences from their data set, and I imagine their data is more precises than the data we have that tells us who is more popular but even what they track in the game doesn't answer questions like why.

> >

> > Play hours data simply does not work like that.

>

> The criteria used in this thread to determine popularity is questionable.

> Numbers of characters is irrelevent, so is hours played. Necro is an excellent bot farmer so its character total and hours played will be higher, just like bear bow rangers of old. Revanent is only available since HoT.

>

> Even if you changed the criteria to the last week I'd question it because it still includes open world PvE and the many bots as well as the AFK. Looking at each game mode separately removes bots and most of the AFK crowd.

>

> Once you look at data per game mode, then you can see the differences between classes and from there ask why one class is used more and why one class is used less. Anet already looks at why some weapons are used more/less, why some traits are used more/less and why some utilities are used more/less.

>

> Medium armor classes are very rare in WvW. Everyone who plays WvW knows it. It's been that way since the beginning of the game. Having data that proves this would be the reason Anet changed those classes to allow them to move from solo roamers to the zerg.

>

> You can do the same thing for sPvP, PvE raids and PvE fractals and make more intelligent decisions regarding balancing based on popularity of classes

 

You can call it questionable all you want but it is the only data we have outside of anecdotal to answer the question posed. Still, based on the actual numbers it is very unlikely that breaking it down by game mode will yield different results. Necromancer's numbers are far too high. Since Necromancer is actually a strong profession in WvW and PvP (where you don't farm) it is highly unlikely to change much.

 

And again, game mode data does not really allow you to ask why. You can already ask that question without it and the data you suggest would never answer the question. Additionally, balancing your profession based on popularity is an absolute horrible idea. Balancing is about making sure things work the way they should and not about encouraging people to play a specific profession. If you are making balancing choices based on popularity then you are making bad balance choices.

[Swamurabi.7890]

> @"Dace.8173" said:

> > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > >

> > > > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > > > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

> > > > >

> > > > > Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

> > > >

> > > > What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

> > > >

> > > > If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

> > > >

> > > > In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

> > > > Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

> > > > Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

> > > > All these can be shown and tracked.

> > > >

> > > > We, the players, never hear anything about this.

> > > >

> > > > What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

> > >

> > > None of what you said addresses anything I have said or was even talking about. However, exactly what I said, not really as in it will not change the numbers. Necromancer is so far ahead of Engineer and Revenant that is very unlikely that if you broke it down by game mode that we would see different placing for Necromancer. Breaking it down by game mode wouldn't really tell us anything new about how popular each profession. There are about 30k more Necro characters than there are Engineers and 40k more on Revenant. Necromancer clocks in at twice the number of play hours for Engineer and it doesn't look much better for Revenant. Breaking it down by game mode doesn't suddenly change that data. Based on those numbers we already know exactly who is more popular.

> > >

> > > Also, as someone who has used data sets to answer questions, I can tell you without breaking it down by game mode that the raw data of player hours will never be able to answer the question of why. Why questions are qualitative type in origin and raw numbers won't give us any of the insights you think it might. Everything you suggest are inferences that play hours will never be able to tell us. As a matter of fact the data that ANet likely tracks doesn't answer those questions either. They could make inferences from their data set, and I imagine their data is more precises than the data we have that tells us who is more popular but even what they track in the game doesn't answer questions like why.

> > >

> > > Play hours data simply does not work like that.

> >

> > The criteria used in this thread to determine popularity is questionable.

> > Numbers of characters is irrelevent, so is hours played. Necro is an excellent bot farmer so its character total and hours played will be higher, just like bear bow rangers of old. Revanent is only available since HoT.

> >

> > Even if you changed the criteria to the last week I'd question it because it still includes open world PvE and the many bots as well as the AFK. Looking at each game mode separately removes bots and most of the AFK crowd.

> >

> > Once you look at data per game mode, then you can see the differences between classes and from there ask why one class is used more and why one class is used less. Anet already looks at why some weapons are used more/less, why some traits are used more/less and why some utilities are used more/less.

> >

> > Medium armor classes are very rare in WvW. Everyone who plays WvW knows it. It's been that way since the beginning of the game. Having data that proves this would be the reason Anet changed those classes to allow them to move from solo roamers to the zerg.

> >

> > You can do the same thing for sPvP, PvE raids and PvE fractals and make more intelligent decisions regarding balancing based on popularity of classes

>

> You can call it questionable all you want but it is the only data we have outside of anecdotal to answer the question posed. Still, based on the actual numbers it is very unlikely that breaking it down by game mode will yield different results. Necromancer's numbers are far too high. Since Necromancer is actually a strong profession in WvW and PvP (where you don't farm) it is highly unlikely to change much.

>

> And again, game mode data does not really allow you to ask why. You can already ask that question without it and the data you suggest would never answer the question. Additionally, balancing your profession based on popularity is an absolute horrible idea. Balancing is about making sure things work the way they should and not about encouraging people to play a specific profession. If you are making balancing choices based on popularity then you are making bad balance choices.

 

You can't answer the question with the data we have. Period. The actual numbers, taken from the beginning of the game, won't answer the question of which class is least populer (now), because why even ask the question which class is least popular since the beginning of the game. Nobody cares.

 

As for using game mode data, take a look at the last update.

 

Engineer

 

Core engineer gameplay has had a complex condition-damage rotation for a long time, which paid off with solid damage output. That has fallen off in part due to condition damage tweaks over time and other condition builds eclipsing it by nature of their simplicity. We're adding damage to some core skills, which we hope will entice engineers to take another look at them. Alongside those changes, Thermal Vision, which was the dominant damage option in its tier, has been reworked to offer a better variety of options. Finally, a few elixirs have been updated to remove their random boon, instead granting reduced amounts of all potential boons so that they're more reliable and can be used more intelligently.

 

I expect it goes something like this......

Data shows Engineers are used less then other professions, specifically condi engineer. Why?

Answer: Other condi classes are being used more. Why?

Answer: Other condi classes have more damage. Why?

Answer: "Other condition builds eclipsing it by nature of their simplicity."

Now for the how. How do we fix it?

Answer: "We're adding damage to some core skills, which we hope will entice engineers to take another look at them."

 

Why would they do that? Because they want to balance based upon class/skill/trait/weapon USAGE aka popularity.

 

Data should always make you ask why.

[bara yaoi.3824]

ok everyone i now know that necro is the most popular class because it has the most posts on any class form!!! i love necro it is so popular!

[Lily.1935]

> @"bara yaoi.3824" said:

> ok everyone i now know that necro is the most popular class because it has the most posts on any class form!!! i love necro it is so popular!

 

That isn't the case either. Necromancer is typically tied or close to Mesmer, occasionally swapping places. Its smack dab in the middle at about 5 and 6 usually. Ranger, Elementalist, Warrior, Thief are all much more popular. Necromancer has a cult following though. Pun intended.

[Dace.8173]

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > > > @"Dace.8173" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > > > @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > > > > > > What you really need is player-hours per class for sPvP, PvE(raids and fractals) and WvW. That would show you how popular each class is.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Not really. It is highly unlikely that if you broke it up between the three modes that Necromancer would suddenly become the least popular profession. It may drop a bit here or there and rise a bit here or there but considering the numbers and how far ahead it is over the last place professions of Revenant and Engineer dividing it up isn't likely to sink it below them. At it's worse it may drop down to their level in PvE but I have serious doubts they would drop below those two in WvW and PvP. Despite the problems Necromancer faces in PvE content, it is still a popular profession for people to play.

> > > > >

> > > > > What do you mean not really. It took Anet 6 years to finally change WvW to a player-hours based system, where population and coverage are the dominate factors in winning. Changing what data you track or prioritize will change the choices you make. WvW will be better under a player-hour alliance system then it was under a server based system.

> > > > >

> > > > > If you get the data that shows player-hours for each area you can then ask the why questions.

> > > > >

> > > > > In sPvP, sometimes a class is hard countered by another class, like Mesmers v Thief a few years ago.

> > > > > Sometimes a class isn't used because when you compare two classes, the meta one does everything the unused one does and it does it more/better.

> > > > > Sometimes it's the mechanics of the encounters that either demand one class over another or actually discourage another class.

> > > > > All these can be shown and tracked.

> > > > >

> > > > > We, the players, never hear anything about this.

> > > > >

> > > > > What we do hear is Anet balancing trait, weapon, and skills because of under or over use and recently DPS.

> > > >

> > > > None of what you said addresses anything I have said or was even talking about. However, exactly what I said, not really as in it will not change the numbers. Necromancer is so far ahead of Engineer and Revenant that is very unlikely that if you broke it down by game mode that we would see different placing for Necromancer. Breaking it down by game mode wouldn't really tell us anything new about how popular each profession. There are about 30k more Necro characters than there are Engineers and 40k more on Revenant. Necromancer clocks in at twice the number of play hours for Engineer and it doesn't look much better for Revenant. Breaking it down by game mode doesn't suddenly change that data. Based on those numbers we already know exactly who is more popular.

> > > >

> > > > Also, as someone who has used data sets to answer questions, I can tell you without breaking it down by game mode that the raw data of player hours will never be able to answer the question of why. Why questions are qualitative type in origin and raw numbers won't give us any of the insights you think it might. Everything you suggest are inferences that play hours will never be able to tell us. As a matter of fact the data that ANet likely tracks doesn't answer those questions either. They could make inferences from their data set, and I imagine their data is more precises than the data we have that tells us who is more popular but even what they track in the game doesn't answer questions like why.

> > > >

> > > > Play hours data simply does not work like that.

> > >

> > > The criteria used in this thread to determine popularity is questionable.

> > > Numbers of characters is irrelevent, so is hours played. Necro is an excellent bot farmer so its character total and hours played will be higher, just like bear bow rangers of old. Revanent is only available since HoT.

> > >

> > > Even if you changed the criteria to the last week I'd question it because it still includes open world PvE and the many bots as well as the AFK. Looking at each game mode separately removes bots and most of the AFK crowd.

> > >

> > > Once you look at data per game mode, then you can see the differences between classes and from there ask why one class is used more and why one class is used less. Anet already looks at why some weapons are used more/less, why some traits are used more/less and why some utilities are used more/less.

> > >

> > > Medium armor classes are very rare in WvW. Everyone who plays WvW knows it. It's been that way since the beginning of the game. Having data that proves this would be the reason Anet changed those classes to allow them to move from solo roamers to the zerg.

> > >

> > > You can do the same thing for sPvP, PvE raids and PvE fractals and make more intelligent decisions regarding balancing based on popularity of classes

> >

> > You can call it questionable all you want but it is the only data we have outside of anecdotal to answer the question posed. Still, based on the actual numbers it is very unlikely that breaking it down by game mode will yield different results. Necromancer's numbers are far too high. Since Necromancer is actually a strong profession in WvW and PvP (where you don't farm) it is highly unlikely to change much.

> >

> > And again, game mode data does not really allow you to ask why. You can already ask that question without it and the data you suggest would never answer the question. Additionally, balancing your profession based on popularity is an absolute horrible idea. Balancing is about making sure things work the way they should and not about encouraging people to play a specific profession. If you are making balancing choices based on popularity then you are making bad balance choices.

>

> You can't answer the question with the data we have. Period. The actual numbers, taken from the beginning of the game, won't answer the question of which class is least populer (now), because why even ask the question which class is least popular since the beginning of the game. Nobody cares.

>

> As for using game mode data, take a look at the last update.

>

> Engineer

>

> Core engineer gameplay has had a complex condition-damage rotation for a long time, which paid off with solid damage output. That has fallen off in part due to condition damage tweaks over time and other condition builds eclipsing it by nature of their simplicity. We're adding damage to some core skills, which we hope will entice engineers to take another look at them. Alongside those changes, Thermal Vision, which was the dominant damage option in its tier, has been reworked to offer a better variety of options. Finally, a few elixirs have been updated to remove their random boon, instead granting reduced amounts of all potential boons so that they're more reliable and can be used more intelligently.

>

> I expect it goes something like this......

> Data shows Engineers are used less then other professions, specifically condi engineer. Why?

> Answer: Other condi classes are being used more. Why?

> Answer: Other condi classes have more damage. Why?

> Answer: "Other condition builds eclipsing it by nature of their simplicity."

> Now for the how. How do we fix it?

> Answer: "We're adding damage to some core skills, which we hope will entice engineers to take another look at them."

>

> Why would they do that? Because they want to balance based upon class/skill/trait/weapon USAGE aka popularity.

>

> Data should always make you ask why.

 

Um no, you've got that backward. I work with data day in and day out. I've designed my own studies. I've conducted my own research. I know how to work data. You ask why first and then you collect your data based on what you think the why is. Having an idea on the why will tell you if you want to go out there and just conduct survey research or if in-depth interviews are going to answer the questions you have. The why should come before the data because if the data came first then you are likely going to have to go out there and collect more data in order to answer the question you have. If you ask the why before the data then you can collect your data in a way that accounts for all the possible additional whys you might have after you answer your initial question. Good data collection involves a well thought out why beforehand.

 

The data we have at present though is a great source of data to answer the question of popularity. Number of hours played and number of characters created is a great indicator of popularity. Even if people were using it to farm the fact that people picked it to farm is an indicator that it is popular on some level. The data we used to answer the question is fine and valid. The problem isn't with the data, it's with the question. Saying that Necromancer was least popular without defining what the term popular means for the purpose of this conversation is the core problem. People naturally answered such an ill-defined question with the only data set we had access to, hours played and characters created. One could ask a more precise form of popularity but that wasn't the question that was initially. If you want to ask a different version of popularity then you should start your own thread in which you define popularity differently. For the purpose of this thread however and based on the conversation that developed here the data we used answered the question just fine.

 

Your Engineer example of using popularity to balance is also flawed. It falls apart at the first answer of Why. You made an assumption on the Why. Condi Engineer could be used less than any number of reasons outside of other condi classes are more used. It could be that DPS Engineer is a better build. It could be that players don't want to play Condi Engineer but want to play Healer Engineer. It could be that people simply don't like Engineer to begin with. These are not balance related issues. These are player choice issues. It does not follow from your example that Condi Engineer needs to be buffed as balance is never about the number of people making use of a trait/skill/profession/weapon etc etc etc. At no point in your example do you hit on a real balance issue. What you describe in your example are player choice issues. It is 100% perfectly fine that people want to play other Condi based professions. There is no game inbalance if folks want to play another Condi build over Engineer condi because of how simple other builds are. Everything in your example are clear player preference choices and buffing Engineer in the fashion you suggested would actually throw off in game balance. After your buffs what's next? More buffs if folks don't play Condi Engineer? Where do the buffs stop? When do the buffs stop? How are those buffs going to affect other condi professions and builds? When is Condi Engineer popular enough that it no longer needs buffs? What's the player threshold here? More than Scourge? More than Ele? More than Mesmer? Less than? There is not a single mechanical problem in your example that needs fixing.

 

Balancing by popularity will always toss game balance into wack because popularity is a subjective emotion that is removed from whether or not there is an actual problem. Balancing is about fixing problems, not forcing people to play a certain way or to pick up a certain profession. Just because something is unpopular it does not follow that it isn't working and needs fixing. If that were the case then the current popularity level of Necromancer would mean that Necromancer is fine and is not in need of any fixing. But we know that isn't true. Popularity based balancing tends to leave the least popular aspects in the game behind and favors the more popular aspects of a game. Popularity based balancing leads to unneeded changes or needed changes going unanswered.

 

Popularity is a horrible measure to balance by. If you think otherwise create a game, balance it via popularity, and then let us know how well that turned out for you. Proper balance should be about what is and isn't working, that's it.

[Yannir.4132]

Entire premise of the thread is false. - Gets 40 replies. - Makes sense.

[Axl.8924]

Why is necromancer popular?

 

Well for one thing the flavor from both scourge and reaper.There is a certain amount of design creativity in necromancer not shown with others that makes it desired, even if it gets nerfed into the ground.Look at reaper:Its hugely popular because its designed, and easy to use.

 

Why is it unused more often outside of WVW and maybe open world pve? Because the class has serious design flaws that are perpetuated by bad choices on ANET's side.They chose to make designs which would come out to be overpowered and you got the unwillingness from many people who play other classes such as:Warrior and elementalist to learn how to counter.Instead, they demand nerfs.Anet's choice of how they made pve classes work is also highly questionable, as only a couple classes dominate pve support role, and others like elementalist and necro have a hard time finding a role in that.Worse yet:The gutting of necros damage in pve and lack of support options made it less desireable.

 

Why is theif more popular in pvp? Well thief has a different play style and its very strong and it can roam.It can go stealth and hide and do a ton of damage, and its fun.

 

My point is:Anet needs to work on their design choices for not just necromancers, but all classes.There is a limited choice of options for pve at the moment, because only a couple classes dominate healing/Support and only 1 class really dominates tanking:(mesmer)

 

Anet needs to stop with the bad design of stacking stuff together on 1 ability and also to do more testing of WVW and pvp and patch it sooner and smaller amounts while testing, and only then can you have a class thats nerfed in the right proportions without being gutted.

 

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

Obviously the OP is trolling. But I do like his style :)

 

I sometimes wonder if this is the whole reasoning behind Necro underperforming so much in the PvE endgame. Maybe for ANet, balance is considered through the _whole_ spectrum. If we can believe current statistics from sites like GW2efficiency, etc. in playtime, the Necro is indeed right under (or very near to) the Mesmer ... somewhere in the middle of the pack. But, I actually believe the Necro might be the absolute number 1 if it comes to "look and feel". If you would make the Necro as _useful_ as the Mesmer in PvE (or PvP/WvW for that matter, they're pretty much the undisputed gods everywhere, atm), I believe the Necro will even top the Warrior and Guardian in playtime! Only because it's such a great profession to 'look' at. I.e.: I really believe some legendaries are just solely _made_ for the Necromancer! Or even think about something more subtle like the lines he/she says when he/she creates/destroys a minion. There's just no other class like it!

 

That said, if ANet really balances its game that way ... I'm really not happy! Imo, it's really wrong to balance a game on aesthetics as well. It _should_ **only** balance classes on how they perform! And if that means, the Necro would top all the charts in popularity, then so be it!

[Axl.8924]

I personally think maybe they could add more mechanics involved in tanking? Maybe that way mesmer isn't always undisputed king, and reaper might be able to tank.Make choices on every class that in order to tank, you have to sacrifice dps to be that super tanky in the options.

 

Make auras viable for eles, and make necro have something besides barriers

 

Something like this needs to happen, or we will have a few dominate support, which in my opinion shouldn't happen.I think all classes should have their niche in support area or none should dominate.

 

I would love necro to have a role in support even if it means having dps at like 29k dps in raid total, but they need to have competitive support first.

 

 

[Loki.4871]

There will always be a least popular class in games with more than 1 class.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Yannir.4132" said:

> Entire premise of the thread is false. - Gets 40 replies. - Makes sense.

 

I'm watching this thread to see how many people haven't figured out it's clickbait. Go check out some of the other threads the OP has started.

 

Even if there is some kind of rhetoric to the weak correlation between forum popularity and class performance, it's completely lost.

[DragonSlayer.1087]

Where'd you get this idea? Necro is probably one of the most popular class. Also the most noob-friendly one in GW2.