A different approach to nerfs

[Nopesarenotforme.5190]

Is this new team going to take a different approach to balancing?

I really don't think that its healthy for the game to nerf professions to the ground, and make people that have different tastes mad, and general functions in the game.

the approach that is nerf itself seems to me like more of a problem creator than a solver.

[Irenio CalmonHuang.2048]

Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

[Arheundel.6451]

Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

[Mbelch.9028]

> @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

 

I think this is well put.

 

Will there be any re-assessment of nonfunctioning classes/specs in PvP/WvW? For example Core Ele is just vastly outgunned right now. Would love to see an elevation of classes/specs that are vastly out of the meta.

[Nopesarenotforme.5190]

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

 

But people can't change the meta themselves. The necromancer for example suffers from underperformance for a very long time while you have the renegade doing 38k dps.

Shouldn't all the dps professions in the game be equal to each other more or less in the matter of performance? making all the professions do 35k dps + - sounds like a good balance to me.

[Irenio CalmonHuang.2048]

> @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

 

Most often_nerfing a completely dominant build actually creates __more__ build diversity.

 

In addition to keeping build diversity alive on a single profession we try to ensure build and role diversity across all professions.

Sometimes that means nerfing a build on one profession so that other professions can have a role in that same space.

[Robert Gee.9246]

Balance isn't always a zero-sum game. Just because there is a nerf to something doesn't mean there needs to be a corresponding buff. If that were the case we'd also have to nerf something every time we buffed something. :s

 

Nerfs do not necessarily reduce build diversity. We've used nerfs in the past to reduce the power of skills/traits that were crowding out other options because they were too strong.

[Autumn.8043]

Is that why we didn't have any form of compensation for the gutting of Epidemic and are now bottom of the barrel in PvE across all our specializations and builds? I'm really enjoying my new found build diversity as a Necromancer..

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Nopesarenotforme.5190" said:

> > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> > If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

>

> But people can't change the meta themselves. The necromancer for example suffers from underperformance for a very long time while you have the renegade doing 38k dps.

> Shouldn't all the dps professions in the game be equal to each other more or less in the matter of performance? making all the professions do 35k dps + - sounds like a good balance to me.

 

Yet, Necro was significantly over performing in WvW and the nerf brought it more into balance.

 

As a side note: my understanding of the original intent of the game was ALL professions would be capable of being 'DPS' professions .

[Tails.9372]

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> Sometimes that means nerfing a build on one profession so that other professions can have a role in that same space.

What's the point of this? I don't see any reason why two different professions shouldn't be able to fit a similar role as long as there is a noticeable difference in regards to their gameplay.

> @"Robert Gee.9246" said:

> Nerfs do not necessarily reduce build diversity.

But in some cases they are without actually providing any positive results in return.

 

[Arheundel.6451]

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> > Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

>

> Most often_nerfing a completely dominant build actually creates __more__ build diversity.

>

> In addition to keeping build diversity alive on a single profession we try to ensure build and role diversity across all professions.

> Sometimes that means nerfing a build on one profession so that other professions can have a role in that same space.

 

The problem is that the community will always gravitate towards the profession perceived as the "most effective" for a particular role, at any given time we always had max 2 professions deemed meta for a given role, what are your thoughts about this issue?

[Nopesarenotforme.5190]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Nopesarenotforme.5190" said:

> > > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > > Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> > > If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

> >

> > But people can't change the meta themselves. The necromancer for example suffers from underperformance for a very long time while you have the renegade doing 38k dps.

> > Shouldn't all the dps professions in the game be equal to each other more or less in the matter of performance? making all the professions do 35k dps + - sounds like a good balance to me.

>

> Yet, Necro was significantly over performing in WvW and the nerf brought it more into balance.

>

> As a side note: my understanding of the original intent of the game was ALL professions would be capable of being 'DPS' professions .

 

This was meant to be on the PVE necromancer but the point was that Anet should decide what's the line that they shouldn't cross so that there won't be professions that over perform nor professions that under perform.

[Ghotistyx.6942]

> @"Tails.9372" said:

> What's the point of this? I don't see any reason why two different professions shouldn't be able to fit a similar role as long as there is a noticeable difference in regards to their gameplay.

 

That's what Irenio is saying. By nerfing one over-performing profession, that allows other professions to share that same space. If the dominant profession's performance is too oppressive, there's no reason to use the underperforming professions. If the difference is 1%, then their performance is basically equal. If the difference is 20%, then the outlier(s) need to be brought closer to average. Sometimes that means buffing the lower, other times it means nerfing the higher.

 

 

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Nopesarenotforme.5190" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"Nopesarenotforme.5190" said:

> > > > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > > > Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> > > > If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

> > >

> > > But people can't change the meta themselves. The necromancer for example suffers from underperformance for a very long time while you have the renegade doing 38k dps.

> > > Shouldn't all the dps professions in the game be equal to each other more or less in the matter of performance? making all the professions do 35k dps + - sounds like a good balance to me.

> >

> > Yet, Necro was significantly over performing in WvW and the nerf brought it more into balance.

> >

> > As a side note: my understanding of the original intent of the game was ALL professions would be capable of being 'DPS' professions .

>

> This was meant to be on the PVE necromancer but the point was that Anet should decide what's the line that they shouldn't cross so that there won't be professions that over perform nor professions that under perform.

 

I understand it was to be PvE necromancer.

 

But if you look at ben's response here:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/52284/will-there-be-continued-skill-splits-for-the-three-main-modes#latest

 

There really isn't a 'WvW vs PvE vs sPvP" necromancer.

[Irenio CalmonHuang.2048]

> @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> > > Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

> >

> > Most often_nerfing a completely dominant build actually creates __more__ build diversity.

> >

> > In addition to keeping build diversity alive on a single profession we try to ensure build and role diversity across all professions.

> > Sometimes that means nerfing a build on one profession so that other professions can have a role in that same space.

>

> The problem is that the community will always gravitate towards the profession perceived as the "most effective" for a particular role, at any given time we always had max 2 professions deemed meta for a given role, what are your thoughts about this issue?

 

It is certainly an issue. -_-

We try to keep professions within a close range of each other for particular roles. We don't always succeed, but we keep honing in on it.

The goal is NOT to make them perfectly equal because then you'd take them based on the next most useful secondary thing they do. Instead we try to keep them at different levels of utility for damage, support, sustain, survivability, etc, so they are less comparable with notable tradeoffs.

[MithranArkanere.8957]

I'd rather have two people with 100 hp each and attacks that do between 1 to 5 damage than two people with 100K HP each and attacks that do 200K damage.

 

Shaving excesses won't get you too close to the first case, but never nerfing eventually gets you to the second one.

[Nopesarenotforme.5190]

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> > > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > > > @"Arheundel.6451" said:

> > > > Shouldn't nerfs come hand in hand with compensating buffs to keep build diversity alive?

> > >

> > > Most often_nerfing a completely dominant build actually creates __more__ build diversity.

> > >

> > > In addition to keeping build diversity alive on a single profession we try to ensure build and role diversity across all professions.

> > > Sometimes that means nerfing a build on one profession so that other professions can have a role in that same space.

> >

> > The problem is that the community will always gravitate towards the profession perceived as the "most effective" for a particular role, at any given time we always had max 2 professions deemed meta for a given role, what are your thoughts about this issue?

>

 

> Instead we try to keep them at different levels of utility for damage, support, sustain, survivability, etc, so they are less comparable with notable tradeoffs.

 

This sounds very promising, but I guess that those changes are yet to come because right now: staff weaver gets nerfed in damage - but lacks survivability, druid dominates the healing role because of it being the best - bringing the most utility compared to other healers so they aren't needed, Reaper and scourge lack dps but have survivabilty, but it isn't needed from the fact that a support chrono can grant aegis on demand and many buffs that makes him the meta and so on...

[zealex.9410]

> @"Autumn.8043" said:

> Is that why we didn't have any form of compensation for the gutting of Epidemic and are now bottom of the barrel in PvE across all our specializations and builds? I'm really enjoying my new found build diversity as a Necromancer..

 

Tune in to teapot's streams.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"Robert Gee.9246" said:

> Balance isn't always a zero-sum game. Just because there is a nerf to something doesn't mean there needs to be a corresponding buff. If that were the case we'd also have to nerf something every time we buffed something. :s

>

> Nerfs do not necessarily reduce build diversity. We've used nerfs in the past to reduce the power of skills/traits that were crowding out other options because they were too strong.

 

@Robert Gee.9246

 

Yes, however I've seen the team pushing Mesmer toward unusable options. After the glamour nerf, the Mesmer found she had few if any strong builds left. It remained so for well over a year. A similar issue happened with the removal of clone death.

 

Moa is a prominent example of balance literally pushing a particular play out of the game.

 

**I don't believe the balance team should attempt to direct play style or push the use of particular builds.** The purpose of balance is to maintain fairness, only that.

[Autumn.8043]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Autumn.8043" said:

> > Is that why we didn't have any form of compensation for the gutting of Epidemic and are now bottom of the barrel in PvE across all our specializations and builds? I'm really enjoying my new found build diversity as a Necromancer..

>

> Tune in to teapot's streams.

 

Still doesn't defeat my point! In any semi organized group everything Necromancer brings is pointless.. Why would my group need the res potential if no one goes down. I'm not talking about random pug adventures, any self informed player would already know Necromancer has it's uses in carrying pugs. I'm basing my points on an organized group who know what they are doing. Let's not even get in to the territory of Necro DPS and the fact that if that particular player is anywhere near the top than the other DPS are doing something highly wrong which again.. doesn't happen in an organized group.

[Ok I Did It.2854]

> @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

 

Unfortunately it feels like that the nerfs are not to control, its like full destruction of a class to the point where its not used in meta's anymore, this has been the case many times over, you just have to look at the current make up or some teams for certain content, this game really isn't a play how you want, its sometimes feels more like a play not the Anet balance team want you to play.

 

I love playing Necro, but even I know that "technically" it could be used, but if I want to play with anyone in game outside my close friends I better be dropping that Necro and rolling a way higher DPS class, this is not balance.

 

Yet we have other classes that are massively over powered and most game modes, yet we never seem to hear anything from the balance team about them classes, think any class that can burst you down from max health to dead from an invis, or classes that if they cannot burst you down, have the ability to stealth out completely heal up and come back for round 2, while all your skills are on cool down, this is not balance, this is a play x class or don't bother.

 

I ultimately feel that things wont change, and you will allow "certain" classes to rain supreme in this game, while others continue to get beaten into the dirt, until they are hardly used anymore, it feels that when certain classes get complained about you move in to cripple them classes fast, yet ignore other completely over powered classes/builds.

[Jojo.6590]

Please take into consideration the points made by players that play (main) the profession in question for a nerf and/ or buff, not the mob mentality(i.e people whom don't have a full understanding of how a class functions). Someone who plays (mains) a class should (hopefully) have a better understanding of whats broken then someone who does not. Of course an outside perspective is still always useful. A great example of this is Mesmer, its still considered unbalanced in certain aspects, these areas have been mentioned repetitively by people that play (main) Mesmer, yet a majority of the changes that have been made have focused on band wagon complaints (given some of the complaints are just while others of course are not) this is not allowing for the profession to be balanced properly.

Thank you for your hard work, we know this is no easy task!

[mindcircus.1506]

> @"Nopesarenotforme.5190" said:

> > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> > If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

>

> But people can't change the meta themselves. The necromancer for example suffers from underperformance for a very long time while you have the renegade doing 38k dps.

> Shouldn't all the dps professions in the game be equal to each other more or less in the matter of performance? making all the professions do 35k dps + - sounds like a good balance to me.

 

And they should all have a second health bar too....right?

[mindcircus.1506]

> @"Ok I Did It.2854" said:

> > @"Irenio CalmonHuang.2048" said:

> > Nerfs are something that must be done when things get out of line.

> > If there are no nerfs then there is only power creep.

>

> Unfortunately it feels like that the nerfs are not to control, its like full destruction of a class to the point where its not used in meta's anymore, this has been the case many times over, you just have to look at the current make up or some teams for certain content, this game really isn't a play how you want, its sometimes feels more like a play not the Anet balance team want you to play.

 

Hyperbole like this does not add to your point or the conversation.

 

Acting like any of the nerfs that hit necro, mesmer or ele was the "full destruction of the class" is just a meme. It's powered by a weak emotional reaction to the lessening of your power-fantasy.

 

>I ultimately feel that things wont change, and you will allow "certain" classes to rain supreme in this game, while others continue to get beaten into the dirt

 

Again with the meme.

 

Good players adapt to change.

[felincyriac.5981]

> @"Autumn.8043" said:

> Is that why we didn't have any form of compensation for the gutting of Epidemic and are now bottom of the barrel in PvE across all our specializations and builds? I'm really enjoying my new found build diversity as a Necromancer..

 

I found that necro's are most effective when they are used for storage, ran out of bank space? Make a necro. I hope the next expansion focuses and hones this ability, though not too much since we don't want people crying for nerfs.