Remove Alacrity, Give All Skills 33% Reduction in PvE?

[Talindra.4958]

It will be too strong for pvp

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Kalthea.4326" said:

> If I'm being honest, having the 33% CDR is /really nice/. It's very fun, and it's fundamental to Raiding. And that's a problem. It shouldn't be fundamental to Raiding. It shouldn't be fundamental to /anything/. It was a bad thing to put in a game that's balanced around classes and skills that aren't on par with eachother, and it's made even worse by having Chrono run all the time with everyone. Mind you, they're also there because of the other boons they can upkeep, but still, why 33% CDR? That seems like a bit much to be slapping on to a single class, giving it the "You must bring this with you, otherwise you'll just end up not doing so great or sub-par." sticker.

 

LOL!! Remove Alacrity :-) If I recall correctly, the Alacrity was one of the selling points for HoT and the special feature related **only** to Chronomancers. Not core Mesmers, but Chronomancers. The Alacrity is no more exclusive today. On top of this, it became a merely buff, you can steal it, corrupt it, remove it. And its strength has been reduced several times, starting from 66% and continuing with the ways a Chrono can generate it, can share it etc.

And now we have someone asking to remove it completely. I don't want to comment to much the request to nullify a class only because someone don't play that class, but in the post I did not see any mention to any compensation for the Chronos for the Alacrity. Taking into account that the Chrono is so good as support and you want to remove it from this role, what about something about making the Chrono a top tier DPS? Something rivaling an Ele? Or even surpassing an Ele?

Remember, this is about the Chrono, the Alacrity sharing Chrono, and not about the Mirages (I don't mention here the core Mesmer - this is already removed from the game).

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"Kalthea.4326" said:

> > If I'm being honest, having the 33% CDR is /really nice/. It's very fun, and it's fundamental to Raiding. And that's a problem. It shouldn't be fundamental to Raiding. It shouldn't be fundamental to /anything/. It was a bad thing to put in a game that's balanced around classes and skills that aren't on par with eachother, and it's made even worse by having Chrono run all the time with everyone. Mind you, they're also there because of the other boons they can upkeep, but still, why 33% CDR? That seems like a bit much to be slapping on to a single class, giving it the "You must bring this with you, otherwise you'll just end up not doing so great or sub-par." sticker.

>

> LOL!! Remove Alacrity :-) If I recall correctly, the Alacrity was one of the selling points for HoT and the special feature related **only** to Chronomancers. Not core Mesmers, but Chronomancers. The Alacrity is no more exclusive today. On top of this, it became a merely buff, you can steal it, corrupt it, remove it. And its strength has been reduced several times, starting from 66% and continuing with the ways a Chrono can generate it, can share it etc.

> And now we have someone asking to remove it completely. I don't want to comment to much the request to nullify a class only because someone don't play that class, but in the post I did not see any mention to any compensation for the Chronos for the Alacrity. Taking into account that the Chrono is so good as support and you want to remove it from this role, what about something about making the Chrono a top tier DPS? Something rivaling an Ele? Or even surpassing an Ele?

> Remember, this is about the Chrono, the Alacrity sharing Chrono, and not about the Mirages (I don't mention here the core Mesmer - this is already removed from the game).

 

This thread is about alacrity, not chrono.

 

Maybe separating the both issues would be wise. It is shocking how many people constantly automatically think chrono when a discussion about alacrity comes up.

 

Removing alacrity from the game has and should have nothing to do with balance of one or two classes but with what is best for the game. The question is: would the game be better off without alacrity and if so why?

 

Class balance sets in after general game balance and major decisions like this. Other similar examples include turning quickness into a boon, changing how stability works etc. and in all cases affected classes were rebalanced.

 

TC in that regard already made the mistake to mention chrono, yes. Forgivable considering he didn't even manage to get the basics right about what alacrity does. It does not invalidate the theory though that the game might be better off without this boon, or make the boon personal only.

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

 

>

> Removing alacrity from the game has and should have nothing to do with balance of one or two classes but with what is best for the game. The question is: would the game be better off without alacrity and if so why?

>

> Class balance sets in after general game balance and major decisions like this. Other similar examples include turning quickness into a boon, changing how stability works etc. and in all cases affected classes were re balanced.

>

In my opinion this is not correct.

Think about this: **"Let's remove invisibility from the game OR give to all the classes a (preferable passive) trait for perma revealing"**. If a developer belonging to the balance team needs time to realize that the Thief will be killed by this change, then most probably, he plays other game.

This is the situation with the Alacrity (and, despite your statement, with the Chrono) - If from a DPS class you remove a minor support ability, used only in very special circumstances and very rarely, then YES, re balancing the class in time is OK. But if from a support class you remove one of its main support tools (something advertised as **unique and exclusive**), then how long time is needed to realize that the class suffered a heavy blow and needs compensation?

[NICENIKESHOE.7128]

Do you remember the days in dungeon before HoT/raid release? Dungeons are all about running dps, every 5 men group runs dps or get kick.

 

Its awfully boring.

 

At its core GW2 is still a dps oriented game rather than the holy trinity. Support has little place and is replaceable by dps if faster kills ensure survival. Removing alacrity ultimately causes everyone but one healer running full dps. Even firebrand can run full dps while easily keeping quickness up. Call it remnant if you want, but boon is a unique mechanic in GW2 that replaces holy trinity. Alacrity is merely a part of it, and removing it will lead to people complaining about perma quickness, fury or 25 might as mandatory next. If you think removing boon mechanics suit your need then honestly GW2 is not for you.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

>

> >

> > Removing alacrity from the game has and should have nothing to do with balance of one or two classes but with what is best for the game. The question is: would the game be better off without alacrity and if so why?

> >

> > Class balance sets in after general game balance and major decisions like this. Other similar examples include turning quickness into a boon, changing how stability works etc. and in all cases affected classes were re balanced.

> >

> In my opinion this is not correct.

> Think about this: **"Let's remove invisibility from the game OR give to all the classes a (preferable passive) trait for perma revealing"**. If a developer belonging to the balance team needs time to realize that the Thief will be killed by this change, then most probably, he plays other game.

> This is the situation with the Alacrity (and, despite your statement, with the Chrono) - If from a DPS class you remove a minor support ability, used only in very special circumstances and very rarely, then YES, re balancing the class in time is OK. But if from a support class you remove one of its main support tools (something advertised as **unique and exclusive**), then how long time is needed to realize that the class suffered a heavy blow and needs compensation?

 

That is the worst argument one can make.

 

Not wanting to balance the game because 1 class might be affected is retarded.

 

Alacrity is not unique to chrono, it was already given to revenant/renegade. Chances are very high it will be given to other classes with the next elite specialization introduction at the latest. Arguing that alacrity is unique to chrono (it is not) and as such needs to stay has no merit. There are other actually useful arguments which can be made (I mentioned some above like over simplifying the game).

 

If chrono is only taken for alacrity, that is a balance issues which needs addressing when it comes to this strong a boon.

 

As to you example with thief, believe it or not, Thief could be rebalanced to work without stealth or the way stealth is currently implemented.

 

> @"NICENIKESHOE.7128" said:

> Do you remember the days in dungeon before HoT/raid release? Dungeons are all about running dps, every 5 men group runs dps or get kick.

>

> Its awfully boring.

>

> At its core GW2 is still a dps oriented game rather than the holy trinity. Support has little place and is replaceable by dps if faster kills ensure survival. Removing alacrity ultimately causes everyone but one healer running full dps. Even firebrand can run full dps while easily keeping quickness up. Call it remnant if you want, but boon is a unique mechanic in GW2 that replaces holy trinity. Alacrity is merely a part of it, and removing it will lead to people complaining about perma quickness, fury or 25 might as mandatory next. If you think removing boon mechanics suit your need then honestly GW2 is not for you.

 

True and I mentioned that I believe that removing alacrity brings problems and would make the game more stale.

 

Compared to all other boons and support skills, it is the most powerful though and that warrants discussion.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> >

> > Implying current bad practice is better than previous bad practice ?

>

> That's not what I am implying. You lot keep telling me that alacrity makes it very difficult to balance the game, and that it hinders Anet's ability to balance. If that is true, why wasn't the game well balanced when alacrity didn't exist?

>

 

You are by asking that question.

 

You are implying that the devs weren't capable of having bad balance practice without alacrity being present. They very much were and did make several bad decisions back then, just as they've made several bad decisions now.

[Cristalyan.5728]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

 

> That is the worst argument one can make.

>

> Not wanting to balance the game because 1 class might be affected is kitten.

>

> If chrono is only taken for alacrity, that is a balance issues which needs addressing when it comes to this strong a boon.

 

According to your statement, the only balance issue in this game is the Alacrity, more specifically the Chrono Alacrity (because, I know also this is **not an unique and exclusive** feature anymore). Everything else is balanced but because of the Alacrity the **game itself** is unbalanced. Are you serious? And even if this is the real situation, why to affect that one class and not to try to bring it to the right level in the moment you remove its Alacrity? You need time for this?

Well, this kind of "as long I'm not in cause, I agree that the sacrifices are needed" is not my way.

 

Also, I think the post is hypocritical: The OP clearly don't main a Chrono. So, instead of being honest and ask what he needs for his class to be competitive he demands the removal of another class? This cannot be a serious demand. "Nerf other classes! No matter how, but nerf!" I mentioned before? **OTHER classes**

 

**"If chrono is only taken for alacrity, that is a balance issues which needs addressing when it comes to this strong a boon. "**

If I recall correctly many Chronos in this game demanded the same thing. Something to make the Chrono competitive outside of the "boon share boot" sphere. That means replacing the support tools with something allowing them to perform other roles. Unfortunately, until now only the first part of this happened: the support tools were removed or weakened. **Without replacing the loss with something of the same value**. This is why I asked if the OP took the idea of some compensation into consideration. Something powerful enough to allow the Chrono to play other roles. Main DPS in a team for example. Like an Ele.

[Ferus.3165]

> @"Talindra.4958" said:

> It will be too strong for pvp

 

something like that would be pve only ofc.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

>

> > That is the worst argument one can make.

> >

> > Not wanting to balance the game because 1 class might be affected is kitten.

> >

> > If chrono is only taken for alacrity, that is a balance issues which needs addressing when it comes to this strong a boon.

>

> According to your statement, the only balance issue in this game is the Alacrity, more specifically the Chrono Alacrity (because, I know also this is **not an unique and exclusive** feature anymore). Everything else is balanced but because of the Alacrity the **game itself** is unbalanced. Are you serious? And even if this is the real situation, why to affect that one class and not to try to bring it to the right level in the moment you remove its Alacrity? You need time for this?

> Well, this kind of "as long I'm not in cause, I agree that the sacrifices are needed" is not my way.

>

 

Great so you are more concerned with your class of choice over balance and are arguing in that basis, I do not.

 

I try to look at balance issues objectively without taking preference to classes.

 

> @"Cristalyan.5728" said:

> Also, I think the post is hypocritical: The OP clearly don't main a Chrono. So, instead of being honest and ask what he needs for his class to be competitive he demands the removal of another class? This cannot be a serious demand. "Nerf other classes! No matter how, but nerf!" I mentioned before? **OTHER classes**

 

Well I main chrono and I have mained Mesmer since release and I have no issue with realizing that alacrity might cause issues.

 

I already mentioned I disagree with TC bringing chrono into this discussion.

[thrag.9740]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"thrag.9740" said:

> > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > >

> > > Implying current bad practice is better than previous bad practice ?

> >

> > That's not what I am implying. You lot keep telling me that alacrity makes it very difficult to balance the game, and that it hinders Anet's ability to balance. If that is true, why wasn't the game well balanced when alacrity didn't exist?

> >

>

> You are by asking that question.

>

> You are implying that the devs weren't capable of having bad balance practice without alacrity being present. They very much were and did make several bad decisions back then, just as they've made several bad decisions now.

 

Ok so balance is bad whether we have alacrity or not? Ok then, I would rather we have alacrity because it allows the game to be more fast paced.

[Zenith.7301]

> @"Klipso.8653" said:

> The reason it's so over the top is because this is a game that relies on management of skill cooldowns instead of mana pools.

>

> Without a mana pool, the skill CD management is the only thing that matters, which is why reducing that cooldown is the only thing that matters.

>

> This is why chrono is meta

 

No game has managed mana pools in ages lmao. Not FFXIV, not WoW (except for healers), not Wildstar, and in ESO it's been trivialized while cooldowns are still a thing.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"thrag.9740" said:

> > > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > >

> > > > Implying current bad practice is better than previous bad practice ?

> > >

> > > That's not what I am implying. You lot keep telling me that alacrity makes it very difficult to balance the game, and that it hinders Anet's ability to balance. If that is true, why wasn't the game well balanced when alacrity didn't exist?

> > >

> >

> > You are by asking that question.

> >

> > You are implying that the devs weren't capable of having bad balance practice without alacrity being present. They very much were and did make several bad decisions back then, just as they've made several bad decisions now.

>

> Ok so balance is bad whether we have alacrity or not? Ok then, I would rather we have alacrity because it allows the game to be more fast paced.

 

That's one option. It's not one i personally agree with.

 

I'd much rather they remove shared alacrity, revert it to a status and then make it a stronger individual buff. That will allow them to do proper balance without having to worry about the warping effects alacrity has on the rest of the game as it will be self contained to specific elite specializations and won't be able to have 100% uptime.

 

 

[Laila Lightness.8742]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"thrag.9740" said:

> > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > > @"thrag.9740" said:

> > > > > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > Implying current bad practice is better than previous bad practice ?

> > > >

> > > > That's not what I am implying. You lot keep telling me that alacrity makes it very difficult to balance the game, and that it hinders Anet's ability to balance. If that is true, why wasn't the game well balanced when alacrity didn't exist?

> > > >

> > >

> > > You are by asking that question.

> > >

> > > You are implying that the devs weren't capable of having bad balance practice without alacrity being present. They very much were and did make several bad decisions back then, just as they've made several bad decisions now.

> >

> > Ok so balance is bad whether we have alacrity or not? Ok then, I would rather we have alacrity because it allows the game to be more fast paced.

>

> That's one option. It's not one i personally agree with.

>

> I'd much rather they remove shared alacrity, revert it to a status and then make it a stronger individual buff. That will allow them to do proper balance without having to worry about the warping effects alacrity has on the rest of the game as it will be self contained to specific elite specializations and won't be able to have 100% uptime.

>

>

 

Solution lock alarcity to elite skill so you cant have both quickness or cc or alarcity you may only choose 1

[thrag.9740]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> That will allow them to do proper balance without having to worry about the warping effects alacrity has on the rest of the game

 

You guys keep saying that alacrity makes balance so difficult, not through dps increase, but through all these other effects. I don't understand how so? When Anet is making an encounter, say they decide to have a boss give conditions that need to be cleansed every 30 seconds. Here is how you balance for alacrity, give the conditions every 24 seconds instead. Boon strip? Cc? Same thing. I don't see any argument as to how alacrity makes balancing difficult if we have 100% alacrity uptime.

 

I can see alacrity being much tougher to balance around if we only had 50% uptime, as Anet would have to guess when alacrity would be used, and changes mechanics accordingly. But 100% alacrity uptime is probably one of the easiest things to balance around, just make all mechanics have a 20% lower cool down. Plus to the best of my knowledge Anet has never made any statement confirming your statement.

 

Things that legitimately makes balancing difficult are hitbox size, speed at which boss attacks (confusion), whether or not the boss stands still (torment classes vs aoe classes), and having more than 1 target (epi bounce meta). Compared to these, simply reducing the cool down of all mechanics by 20% seems easy.

 

 

 

 

[syszery.1592]

Great idea OP: Can we also make all other boon permanent? Then the new meta group will be so easy that even I can understand it xD

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > That will allow them to do proper balance without having to worry about the warping effects alacrity has on the rest of the game

>

> You guys keep saying that alacrity makes balance so difficult, not through dps increase, but through all these other effects. I don't understand how so? When Anet is making an encounter, say they decide to have a boss give conditions that need to be cleansed every 30 seconds. Here is how you balance for alacrity, give the conditions every 24 seconds instead. Boon strip? Cc? Same thing. I don't see any argument as to how alacrity makes balancing difficult if we have 100% alacrity uptime.

>

 

and thus you make alacrity required by forcing people to take it and making the encounter not doable without alacrity or severely disadvantaging groups that don't bring any.

 

Now on the flip side, if arenanet does not balance for 100% alacrity uptime, the encounter and the mechanics it is designed around gets a lot easier going as far as potentially making it possible to skip certain mechanics. That is ON TOP of the added benefit of increased damage it provides. Simply put: alacrity improves nearly ALL performance of a class and raid group on different areas as mentioned by me earlier, not only damage.

 

You assume that 100% alacrity uptime is given and should be given. That alone makes you only look at half the picture already.

 

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> I can see alacrity being much tougher to balance around if we only had 50% uptime, as Anet would have to guess when alacrity would be used, and changes mechanics accordingly. But 100% alacrity uptime is probably one of the easiest things to balance around, just make all mechanics have a 20% lower cool down. Plus to the best of my knowledge Anet has never made any statement confirming your statement.

 

Alacrity is tougher to balance over simply because it affects a lot more than just damage. If you have to balance around multiple issues you will run into more problems than balancing around only 1 (damage).

 

> @"thrag.9740" said:

>

> Things that legitimately makes balancing difficult are hitbox size, speed at which boss attacks (confusion), whether or not the boss stands still (torment classes vs aoe classes), and having more than 1 target (epi bounce meta). Compared to these, simply reducing the cool down of all mechanics by 20% seems easy.

>

 

It's not simply reducing cool downs, it's increasing availability of EVERY SKILL and EVERY SKILL RELATED EFFECT. You are literally talking down the usefulness of alacrity on everything which is not damage, and that is plain wrong.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > That will allow them to do proper balance without having to worry about the warping effects alacrity has on the rest of the game

>

> You guys keep saying that alacrity makes balance so difficult, not through dps increase, but through all these other effects. I don't understand how so? When Anet is making an encounter, say they decide to have a boss give conditions that need to be cleansed every 30 seconds. Here is how you balance for alacrity, give the conditions every 24 seconds instead. Boon strip? Cc? Same thing. I don't see any argument as to how alacrity makes balancing difficult if we have 100% alacrity uptime.

>

> I can see alacrity being much tougher to balance around if we only had 50% uptime, as Anet would have to guess when alacrity would be used, and changes mechanics accordingly. But 100% alacrity uptime is probably one of the easiest things to balance around, just make all mechanics have a 20% lower cool down. Plus to the best of my knowledge Anet has never made any statement confirming your statement.

>

> Things that legitimately makes balancing difficult are hitbox size, speed at which boss attacks (confusion), whether or not the boss stands still (torment classes vs aoe classes), and having more than 1 target (epi bounce meta). Compared to these, simply reducing the cool down of all mechanics by 20% seems easy.

>

>

>

>

 

And now you're balancing around 100% uptime and mandating the boon exist. This is the problem that you seemingly wish to ignore existing. Either you balance with it in mind being 24/7 meaning everyones "base cooldowns" must be higher than would be leading to warped group play dynamics where it doesn't exist.

 

Remember when you said "Things feel slow paced without it"....Here's why you asking to keep the status quo is the problem. Instead of actually fixing the issue you're putting a bandaid on it.

[Dark Knight.6294]

> @"ButcherofMalakir.4067" said:

> Its 20% cdr. And I dont understand why support chrono is bad design. You dont need chrono to complete raids.

 

Its 25% cdr btw

[ButcherofMalakir.4067]

> @"Dark Knight.6294" said:

> > @"ButcherofMalakir.4067" said:

> > Its 20% cdr. And I dont understand why support chrono is bad design. You dont need chrono to complete raids.

>

> Its 25% cdr btw

 

From wiki:

"It increases the rate at which skills recharge by 25%, therefore making skills recharge in 80% of the original time."

 

With alacrity each 1 second reduce cds by 1.25 seconds. So in 8 seconds you get cds reduced by 8*1.25=10s. And 1- 8/10 = 0.2

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Dark Knight.6294" said:

> > @"ButcherofMalakir.4067" said:

> > Its 20% cdr. And I dont understand why support chrono is bad design. You dont need chrono to complete raids.

>

> Its 25% cdr btw

 

It increases recharge rate by 25%, which results in 20% reduced skill cool down. The wiki is very clear on this. In short, you are wrong.

[thrag.9740]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

>

> And now you're balancing around 100% uptime and mandating the boon exist. This is the problem that you seemingly wish to ignore existing. Either you balance with it in mind being 24/7 meaning everyones "base cooldowns" must be higher than would be leading to warped group play dynamics where it doesn't exist.

>

Im not ignoring it, I don't see alacrity being mandatory as a problem. Try raiding without 25 might, or fury, or quickness, I'm sure most groups can not meet the dps requirements without those boons. Its already balanced around those boons, and I don't consider that a problem. If boons were not worth having, we would just run 1 healer and 9 dps or maybe just 10 dps. I like having different play styles. The only problem I see is that chrono is the only class that can do quickness + alacrity. Just give firebrand and renegade the ability to lower their personal dps down to 10k in exchange for being able to compete with chaos builds.

 

It seems easier to balance 2 additional builds to compete with chrono, rather than remove a boon from the entire game.

 

 

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"thrag.9740" said:

> It seems easier to balance 2 additional builds to compete with chrono, rather than remove a boon from the entire game.

Especially since currently everything _is_ balanced around it, so removing it would require a complete rebalancing of all skills and raid encounters.

 

[Zenith.7301]

Just give Revenant and Firebrand alacrity+quickness options. Maybe even support elementalist builds.

 

I'm sick as a mesmer main being expected to always fill the support chrono role.

 

Spread the support options around and implement more competitive DPS fixes to mesmer DPS builds so that clones don't despawn on mob death (for PvE at least) and that shatters immediately switch your clones into your selected target so target switching and ramp up aren't such a crippling issue to mesmer DPS specs.

 

Also remove the miserable fragment on continuum split in PvE because I'm sick of randomly my continuum split getting instantly killed as soon as it spawns and completely destroying my spec's main mechanic.

 

Mesmer DPS specs seriously need improved aoe/cleave mechanisms as do rangers, both classes have atrocious target switching and especially aoe.

 

Remove the range thresholds for damage on greatsword at least for PvE, since it seems pretty obvious greatsword could fill the cleaving weapon niche if its autoattack wasn't such horrendous DPS holding it irrelevant in PvE.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"thrag.9740" said:

> > It seems easier to balance 2 additional builds to compete with chrono, rather than remove a boon from the entire game.

> Especially since currently everything _is_ balanced around it, so removing it would require a complete rebalancing of all skills and raid encounters.

>

 

The balance patches would disagree with your notion that the game is balanced around it. If it was there'd be zero reason ever to be changing cooldowns as they'd already be at the point where it wasn't needed. Find me a balance patch where Anet hasn't touched cooldowns since alacrity's inception.

 

It's pretty clear that Anet does not balance around a boon being omnipresent. If that was the case they'd save themselves a lot of time and headache and just remove the boon system entirely and budget in that extra power baseline to all classes. Boons are temporary by their nature and shouldn't be nearly as omnipresent as they currently are to begin with.