Fundamentally altering professions every few months

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> That doesn't really stick. That classes that perform certain tasks still do those things, EVEN if we aren't told what the class is 'for' by Anet. It's simply a matter of players determining what they like to play and what's effective. No defined path from Anet is necessary for that to happen. This is why it's completely wrong to use meta as a reference to balance; the optimal path is defined by players based on what works best, not defined by Anet because they have hardcoded what classes are for.

>

> Think of this way; Anet created Druid and gave it some great healing capability, likely knowing it would be a spec favourited by players for healing. What Anet didn't do was say "Druid is THE healing class, so you should play Druid if you want the best healing in the game". Those are very different things. The reason the whole 'not defined' class roles thing works for Anet is because 1) there are multiple classes that fill the same role and 2) the threshold for success is not high enough to need to rely on the most optimal comps/builds to win.

You are missing the point: Anet may not tell us what classes are for, but they do definitely have some idea of it. we just end up learning it in bits and pieces anytime Anet tells us "This is not what this class was meant to do" (cue the incoming nerf). Even now, they obviously do have some idea of how they want different classes to contribute to the meta. It's just they aren't telling us that. And that is the problem - we definitely _should_ know that, because that information influences what classes we might pick as our mains. Picking a class for what it can do at the moment, and then, after we've sunk some time, effort and resources into it, being told that Anet vision of it is completely different (and coincidentally not compatible with what we originally liked) can be really discouraging for many.

 

We really do need to know things like reaper not being intended as a condi dps, but only a power dps (and a poor one, at that), or scourge not being intended as condi dps, but as a support spec beforehand. Not only some time after people have started to use it in those "wrong" ways, and started to like it. And if some balance changes are not based on actual balance, but on movong towards some class design goals (like in this case), those goals also need to be given clearly upfront. Not merely alluded to in a roundabout and unclear way.

 

 

[Vrath.1754]

> @"ButcherofMalakir.4067" said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > Dont understand why they couldnt relese this changes with runes.

 

It's obvious why these changes were made with rune changes from a development perspective. That is a system over haul and balance changes at the same time, that is a deployment and QA mess. One could affect the other. It's easier to seperate them out to remove certain variables. It's like this with all most all software releases really. And most MMOs except when expansions launch due to more time being budgeted for dev and QA the changes.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > That doesn't really stick. That classes that perform certain tasks still do those things, EVEN if we aren't told what the class is 'for' by Anet. It's simply a matter of players determining what they like to play and what's effective. No defined path from Anet is necessary for that to happen. This is why it's completely wrong to use meta as a reference to balance; the optimal path is defined by players based on what works best, not defined by Anet because they have hardcoded what classes are for.

> >

> > Think of this way; Anet created Druid and gave it some great healing capability, likely knowing it would be a spec favourited by players for healing. What Anet didn't do was say "Druid is THE healing class, so you should play Druid if you want the best healing in the game". Those are very different things. The reason the whole 'not defined' class roles thing works for Anet is because 1) there are multiple classes that fill the same role and 2) the threshold for success is not high enough to need to rely on the most optimal comps/builds to win.

> You are missing the point: Anet may not tell us what classes are for, but they do definitely have some idea of it. we just end up learning it in bits and pieces anytime Anet tells us "This is not what this class was meant to do" (cue the incoming nerf). Even now, they obviously do have some idea of how they want different classes to contribute to the meta. It's just they aren't telling us that. And that is the problem - we definitely _should_ know that, because that information influences what classes we might pick as our mains. Picking a class for what it can do at the moment, and then, after we've sunk some time, effort and resources into it, being told that Anet vision of it is completely different (and coincidentally not compatible with what we originally liked) can be really discouraging for many.

>

> We really do need to know things like reaper not being intended as a condi dps, but only a power dps (and a poor one, at that), or scourge not being intended as condi dps, but as a support spec beforehand. Not only some time after people have started to use it in those "wrong" ways, and started to like it. And if some balance changes are not based on actual balance, but on movong towards some class design goals (like in this case), those goals also need to be given clearly upfront. Not merely alluded to in a roundabout and unclear way.

>

>

I don't get why though ... just so people can avoid playing something they like because their might be a change to it later? Seems unnecessarily restrictive for players and Anet while being rather unavoidable. Again, this whole game is designed to allow players and Anet the freedom to play and develop how they want. Classes don't have roles that Anet can say "Oh, this class does this and plays this way with this kind of damage ... and it will never change". This whole idea sounds like a really ill-fated request to try to lock Anet down when they change things or provide players with cannon fodder to protest when changes are made.

 

What you are asking for is already in a way implemented ... elite specs are what gives new flavours to the base class. The specs are broadly enough defined by their skills so if a player wants to play 'healer', they know where to go to get that kind of gameplay. It's just not necessary for Anet to come in and say "Druid is a healer"; it's obvious. I think at this point, it would be good to be more specific to the kind of thing you think Anet should provide. I really just don't think that how players pigeonhole things as 'condi DPS' or 'support tank' is a language that Anet uses when they develop classes, nor should it if they stay true to the original intent of the game; play how you want. There is a cost to playing how you want and it's high, but it's one of the things that gives GW2 it's unique feel as a game.

 

[Magnus Godrik.5841]

Altering things a bit is a great idea. Alot if not most of mmos do it. The beauty of it all is how easy it is to switch stats in gw2 compared to others. Sure there may be some gold involved but thats it. This keeps the game fresh especially in wvw and pvp, which im enjoying wvw more now that mirages arent so cancerous. If you dont want a balance change then perhaps a single player is more up your alley than an mmo. May I suggest God of War or Reddead Redemption 2.

[finkle.9513]

Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"finkle.9513" said:

> Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

 

I wouldn’t use ‘forced’ but it’s the main reason why (along with convenience) that many WvW players have put a heavy investment in legendaries both armor and weapons.

 

Most large balance patches changes our Meta fairly significantly. Thus regearing is a normal part of our year.

 

Legendary armor and weapons just make it faster.

[Neural.1824]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

>

>...many WvW players have put a heavy investment in legendaries both armor and weapons.

>

> Most large balance patches changes our Meta fairly significantly.

 

And there is the truth that most don't even see. The changes to the meta aren't about balance, they are about money.

 

 

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Neural.1824" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> >

> >...many WvW players have put a heavy investment in legendaries both armor and weapons.

> >

> > Most large balance patches changes our Meta fairly significantly.

>

> And there is the truth that most don't even see. The changes to the meta aren't about balance, they are about money.

>

>

 

Won’t think about questioning that. I just minimize the long term pay, with an investment sooner.

[otto.5684]

Outside of the Mesmer changes to phantasm and overall change to condi, most builds/elites/classes are the same. Even with the recent nerfs to chrono and Druid support, they builds are still support and still function the same way.

 

Also, each elite has at least one build viable in group PvE. Outside PvP the OP is plainly wrong.

 

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"finkle.9513" said:

> Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

 

This is just not true. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change ... unless you adhere to meta playstyle (which is your mistake in the first place)

[finkle.9513]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"finkle.9513" said:

> > Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

>

> This is just not true. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change ... unless you adhere to meta playstyle (which is your mistake in the first place)

 

Your incorrect, How are you supposed to see how your build effects against these changes without trying the changes!!!

[Obtena.7952]

> @"finkle.9513" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"finkle.9513" said:

> > > Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

> >

> > This is just not true. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change ... unless you adhere to meta playstyle (which is your mistake in the first place)

>

> Your incorrect, How are you supposed to see how your build effects against these changes without trying the changes!!!

 

I don't even know how to respond to that because I don't see the connection to what I said. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change in order to see how your old build effects against these changes. You literally just use your old build if you want to see how it performs with the changes.

 

As I said, this affects you ONLY if you want to play meta, and since there are people dedicated to determining what that is for you, the cost to swap whatever gear you need to stay on top is minimized.

[finkle.9513]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"finkle.9513" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"finkle.9513" said:

> > > > Kinda forced into needing ledendaries as like said every 3 months there is a respec.

> > >

> > > This is just not true. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change ... unless you adhere to meta playstyle (which is your mistake in the first place)

> >

> > Your incorrect, How are you supposed to see how your build effects against these changes without trying the changes!!!

>

> I don't even know how to respond to that because I don't see the connection to what I said. You don't need to adjust your builds to work in the top 1% every game change in order to see how your old build effects against these changes. You literally just use your old build if you want to see how it performs with the changes.

>

> As I said, this affects you ONLY if you want to play meta, and since there are people dedicated to determining what that is for you, the cost to swap whatever gear you need to stay on top is minimized.

 

What are you talking about?

Why are you referring to the top 1%?

 

If I have a skill that buffs my team, yet Anet has made changes to make this not worth using compared to another skill that may now have been given a buff... why are you telling me that only the top 1% need to make a change?

 

If I have a skill that I use that effectively deals with a condi lets say bleeding... yet Anet have made this skill not quite as good... why can I not go on my necro respec and test... I need to be in the top 1% ohh I see... nothing effects me unless I am in the top 1%... thats a good safety net Anet have implemented!

 

What are you going on about Meta for? I work out my own builds as stated above... maybe you should try it out and realise that in doing so you are required to respec a lot!

[Obtena.7952]

Let's start again, because you've missed my point here.

 

Your assertion was that we are forced into legendaries because we need to respec every 3 months (because you think the changes are that severe). That's not true for 2 reasons:

 

1) There just isn't enough changes occuring to make legendaries option the better choice financially over anything else.

 

2) You don't perscribe to the meta-mentality and being in the top performance doesn't matter to you in the first place.

 

This isn't hard. There is only one reason for anyone to adjust their build after a balance patch, and that's for performance ... and it's for optimal performance ... which is why meta is being brought forward here. You're assertion implies the frequency you would have to gobble up new stats and runes/sigils on non-legendary gear is more expensive than legendarys + swapping to 'keep up' with being a top performer. That's just not true. Besides, over the time the changes happen, if you actually play the game, you are earning gold. So f you want to chase meta all the time for that benefit, it's going to cost you anyways.

 

You're expectation playing an MMO was that you would never have to adapt to game changes ever? It would never cost you gold to stay top performing?

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> You're expectation playing an MMO was that you would never have to adapt to game changes ever? It would never cost you gold to stay top performing?

Well, yes, that _was_ one of the core premises of this game. That if i stopped playing for a year (for example), and then came back, my gear would remain exactly as relevant as the moment i left. For some builds it remains true (Berserkers + Scholars are exactly this), but for others, not so much.

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > You're expectation playing an MMO was that you would never have to adapt to game changes ever? It would never cost you gold to stay top performing?

> Well, yes, that _was_ one of the core premises of this game. That if i stopped playing for a year (for example), and then came back, my gear would remain exactly as relevant as the moment i left. For some builds it remains true (Berserkers + Scholars are exactly this), but for others, not so much.

>

 

What do you mean by 'relevant' gear though? That's a completely subjective definition. In what sense does gear being relevant become related to performance? That just feels like meta pushing because it implies if you aren't playing the gear that puts you into optimized meta range output, it's not relevant. I'm pretty sure no core premise of the game promoted that idea.

 

I mean, nothing prevents you from leaving for a year, coming back and using whatever build you had going with whatever gear you have on ... so seems to me that 'relevant' is anything you want ... Again, my position here is that it's really unreasonable that someone wanting top performance doesn't want to adjust to the game changes. That makes no sense at all and it's not out of line with any core premise of the game I'm familiar with because there isn't anything about the game that forces me to play at the top performance level to succeed.

[Strider Pj.2193]

S> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > You're expectation playing an MMO was that you would never have to adapt to game changes ever? It would never cost you gold to stay top performing?

> Well, yes, that _was_ one of the core premises of this game. That if i stopped playing for a year (for example), and then came back, my gear would remain exactly as relevant as the moment i left. For some builds it remains true (Berserkers + Scholars are exactly this), but for others, not so much.

>

 

The gear stats on ascended and legendary are equal. Whether you need berserker, dire, knights, maurauders etc has always changed. Unless you only did open world PvE. Short of that, you needed to be able to change with the Meta.

 

The ‘problem’ is, since Raids and CM fractals were introduced, different builds have become more efficient.

 

It’s relevant. Just not where you want it.

[Magek.4718]

Imagine playing Base Mesmer after Anet has completely gutted it in favor of its elite specs.

 

And also imagine neither of those elite specs being your cup of tea.

 

Ha ha. Hilarious, right?

 

Please give me back my phantasms so I can go back to playing my main, Anet.

[Jimbru.6014]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Everyone wants 'balance' ... no one wants to pay the price to get it.

 

Everyone wants "balance" but only in favor of their favorite class.

[Jimbru.6014]

> @"Jski.6180" said:

> If your not the right class you dont get to play GW2.

 

Charr feathers. People play every class in GW2 in all kinds of content every single day. No class is dead. Just some players' souls are.

 

Are some classes more powerful than others in certain game modes and builds? Yes. Welcome to the entire history of MMOs. None have ever had perfect class balance, and it's very likely that none ever will. The game that came closest was old school EverQuest. How did they do it? By ignoring "balance", giving each class clearly defined roles in PVE, and putting PVP in the corner by itself where it belongs. "What, your cleric isn't as powerful in PVP as a monk? Too bad, that's not what clerics were designed for." That was the answer to "balance" in EQ.

 

GW2 was not built on that "class role" paradigm. GW2 originally wanted to be a PVE and WVW centered game and do away with the traditional tank-healer-DPS triad. But unfortunately with the evolution of GW2 -- the addition of fractals and raids, PVP being a plague as it is in every game, and the general concept of being "meta" -- that's where we've ended up. That evolution is still very much a work in progress, and probably always will be.

 

In the end, the answer is actually a question: why are you playing this game? What, mechanics changed? "Balance" changed? I don't play this game for its mechanics, I play it for the lore and the great community. Those of you who are still here despite your complaining, obviously must have your own reasons to still by playing. Examine your reasons and follow them, and let the PVP crybabies and "meta" edge riders worry about "balance".

 

 

[Jski.6180]

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > If your not the right class you dont get to play GW2.

>

> Charr feathers. People play every class in GW2 in all kinds of content every single day. No class is dead. Just some players' souls are.

>

> Are some classes more powerful than others in certain game modes and builds? Yes. Welcome to the entire history of MMOs. None have ever had perfect class balance, and it's very likely that none ever will. The game that came closest was old school EverQuest. How did they do it? By ignoring "balance", giving each class clearly defined roles in PVE, and putting PVP in the corner by itself where it belongs. "What, your cleric isn't as powerful in PVP as a monk? Too bad, that's not what clerics were designed for." That was the answer to "balance" in EQ.

>

> GW2 was not built on that "class role" paradigm. GW2 originally wanted to be a PVE and WVW centered game and do away with the traditional tank-healer-DPS triad. But unfortunately with the evolution of GW2 -- the addition of fractals and raids, PVP being a plague as it is in every game, and the general concept of being "meta" -- that's where we've ended up. That evolution is still very much a work in progress, and probably always will be.

>

> In the end, the answer is actually a question: why are you playing this game? What, mechanics changed? "Balance" changed? I don't play this game for its mechanics, I play it for the lore and the great community. Those of you who are still here despite your complaining, obviously must have your own reasons to still by playing. Examine your reasons and follow them, and let the PVP crybabies and "meta" edge riders worry about "balance".

>

>

 

You can do any you want for fun but once your working with other ppl and there are size limited things set in fast that only the right classes and the right build on though classes come in.

 

Yes that is how mmorpgs work out but that dose not mean you should simply be ok with nerfs to classes viability. There is a long history of devs forgetting about every thing there community wants and just powering throw with there wants and ideals to the death of there own game. The history of mmorpgs often is mostly failure as well.

 

Its very roll base now started with HoT for raids and its gotten worst or better if you like that type of thing.

 

I play because i enjoy the game and i do not want to see it die due to bad choose of dev. This game lost a lot of players due to bad balancing chose this last one hit far more then the normal gimped classes ( ele whom players are very use to endless nerfs).

 

At the end of the day you have to work with ppl in each game type even if you do not like them because your going to be grouped with them at one point or another and you will feel it. This is a team game you WILL be jugged by your team and your fun is not as important as there fun (you are just 1 in a group of 5 or 10 or 50).

 

Is it that hard for devs to let all classes have builds that partly lets them fill boon support more then the common boon support that most classes get passively? Is it that bad to let other classes have stab support quickness and alictorly. Is it that bad to let classes have boon strips unblockables and real condis dmg (not just 1 or 2 types)? Is it that bad to ask for classes to be able to build for healing? I am asking for all classes to be able to BUILD for a roll and not be locked off by "free" riders classes getting effects with out building for it and classes who can never build for a roll due to lack of effects.

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Jski.6180" said:

> > @"jbrother.1340" said:

> > > @"Einsof.1457" said:

> > > Arena Net, you made a great game. Really. All the pieces are there, yet it seems the only enemy you have is yourself. You aren't just tweaking professions every few months, you are fundamentally altering them every few months. It is very jarring to log in, and have such glaringly extreme changes to your profession that you are unable to get back into doing content in raids and fractals until you pour through the math and test what works. I don't know if this is supposed to be the design, but I hate it. Tweaks here and there to duration etc. is fine and expected for an MMO, but massive overhauls every 3-6 months need to stop. If these changes are really truly necessary then the design was awful to begin with, which really is not only disappointing but embarrassing for you. Please either stop this madness, or save these overhauls for huge events like expansion releases. I can't take the heartbreak anymore to log in and have no idea how to play anymore for the 4th time this year. It really really sucks.

> >

> > Are you seriously heartbroken over this?

> >

> > Most people reserve that level of emotion for dead loved ones and their pet that got crushed by a truck.

> >

> > Why does dealing with change come so hard to humans? Learn not to hate and maybe this won't feel the same after possibly.

> >

> > You are using a strong word in using "hate" and if you truly hate why do you keep coming back for more?

>

> To feel is to be human to feel nothing is not to be human putting 5 years of your life is a big investment and its meaningful what happens. Not every one can make an alt to play class of the month ppl have real ties to there hero and that hero is locked into a class. My alts are more or less mules that i have no real attachment to. The hero i want to play has a lot tide to it but its an ele so rip lol. I even have items i held on to because they have meaning in game. I still have my pic of a drawing from way back that most ate for karma. All from that ele hero i cant play any more and still be of use to others at the same level as other classes.

 

Then I'll just say you're going about things wrong and you shouldn't do that...or at the very least, when you do, don't create an emotional bridge built ontop of a sand foundation.

 

I made the same mistake as you when City of Heroes was still around and suffered greatly for that mistake. You should be grateful the game still exists for you to enjoy and without paying a subscription fee.

[Zin Dau.1749]

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Everyone wants 'balance' ... no one wants to pay the price to get it.

>

> Everyone wants "balance" but only in favor of their favorite class.

 

Everyone wants "balance", but no one knows how to achieve it. Especially the creators.

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Jski.6180" said:

> > @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> > > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > If your not the right class you dont get to play GW2.

> >

> > Charr feathers. People play every class in GW2 in all kinds of content every single day. No class is dead. Just some players' souls are.

> >

> > Are some classes more powerful than others in certain game modes and builds? Yes. Welcome to the entire history of MMOs. None have ever had perfect class balance, and it's very likely that none ever will. The game that came closest was old school EverQuest. How did they do it? By ignoring "balance", giving each class clearly defined roles in PVE, and putting PVP in the corner by itself where it belongs. "What, your cleric isn't as powerful in PVP as a monk? Too bad, that's not what clerics were designed for." That was the answer to "balance" in EQ.

> >

> > GW2 was not built on that "class role" paradigm. GW2 originally wanted to be a PVE and WVW centered game and do away with the traditional tank-healer-DPS triad. But unfortunately with the evolution of GW2 -- the addition of fractals and raids, PVP being a plague as it is in every game, and the general concept of being "meta" -- that's where we've ended up. That evolution is still very much a work in progress, and probably always will be.

> >

> > In the end, the answer is actually a question: why are you playing this game? What, mechanics changed? "Balance" changed? I don't play this game for its mechanics, I play it for the lore and the great community. Those of you who are still here despite your complaining, obviously must have your own reasons to still by playing. Examine your reasons and follow them, and let the PVP crybabies and "meta" edge riders worry about "balance".

> >

> >

>

> You can do any you want for fun but once your working with other ppl and there are size limited things set in fast that only the right classes and the right build on though classes come in.

 

 

But that's not true for GW2 because there are no 'right' builds with the 'right' classes needed to complete content; there are lots of comps that can do it, a low threshold for success and many people around that want to play without playing the 'right' builds and classes that you can play with if you feel the same way. All these things result in not needed the exacting engineering and execution of a group to win.

 

... Unless of course you're one of these people that think the only way to play is meta. Then you have screwed yourself.

[Jski.6180]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Jski.6180" said:

> > > @"Jimbru.6014" said:

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

> > > > If your not the right class you dont get to play GW2.

> > >

> > > Charr feathers. People play every class in GW2 in all kinds of content every single day. No class is dead. Just some players' souls are.

> > >

> > > Are some classes more powerful than others in certain game modes and builds? Yes. Welcome to the entire history of MMOs. None have ever had perfect class balance, and it's very likely that none ever will. The game that came closest was old school EverQuest. How did they do it? By ignoring "balance", giving each class clearly defined roles in PVE, and putting PVP in the corner by itself where it belongs. "What, your cleric isn't as powerful in PVP as a monk? Too bad, that's not what clerics were designed for." That was the answer to "balance" in EQ.

> > >

> > > GW2 was not built on that "class role" paradigm. GW2 originally wanted to be a PVE and WVW centered game and do away with the traditional tank-healer-DPS triad. But unfortunately with the evolution of GW2 -- the addition of fractals and raids, PVP being a plague as it is in every game, and the general concept of being "meta" -- that's where we've ended up. That evolution is still very much a work in progress, and probably always will be.

> > >

> > > In the end, the answer is actually a question: why are you playing this game? What, mechanics changed? "Balance" changed? I don't play this game for its mechanics, I play it for the lore and the great community. Those of you who are still here despite your complaining, obviously must have your own reasons to still by playing. Examine your reasons and follow them, and let the PVP crybabies and "meta" edge riders worry about "balance".

> > >

> > >

> >

> > You can do any you want for fun but once your working with other ppl and there are size limited things set in fast that only the right classes and the right build on though classes come in.

>

>

> But that's not true for GW2 because there are no 'right' builds with the 'right' classes needed to complete content; there are lots of comps that can do it, a low threshold for success and many people around that want to play without playing the 'right' builds and classes that you can play with if you feel the same way. All these things result in not needed the exacting engineering and execution of a group to win.

>

> ... Unless of course you're one of these people that think the only way to play is meta. Then you have screwed yourself.

 

A few things meta is meta for a reason if you want to have viability often you need to be some what near meta but you do not have to be right on meta i mean i love healing thfs and all but i do not see it being a thing as things stand. I am trying to get anet to make ppl able to build a real viable healing thf or what ever i am trying to make all classes able to build near meta or near viability.

 

It funny most ppl i fight with to play with who are hard core meta build and classes only look at me as a counter meta type of person. I am that person on FA who builds ele in crazy ways trying to make it work. Sadly there is no build that will add enofe to any class if it lacks the viability or meta effects.