Please fix game balance

[Israel.7056]

> @"SloRules.3560" said:

> Seriously, chrono had very little effect on incoming condies and before that NO ONE played mallix rev. So??

 

No comment.

 

 

[SloRules.3560]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"SloRules.3560" said:

> > Seriously, chrono had very little effect on incoming condies and before that NO ONE played mallix rev. So??

>

> No comment.

>

>

 

Seriously? I am/was mesmer for [vi], i know what i'm talking about, but haven't played for real since Hybrid (leader) left.

[lodjur.1284]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"lodjur.1284" said:

> > Sry if your guild zerg can't clear enough that's on them.

>

> I didn't say we can't clear them I said Mallyx is mandatory for resistance and clearing condis at every scale of play above roaming and so any changes to Mallyx will trickle over into other scales of play.

 

Clear/resistance is the same thing when discussing if you have problems dealing with conditions. Smallscale Power Rev doesn't use mallyx, condi rev in smallscale doesn't struggle more with power than any other build, no idea why you think I ever suggested to buff mallyx to better deal with condis (only buff it should get is the resistance from the trait applying before the heal but that's not really the topic we're discussing)

 

> > So we should have bad balance because it might get worse by attempting to fix it?

>

> Your idea of good balance and mine are very different. As I said before I think balance is building dominant unique strengths and exploitable severe structural weaknesses into classes that they cannot overcome on their own. This makes compcraft crucially important for guild play. It also means that at certain scales of play these strengths and weaknesses will be more or less impactful. So in the case of roaming scale, mobility and single target ranged damage are incredibly impactful but once you get into small scale or medium scale mobility and single target ranged damage become less and less impactful and 900-1200 range aoe becomes the meta. This is why necros, revs and weavers are the meta dps for small scale and up but why they struggle at roaming.

 

Compcraft would still exist even if necro didn't suck without a pet firebrand and if revenant had a condi clear in shiro. It would just make smallscale combat less bad. Something you seem to be actively against for w/e reason. Compcraft is more interesting the more viable options there are for each slot.

 

> > Except that means you have less options in every gamemode. If someone asked me if thief/mirage/sb should get zerging exclusive buffs I would say ye (even if this might be harder to implement). Will every build be optimal everywhere, no, nor does that need to be the case but making more builds payable in more situations is positive.

>

> That's correct but I don't think build diversity is inherently good. The crucial thing to me for good balance to exist is that everything should have its own defined strengths and defined extreme weaknesses.

 

Well then that kinda makes the discussion futile.

 

> >Smallscale stops when you become a squad, kinda in the name of it...

>

> In this game "small scale" refers to 5-15. Squads can still be "small scale" in the context of a game mode where groups can and often do run 50+. You're talking roaming size.

 

Not really something we can argue is it? There is no official definition to go by here.

 

> > These classes also happens to be excellent +1ers for already outnumbered fights, which is one of the main reasons why I dislike them.

>

> Yes because they're mobile and that's what makes them impactful at that scale of play. +1 means absolutely nothing as fights begin to scale though.

 

Yes. You don't need to explain why statements I said are true.

 

> > I think if we can improve one aspect of the game that clearly matters to me and several other people that would be beneficial to the game. I don't think 1v1s are much fun or even good quality gameplay but if you run solo (such as when your guild is asleep or refusing to WvW cause of the terrible state of it) it sadly is a lot of what you will find.

>

> Marginally beneficial I'd say.

>

 

Yet massively beneficial for me and most of the people I know who play the game.

[Israel.7056]

> @"lodjur.1284" said:

> Clear/resistance is the same thing when discussing if you have problems dealing with conditions. Smallscale Power Rev doesn't use mallyx, condi rev in smallscale doesn't struggle more with power than any other build, no idea why you think I ever suggested to buff mallyx to better deal with condis (only buff it should get is the resistance from the trait applying before the heal but that's not really the topic we're discussing)

 

Personally I run condi rev for roaming I think it's way better than power because it can actually deal with condis. If you want power spike for roaming bring a thief or ranger or even a warrior imo. Still can't 1v1 condi mirages consistently but I have a way easier time than when I run power and I am much harder to single target down in a group fight and much easier to keep alive if I have support.

 

Buffing shiro's condi survivability would probably amount to adding more cleanse to riposting because I doubt they'd add cleanse to phase or impossible odds. Riposting is one of those skills that can easily become broken if it does too much because it's already a stun break a dodge roll an i frame and movement condi cleanse. They could put cleanses on the glint/shiro f2s but that wouldn't likely be enough if it's shiro/glint because you need a metric ton of frequent cleanses right now to deal with the amount of condis mirages can pump out. They could put more cleanses on staff or perhaps more cleanses on legend swap but then that would bleed into other builds. They could put more condi cleanse on the shield or revert the heal on shield 5 but that could get pretty broken pretty fast depending on what they did. Either way making shiro power rev condi survivable would probably break rev at that scale because other than being extremely vulnerable to condis shiro rev is pretty amazing. Like I said you might run into a situation where all of a sudden shiro rev would just push everything else out of the roaming meta like what happened when rev first came out but for different reasons. Shiro Rev needs to be severely vulnerable to condis for it to be balanced and I'm saying this as probably one of the most dedicated rev mains left in the game at this point.

 

> Compcraft is more interesting the more viable options there are for each slot.

 

I fundamentally disagree. Compcraft is more interesting the more structural weaknesses the group has to overcome through design, strategy and tactics.

 

> Well then that kinda makes the discussion futile.

 

If you're one of these people who thinks balance is fundamentally about build diversity rather than extreme tradeoffs then yeah probably.

 

> Not really something we can argue is it? There is no official definition to go by here.

 

There's no dictionary to refer to no but in this game the common usage of "small scale" isn't a group or less. In my experience there are basically four scales of play: roaming, small, medium and large. Roaming is a group or less, small is 5-15, medium is usually something like 15-30 and large is 30+.

 

> Yes. You don't need to explain why statements I said are true.

 

Clearly I do. You don't seem to understand why it's important to state why they're true. The +1 ability of a ranger is directly related to their mobility and long range single target pressure which is a defined strength of the ranger class. The trade off for ranger is that to have those strengths they have to run longbow and greatsword (or sword mainhand I guess but then they don't have maul) and then they become mostly useless once the fight starts to scale up or if the fight gets placed in a sustained melee situation because they have almost zero access to stab and what stab they have can be easily corrupted by a necro, particularly if they're a scourge but reapers will also eat rangers alive in close quarters . The trade off here is that necro has insane 900 or less aoe pressure and reapers wreck face in a sustained melee fight particularly with some support whereas the ranger is extremely mobile and effective at range and hit and run melee but really cannot afford to trade in a sustained melee fight or at anything less than 900 unless they're running druid and then their damage is significant reduced from a soulbeast. This is what balance is supposed to look like; severe tradeoffs.

 

> Yet massively beneficial for me and most of the people I know who play the game.

 

Perhaps but you seem to be incredibly biased on this topic which makes it hard for you to see outside your own particular interest here.

 

[EremiteAngel.9765]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"lodjur.1284" said:

> > Clear/resistance is the same thing when discussing if you have problems dealing with conditions. Smallscale Power Rev doesn't use mallyx, condi rev in smallscale doesn't struggle more with power than any other build, no idea why you think I ever suggested to buff mallyx to better deal with condis (only buff it should get is the resistance from the trait applying before the heal but that's not really the topic we're discussing)

>

> Personally I run condi rev for roaming I think it's way better than power because it can actually deal with condis. If you want power spike for roaming bring a thief or ranger or even a warrior imo. Still can't 1v1 condi mirages consistently but I have a way easier time than when I run power and I am much harder to single target down in a group fight and much easier to keep alive if I have support.

>

> Buffing shiro's condi survivability would probably amount to adding more cleanse to riposting because I doubt they'd add cleanse to phase or impossible odds. Riposting is one of those skills that can easily become broken if it does too much because it's already a stun break a dodge roll an i frame and movement condi cleanse. They could put cleanses on the glint/shiro f2s but that wouldn't likely be enough if it's shiro/glint because you need a metric ton of frequent cleanses right now to deal with the amount of condis mirages can pump out. They could put more cleanses on staff or perhaps more cleanses on legend swap but then that would bleed into other builds. They could put more condi cleanse on the shield or revert the heal on shield 5 but that could get pretty broken pretty fast depending on what they did. Either way making shiro power rev condi survivable would probably break rev at that scale because other than being extremely vulnerable to condis shiro rev is pretty amazing. Like I said you might run into a situation where all of a sudden shiro rev would just push everything else out of the roaming meta like what happened when rev first came out but for different reasons. Shiro Rev needs to be severely vulnerable to condis for it to be balanced and I'm saying this as probably one of the most dedicated rev mains left in the game at this point.

>

> > Compcraft is more interesting the more viable options there are for each slot.

>

> I fundamentally disagree. Compcraft is more interesting the more structural weaknesses the group has to overcome through design, strategy and tactics.

>

> > Well then that kinda makes the discussion futile.

>

> If you're one of these people who thinks balance is fundamentally about build diversity rather than extreme tradeoffs then yeah probably.

>

> > Not really something we can argue is it? There is no official definition to go by here.

>

> There's no dictionary to refer to no but in this game the common usage of "small scale" isn't a group or less. In my experience there are basically four scales of play: roaming, small, medium and large. Roaming is a group or less, small is 5-15, medium is usually something like 15-30 and large is 30+.

>

> > Yes. You don't need to explain why statements I said are true.

>

> Clearly I do. You don't seem to understand why it's important to state why they're true. The +1 ability of a ranger is directly related to their mobility and long range single target pressure which is a defined strength of the ranger class. The trade off for ranger is that to have those strengths they have to run longbow and greatsword (or sword mainhand I guess but then they don't have maul) and then they become mostly useless once the fight starts to scale up or if the fight gets placed in a sustained melee situation because they have almost zero access to stab and what stab they have can be easily corrupted by a necro, particularly if they're a scourge but reapers will also eat rangers alive in close quarters . The trade off here is that necro has insane 900 or less aoe pressure and reapers wreck face in a sustained melee fight particularly with some support whereas the ranger is extremely mobile and effective at range and hit and run melee but really cannot afford to trade in a sustained melee fight or at anything less than 900 unless they're running druid and then their damage is significant reduced from a soulbeast. This is what balance is supposed to look like; severe tradeoffs.

>

> > Yet massively beneficial for me and most of the people I know who play the game.

>

> Perhaps but you seem to be incredibly biased on this topic which makes it hard for you to see outside your own particular interest here.

>

 

Kindly allow me to chip in.

I think that claiming revs as weak to condis is not accurate anymore after the runes/sigils patch changes.

 

I've fought revs who run cleansing sigils and runes of resistance and they put up a hell of a fight against condi classes. One even beat my condi necro using a glint/jalis build. I would say the fight was 60/40 in my favour but I got outplayed by him and lost.

 

I think revs on the whole needs to rethink their builds with all the new condi clear tools available because I don't think they are as weak to condi as they were before the patch.

[Kovu.7560]

> @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

>

Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

 

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"lodjur.1284" said:

> > Yes. You don't need to explain why statements I said are true.

>

> Clearly I do. You don't seem to understand why it's important to state why they're true. The +1 ability of a ranger is directly related to their mobility and long range single target pressure which is a defined strength of the ranger class. The trade off for ranger is that to have those strengths they have to run longbow and greatsword (or sword mainhand I guess but then they don't have maul) and then they become mostly useless once the fight starts to scale up or if the fight gets placed in a sustained melee situation because they have almost zero access to stab and what stab they have can be easily corrupted by a necro, particularly if they're a scourge but reapers will also eat rangers alive in close quarters . The trade off here is that necro has insane 900 or less aoe pressure and reapers wreck face in a sustained melee fight particularly with some support whereas the ranger is extremely mobile and effective at range and hit and run melee but really cannot afford to trade in a sustained melee fight or at anything less than 900 unless they're running druid and then their damage is significant reduced from a soulbeast. This is what balance is supposed to look like; severe tradeoffs.

 

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Israel.7056]

> @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"lodjur.1284" said:

> > > Clear/resistance is the same thing when discussing if you have problems dealing with conditions. Smallscale Power Rev doesn't use mallyx, condi rev in smallscale doesn't struggle more with power than any other build, no idea why you think I ever suggested to buff mallyx to better deal with condis (only buff it should get is the resistance from the trait applying before the heal but that's not really the topic we're discussing)

> >

> > Personally I run condi rev for roaming I think it's way better than power because it can actually deal with condis. If you want power spike for roaming bring a thief or ranger or even a warrior imo. Still can't 1v1 condi mirages consistently but I have a way easier time than when I run power and I am much harder to single target down in a group fight and much easier to keep alive if I have support.

> >

> > Buffing shiro's condi survivability would probably amount to adding more cleanse to riposting because I doubt they'd add cleanse to phase or impossible odds. Riposting is one of those skills that can easily become broken if it does too much because it's already a stun break a dodge roll an i frame and movement condi cleanse. They could put cleanses on the glint/shiro f2s but that wouldn't likely be enough if it's shiro/glint because you need a metric ton of frequent cleanses right now to deal with the amount of condis mirages can pump out. They could put more cleanses on staff or perhaps more cleanses on legend swap but then that would bleed into other builds. They could put more condi cleanse on the shield or revert the heal on shield 5 but that could get pretty broken pretty fast depending on what they did. Either way making shiro power rev condi survivable would probably break rev at that scale because other than being extremely vulnerable to condis shiro rev is pretty amazing. Like I said you might run into a situation where all of a sudden shiro rev would just push everything else out of the roaming meta like what happened when rev first came out but for different reasons. Shiro Rev needs to be severely vulnerable to condis for it to be balanced and I'm saying this as probably one of the most dedicated rev mains left in the game at this point.

> >

> > > Compcraft is more interesting the more viable options there are for each slot.

> >

> > I fundamentally disagree. Compcraft is more interesting the more structural weaknesses the group has to overcome through design, strategy and tactics.

> >

> > > Well then that kinda makes the discussion futile.

> >

> > If you're one of these people who thinks balance is fundamentally about build diversity rather than extreme tradeoffs then yeah probably.

> >

> > > Not really something we can argue is it? There is no official definition to go by here.

> >

> > There's no dictionary to refer to no but in this game the common usage of "small scale" isn't a group or less. In my experience there are basically four scales of play: roaming, small, medium and large. Roaming is a group or less, small is 5-15, medium is usually something like 15-30 and large is 30+.

> >

> > > Yes. You don't need to explain why statements I said are true.

> >

> > Clearly I do. You don't seem to understand why it's important to state why they're true. The +1 ability of a ranger is directly related to their mobility and long range single target pressure which is a defined strength of the ranger class. The trade off for ranger is that to have those strengths they have to run longbow and greatsword (or sword mainhand I guess but then they don't have maul) and then they become mostly useless once the fight starts to scale up or if the fight gets placed in a sustained melee situation because they have almost zero access to stab and what stab they have can be easily corrupted by a necro, particularly if they're a scourge but reapers will also eat rangers alive in close quarters . The trade off here is that necro has insane 900 or less aoe pressure and reapers wreck face in a sustained melee fight particularly with some support whereas the ranger is extremely mobile and effective at range and hit and run melee but really cannot afford to trade in a sustained melee fight or at anything less than 900 unless they're running druid and then their damage is significant reduced from a soulbeast. This is what balance is supposed to look like; severe tradeoffs.

> >

> > > Yet massively beneficial for me and most of the people I know who play the game.

> >

> > Perhaps but you seem to be incredibly biased on this topic which makes it hard for you to see outside your own particular interest here.

> >

>

> Kindly allow me to chip in.

> I think that claiming revs as weak to condis is not accurate anymore after the runes/sigils patch changes.

>

> I've fought revs who run cleansing sigils and runes of resistance and they put up a hell of a fight against condi classes. One even beat my condi necro using a glint/jalis build. I would say the fight was 60/40 in my favour but I got outplayed by him and lost.

>

> I think revs on the whole needs to rethink their builds with all the new condi clear tools available because I don't think they are as weak to condi as they were before the patch.

 

The class itself is still weak to condi particularly shiro/glint builds as I said mallyx is mandatory for anti condi. Jalis heal is getting better since they reduced the time it takes for the clears to take effect. Still it's easy to get overloaded in a fight with no supports. Firebrand and rev team up very well in this regard.

 

I don't consider runes and sigils when talking about class balance because those things are available to all classes. The thing to note about a build like that is how invested that dude is in trying to make up for the inherent weakness to condi.

 

To me that's what balance is supposed to look like. And the rev will still be at a disadvantage against scourge even after the dhuumfire nerf and probably at an even greater disadvantage against a condi mirage. As long as that stays the case i think rev is in a good place. Necros however should always lose to range and mobility though those are its defined weaknesses and I think it should stay that way because of how strong the class is in other areas.

[MithranArkanere.8957]

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> I think scaling down the damage in WvW a bit would make for more longer lasting fights. But it would also be needed to cut back on the healing a lot.

 

Not a bit. A lot. All damage down to 1/3, and all healing down to 1/5.

 

Also, disable out of combat healing altogether. Instead of that, put healing objects like fountains on controlled objectives, that have to be built with supply, and can only be used while out of combat.

 

And of course, disabling effects should give people a short duration of a stacking stun resistance that converts into a short stun immunity if it gets too high. So CC gets spammed too much against one target, they get an automatic stun break and become temporarily immune to CC for 0.75s or so.

 

If this was tested in a weeked event, I can guarantee fights would be way more enjoyable for anyone who hasn't gotten used to exploiting gimmicky builds to kill unsuspecting newbies faster than their computers can load enemy models.

[Brujeria.7536]

> @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> >

> Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

>

Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

[DeadlySynz.3471]

Anet balances the game around raids, that's the problem. They can only skill split so much. The game would have far far better balance if raids didn't exist.

[Kovu.7560]

> @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > >

> > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> >

> Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

 

These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

 

Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

 

edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were bitching last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

 

~ Kovu

[Israel.7056]

> @"DeadlySynz.3471" said:

> Anet balances the game around raids, that's the problem. They can only skill split so much. The game would have far far better balance if raids didn't exist.

 

I mean thief and mesmer were broken op for roaming years before raids so it's not just the raids that make balancing difficult. The problem as I see it is that there are far too many options. Too many stat combos too many sigils too many runes too many too many food choices too many utilities too many traits that do too much too many skills that do too many things . Balance and complexity are naturally opposing forces and the farther they've gone down the path of increased complexity the harder it has been for them to balance it all.

 

To their credit i think the game is actually the best balanced it's possibly ever been for team play in wvw. 7 of 9 professions have a place in the meta for everything other than roaming apparently. That's not too bad.

[zinkz.7045]

What else do you expect, they balance for PvE & PvP, not WvW.

 

Balance in WvW has always been non-existent and that is for everything not just roaming. I mean look at the composition of any blob on the servers that win fights at nearly any time in the game's life (bar first few months) the class "balance" has always been absolutely laughable.

 

Back pre-HoT when you had melee meta out of say 50 people you had 20 guards, that alone is ridiculous in a game with 8 classes (back then), then at the same time you had 3 classes that were considered completely useless (engy, thief, ranger) and another that had a niche role as a veil-bot that you might want 2 of for your blob. You literally have single classes like guard (or now necro) taking more spots in a squad that 5 or 6 other classes combined, it is laughable, the worst balance I have ever seen in a game. Which is of course because bar the odd crumb thrown in WvW's direction, they don't balance for WvW.

 

Same thing now, just playing a while ago, can you guess which two classes the comm asked for, I don't even have to say them do I. ;) Balance is that bad, which is of course one of the reasons WvW is in the state it is in (at least on EU), T1/T2 that has less activity that T4 used to have and that is with 6 servers in a matchup rather than 3.

[Xtinct.7031]

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> I think scaling down the damage in WvW a bit would make for more longer lasting fights. But it would also be needed to cut back on the healing a lot.

 

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> I think scaling down the damage in WvW a bit would make for more longer lasting fights. But it would also be needed to cut back on the healing a lot.

 

I'm just shaking my head reading these comments, because this is what you all wanted in the first place. Now that we got it, you all want it rolled back now?

[EremiteAngel.9765]

> @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > > >

> > > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> > >

> > Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

>

> These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

>

> Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

>

> edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were kitten last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

>

> ~ Kovu

 

I strongly agree with Brujeria that being good at one thing doesn't mean it shouldn't be good at another.

Every class should have the ability to be efficient at a certain game mode and not just be good at some but restricted in others.

I remember there was a post on the game's vision that we should be able to play any class we want in any game mode and I think that should involve having the option to be good at that mode.

 

Elite specs are in fact a great way to address this issue as we can cater for different roles using the elite specs for each class.

Unfortunately necro in general has never been given proper tools to fight ranged and mobile foes which hampers its roaming capabilities.

The same applies for other classes who have never been given proper tools to find its place in a zerg/guild comp.

I hope that changes in the next elite spec though.

 

I do think the current boons application rework will help a lot in allowing more classes to find their spot in a zerg/guild comp.

But we will have to see further on how this affects zerg/guild directions.

 

Having said that, I made this video to show that necros can fight the current meta classes.

Mesmers? Rangers? Thieves?

Pfft, meet the Necromancer.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctt6piLXQ0Y

[MUDse.7623]

> @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > > > >

> > > > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > > > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> > > >

> > > Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

> >

> > These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

> >

> > Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

> >

> > edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were kitten last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

> >

> > ~ Kovu

>

> I strongly agree with Brujeria that being good at one thing doesn't mean it shouldn't be good at another.

> Every class should have the ability to be efficient at a certain **game mode** and not just be good at some but restricted in others.

> I remember there was a post on the game's vision that we should be able to play any class we want in any **game mode** and I think that should involve having the option to be good at that **mode**.

 

correct every class should have a place in every game mode. WvW is a mode, roaming isnt. in that regard WvW is much better balanced than instanced PvE (raid/fractals).

[EremiteAngel.9765]

> @"MUDse.7623" said:

> > @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > > > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > > > > >

> > > > > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > > > > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> > > > >

> > > > Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

> > >

> > > These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

> > >

> > > Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

> > >

> > > edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were kitten last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

> > >

> > > ~ Kovu

> >

> > I strongly agree with Brujeria that being good at one thing doesn't mean it shouldn't be good at another.

> > Every class should have the ability to be efficient at a certain **game mode** and not just be good at some but restricted in others.

> > I remember there was a post on the game's vision that we should be able to play any class we want in any **game mode** and I think that should involve having the option to be good at that **mode**.

>

> correct every class should have a place in every game mode. WvW is a mode, roaming isnt. in that regard WvW is much better balanced than instanced PvE (raid/fractals).

 

I prefer to see WvW as a big mode with many small modes in there. Like Zerg guild party duo solo roaming.

 

It is just like PvE is a big mode that has many small modes in there too. Open world story dungeons fractals raids etc.

[MUDse.7623]

> @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > @"MUDse.7623" said:

> > > @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > > > > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > > > > > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> > > > > >

> > > > > Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

> > > >

> > > > These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

> > > >

> > > > Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

> > > >

> > > > edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were kitten last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

> > > >

> > > > ~ Kovu

> > >

> > > I strongly agree with Brujeria that being good at one thing doesn't mean it shouldn't be good at another.

> > > Every class should have the ability to be efficient at a certain **game mode** and not just be good at some but restricted in others.

> > > I remember there was a post on the game's vision that we should be able to play any class we want in any **game mode** and I think that should involve having the option to be good at that **mode**.

> >

> > correct every class should have a place in every game mode. WvW is a mode, roaming isnt. in that regard WvW is much better balanced than instanced PvE (raid/fractals).

>

> I prefer to see WvW as a big mode with many small modes in there. Like Zerg guild party duo solo roaming.

>

> It is just like PvE is a big mode that has many small modes in there too. Open world story dungeons fractals raids etc.

 

but its different.

in WvW no matter what role you have, you share a common goal to win the match. a roamer, a scout, a zerg, a havoc group all do work towards the same goal just in different roles.

yet in PvE OW, raids, fractals are all seperate. i do not complete a raid / fractal by fighting jokos army in istan.

 

even if we see it similar.

for balancing pve mostly raids/fractals are considered while dungeons and open world do not matter. in WvW mainly zergs are considered while roaming doesnt matter.

in PvE one could actually split between instanced modes and open world, in WvW that would be technically difficult because how does the game know what 'small mode' you partake in?

[EremiteAngel.9765]

> @"MUDse.7623" said:

> > @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > > @"MUDse.7623" said:

> > > > @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> > > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > > > > > > @"Kovu.7560" said:

> > > > > > > > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > > > > > > > LB Soulbeasts, Burst Mirages, Deadeyes - anets pet classes. 'nuff said.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Clearly the most utilized professions in this gamemode.

> > > > > > > Every commander wants their squad full of 'em. =)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Not being good in zerg fights is no excuse for being op in roaming. On the opposite, its also not good that these classes are unwanted in zerg fights. But you cant compensate it like this.

> > > > >

> > > > > These professions are built around being productive and survivable in small scale scenarios which is _exactly_ a counterbalance to their lack of contribution to larger fights. Read Israel's posts, I'm not going to rehash it. That said, I don't agree with one/two-shot or perma-lockdown builds in general, but if you see someone you go into the fight knowing what their profession is capable of.

> > > > >

> > > > > Nobody likes fighting ~~Maguuma~~ certain professions. But instead of talking about how "op" rangers, thieves and mesmers are perhaps giving suggestions for reworks instead of straight nerfs would be more productive. There are nine professions in the game, not 4~5. Even then, Anet has told us their design philosophy on each profession and I doubt they'll shift their stance because a few "meta" players are tired of how potent certain pick professions are at being pick professions.

> > > > >

> > > > > edit- I might a little bitter -- people in discord were kitten last night about longbow damage during a guild rally, then 5 minutes later we wiped and the first thing out of the driver's mouth was "Kovu, get off your ranger and bring a necro." (Yes, I understand why a necro would be wanted over a ranger, the timing just left me a little salty.) Rangers are basically schrödinger's profession, being in a constant state of being OP and useless. Thieves, too.

> > > > >

> > > > > ~ Kovu

> > > >

> > > > I strongly agree with Brujeria that being good at one thing doesn't mean it shouldn't be good at another.

> > > > Every class should have the ability to be efficient at a certain **game mode** and not just be good at some but restricted in others.

> > > > I remember there was a post on the game's vision that we should be able to play any class we want in any **game mode** and I think that should involve having the option to be good at that **mode**.

> > >

> > > correct every class should have a place in every game mode. WvW is a mode, roaming isnt. in that regard WvW is much better balanced than instanced PvE (raid/fractals).

> >

> > I prefer to see WvW as a big mode with many small modes in there. Like Zerg guild party duo solo roaming.

> >

> > It is just like PvE is a big mode that has many small modes in there too. Open world story dungeons fractals raids etc.

>

> but its different.

> in WvW no matter what role you have, you share a common goal to win the match. a roamer, a scout, a zerg, a havoc group all do work towards the same goal just in different roles.

> yet in PvE OW, raids, fractals are all seperate. i do not complete a raid / fractal by fighting jokos army in istan.

>

> even if we see it similar.

> for balancing pve mostly raids/fractals are considered while dungeons and open world do not matter. in WvW mainly zergs are considered while roaming doesnt matter.

> in PvE one could actually split between instanced modes and open world, in WvW that would be technically difficult because how does the game know what 'small mode' you partake in?

 

I feel it is not that right to say one of the mode matters while the others doesn't.

All the modes do exist and a roamer scout havoc etc. contributes in their own way as does a zerg towards the goal of winning the match.

A zerg that runs around fighting other zergs and taking structures is one way of winning a match.

There is still need for scouts to call out enemy movement, defenders to hold structures, refresh siege and delay enemy attempts to take it, roamers to flip camps to cut supply or retake supply or to cut off enemy reinforcements.

A zerg while making up the majority of the playing base isn't everything to winning a match.

 

And there-in lies the challenge as you pointed out for WvW balance. Every small mode needs to be taken care of as much as possible. I recall a post or comment on stream by Anet and they were saying that they do balance around all scales of combat, from 1 vs 1 to 50 vs 50 (not the exact words but the gist is there).

How then do we balance for all these small modes?

 

I think the WvW modes can largely be broken down into two scales. Large blobs/guilds and Small parties/roamers/scouts.

One needs boons and AOE support/pressure. The other needs mobility.

To me, it feels like Anet is trying to mold each class into their own respective theme at the expense of their viability in different modes.

* Thieve = single target stealthy mobile assassin killer.

* Necro = slow AOE monsters that you don't want to go close to.

 

I would suggest using the new elite specs to provide things that are lacking in each class instead of following their 'theme' so that each class has the option to build for the different modes that are present in the game.

* For example, thieves who are strong at small party/roaming should get a new elite spec that gives more AOE support/pressure to make them viable in a zerg/guild comp. The new elite spec should not give thieves another single target stealthy mobile killer like deadeye/daredevil.

* For example, necros who are strong in a zerg/guild comp should get a new elite spec that gives more mobility to make them vaible in a small party/roaming comp. The new elite spec should not give necros another AOE spamming slow close range monster like reaper/scourge.

 

 

[MUDse.7623]

sure with more options in the form of new specs in the future, every profession can be made more versatile. what i do not what however is that the same elite spec is good at everything. i dont want a mobile stealthy aoe monster.

but i think in the long run elite specs have to be more than just 1 traitline and can use all core, there has to be more splits in core traits/skills depending on elite spec you use, else the options for elite specs will be limited.

 

the problem however i see is that often there are suggestion that want to balance specs that have good roaming tools to specs that have good zerg tools in regards to roaming. so there are people asking to cut mobile professions mobility to current necro level, wich would make them average at best for roaming and still not good in zergs. instead of asking necro to get a espec that trades AoE pressure for mobility (maybe with a 1h sword next)

[EremiteAngel.9765]

> @"MUDse.7623" said:

> sure with more options in the form of new specs in the future, every profession can be made more versatile. what i do not what however is that the same elite spec is good at everything. i dont want a mobile stealthy aoe monster.

> but i think in the long run elite specs have to be more than just 1 traitline and can use all core, there has to be more splits in core traits/skills depending on elite spec you use, else the options for elite specs will be limited.

>

> the problem however i see is that often there are suggestion that want to balance specs that have good roaming tools to specs that have good zerg tools in regards to roaming. so there are people asking to cut mobile professions mobility to current necro level, wich would make them average at best for roaming and still not good in zergs. instead of asking necro to get a espec that trades AoE pressure for mobility (maybe with a 1h sword next)

 

True, as you said, because of how the core is like for different classes, it will ultimately be a huge challenge not to create an OP elite spec that is good at everything.

But I'll leave that balancing act to the developers XD

[Brujeria.7536]

> @"MUDse.7623" said:

> sure with more options in the form of new specs in the future, every profession can be made more versatile. what i do not what however is that the same elite spec is good at everything. i dont want a mobile stealthy aoe monster.

> but i think in the long run elite specs have to be more than just 1 traitline and can use all core, there has to be more splits in core traits/skills depending on elite spec you use, else the options for elite specs will be limited.

>

 

Its a matter on how they do it, really. Look at the comparison of core necro and scourge foe example. Some traits are much better on scourge (dhuumfire, transfusion) and other traits are worse (basicly all "on shroud entry / exit traits) due to the individual cooldown on shroud and certain skills. One main problem the balancing of the current elite specs suffer from is: Elite specs only add for most classes. If lets say a mesmer also gets some negative feats for picking mirage (for example: Shatter cooldowns increase by 50%, or max number of clones is limited to 2) the things would be much different in both, gameplay and balance. If the core traitlines are good, and the elite spec adds something even better on top of it, things arent really balanced anymore. The only class that really gives something up if picking an espec is necro and to some extend ele and warrior.

 

At the bottomline, each core trait line should be as potent as an espec line - the espec line could then focus on adjusting the playstyle, instead of fixing the core traits mistakes for a class and adding negative feats and weapons / skills that alter the playstyle.

 

[Israel.7056]

> @"EremiteAngel.9765" said:

> I feel it is not that right to say one of the mode matters while the others doesn't.

> All the modes do exist and a roamer scout havoc etc. contributes in their own way as does a zerg towards the goal of winning the match.

> A zerg that runs around fighting other zergs and taking structures is one way of winning a match.

> There is still need for scouts to call out enemy movement, defenders to hold structures, refresh siege and delay enemy attempts to take it, roamers to flip camps to cut supply or retake supply or to cut off enemy reinforcements.

> A zerg while making up the majority of the playing base isn't everything to winning a match.

 

Ok first of all the work load split is like 80/20 between the guilds/zergs and the roamers/scouts. So I think it is fair to say one matters much more than the other if you're actually talking about winning matchups. Sure scouting matters, building and operating siege matters, flipping camps matters etc etc. It just doesn't matter nearly as much as what the guilds/zergs do.

 

Second of all the scouting/roaming type jobs can be done by almost any build for almost any class so it doesn't really matter what they're running, they're just tailing zergs and flipping camps like you can do that on almost any build.

 

If your main goal as a server is winning matchups and only winning matchups you really only need a few decent scouts who understand how callouts work and how to read the map and everyone else in coms and on pin and commanders for every timezone who get people in coms and on pin. That's really all there is to this game if you're just talking about winning matchups.

 

The roaming around ganking people, flipping camps stuff is fun don't get me wrong but largely irrelevant to the final outcome of any given match particularly as you get up in tiers.

 

[Kovu.7560]

Its very impractical in a game with professions as diverse as those in gw2 to expect every profession to have the tools available to contribute to all of the different roles with relatively the same degree as the other eight professions in each of the different "game modes" (an expression itself which is hardly defined to everyone's satisfaction).

 

Also, @"EremiteAngel.9765", what I took away from Brujeria's post is that they were suggesting that certain professions underperforming in the wvw meta is no excuse for them to overperform in small scale roaming (a sentiment I neither completely agree or disagree with), not that it'd be realistic for everyone to be equally good at everything. Such expectations are faaar beyond a pipe dream.

 

~ Kovu

[coro.3176]

It sure would be nice if the devs could weigh in on this once in a while regarding their vision for WvW balance. For what it's worth, I much prefer 60-40 balancing compared to certain 99-1 matchups that currently exist.

 

Too much of the latter has a chilling effect on all roaming and smallscale fights. If your non-dedicated roaming build stands only a 1% chance of beating a meta roamer, you're just never going to engage that fight. You're always going to run or waypoint or alt-f4. Then no one is having fun..

 

It's better for everyone if builds are closer in power level, or at least stand SOME chance of winning an encounter assuming you outskill your opponent by enough.