Balance: What is your TOP priority?

[Kovu.7560]

I always thought it would be an interesting idea for upgraded structures to be worth _fewer_ points and the paper/easy to cap stuff to be worth more. I know that's kind of skewed, but the paper stuff is easier to flip and harder to defend.

 

Alternatively, granting points for a successful defense based on the number of opposing attackers was also a thought that went through my head. Of course that would further favor more upgraded structures. Something like this would probably make the most sense in a system where objectives are all worth the same points regardless of tier.

 

I know its a pipedream, but I voted for each class having better representation in large group fights.

 

~ Kovu

[Zeaxeios.5423]

I personally think fairness fight between 1v1 or how some classes are not balanced or whatsoever as you mentioned above actually doesn't matter... If you can't win in 1v1 often just because you felt like they are stronger or unfair in several time. You might be wrong but I'm not here to correct anything since some people can be just too good or at least great knowledge with their classes. I used to suck in pvp a lot so I tried to figure why 1v1 was so hard or stupidly unfair for me no matter what build I tried. However... Longer I played, I get to know more about classes and build as my own customs. I turned out doing really good at pvp and turned the table around winning 1v1 often with my customized builds for every class I played so I was surprised at myself for that. I learned a lesson from that.

[Ben K.6238]

Lower DPS caps across the board, and a lot more counter-play. Option 3 isn't quite acceptable as 1v1s should not be the gauge for balanced fights, but rather larger engagements such as 5v5s.

[Acyk.9671]

i hope Anet keeps trying to balance around 10+ vs 10+. People that want to do 1v1 still can go to PvP, RvR fans have no other choices

[RedShark.9548]

> @"JayAction.9056" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > The problem is that there are very very few competent players left playing the game in any timezone anywhere. They tend to want to play with other competent players and not have to carry and who can blame them?

>

> This is the problem. The average WvW player is about bronze PvP skill level, and outside of maguuma (and even on that server to some extent) WvW has become a game of “follow the clueless leader”.

>

> WvW is unplayable for me currently. Lots of people trying to role play and have social hour on a near 7 year old game.

>

> **EDIT**; people playing WvW still argue soulbeast is weak over a year after POF release lmfao. That’s the level of **cluelessness** in WvW right now.

>

 

True, yesterday i fought someone in the open pvp arena and this person never dodged bullscharge... I went ahead and told that player that its rly important to dodge that one...

I got a rly depressing answer:

"you know, i usually only play wvw, i dont need to know when to dodge, the commander tells me when to do it"

 

I could just sit there, baffled.

I dont think that the average zergling is that much like a sheep, but if they are only close to it then its pretty sad and i dont even know anymore.

[steki.1478]

Population balance is never gonna happen. You cant force people to play with ones they don't like and you cant perfectly sort everyone among time zones because you cant predict what kind of gameplay people have.

 

1v1 balance isnt that important in wvw, but it doesn't even exist in spvp where it can matter (so there's nothing to merge between those modes). Classes also have different builds for zergs and roaming so balancing one doesn't break the other, but again, balance doesn't exist on any level of class performance.

 

Zergs are exclusive to wvw and balancing classes around that doesn't depend on play time, time of the day or location of fight. It just requires devs doing buffs and nerfs.

 

You can always transfer if population doesn't fit you, but you cant be viable if your class sucks for desired content.

[Nimon.7840]

Would be amazing though if skill alone would determine 1v1 fights.

Ok maybe not completely, it's ok having one class countering another, but not like 3 classes countering all other classes (thief, ranger, mesmer)

[lodjur.1284]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> Which of the following, if you could choose **ONLY ONE** to ‘*perfectly*’ balance, what would it be?

 

Some of the options aren't related. Population balance is completely unrelated to class/Build balance.

 

Imo what would be most important is making it so that no class has a 0 risk playstyle in smallscale with unlimited disengages and/or high range. That and balancing roaming so no matchup is worse than 70/30 ish, doesn't have to be perfectly balanced just make it so that more fights feel worth playing out and the meta is more than just 3 classes.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"lodjur.1284" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > Which of the following, if you could choose **ONLY ONE** to ‘*perfectly*’ balance, what would it be?

>

> Some of the options aren't related. Population balance is completely unrelated to class/Build balance.

>

> Imo what would be most important is making it so that no class has a 0 risk playstyle in smallscale with unlimited disengages and/or high range. That and balancing roaming so no matchup is worse than 70/30 ish, doesn't have to be perfectly balanced just make it so that more fights feel worth playing out and the meta is more than just 3 classes.

 

I’ve tried not to comment as I didn’t want to bias anyone.

 

I don’t think there is a way to ‘perfectly balance’ WvW. The intent of the poll was to get thoughts on what the priority was for each player.

 

And your point about the areas being unrelated has merit. Each area though has had a focus as a ‘need’ by different threads.

 

 

[Hitman.5829]

OTHER

* [Down state needs to go! No more handicapping in competitive modes!](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/58208/down-state-handicapping-the-game-in-favor-of-the-serg-that-has-more-numbers-is-a-bad-design-game/p1)