Ex-player who sometimes wants to return's thoughts on why I don't play GW2

[Gyousa.5609]

Hoi, I used to be a big fan of GW2 and still kind of am, though I have little immediate desire to pick up the game again, it is likely I'll fall back into it some day.

 

I figured I'd make this thread to gather my thoughts on GW2 and what I'd like to see from it in the future. There are some big ticket points that will IMMEDIATELY pull me back to the game if ever one or more of them get resolved.

 

The things I enjoyed the most about GW2 are its world design and freedom of experience. It really felt like the first MMO I could play exactly how I wanted to play and not feel bad about that, but this was a feeling that didn't survive end game content.

 

This first big ticket item I wanted to address is game balance, and this is an issue that stretches all the way down to fundamental class design. I played a Guardian (mostly Dragonhunter) for the majority of my time with GW2, which I feel gave me some unique insight into the structure of classes. I picked Guardian because it was sold to me by the game itself as a utility fighter, and in a game without the combat triangle, I loved the idea of that. Initially, I was quite dazzled by all the tools I unlocked but very quickly came to realise the vast majority of them were simply useless, and this got even worse when I was exposed to the design of other classes. Not only were my already useless tools irrelevant, but some of the other abilities I'd flagged as potentially useful were annihilated by what Druids and Chronos were capable of.

 

I came to look at my skill repertoire as a cluttered mess. I had a dozen shouts and signets and spirit weapons that I would never even consider picking, and the list only grew when I was doing group content like T4 Fractals. I'm aware balance changing since I last played has improved on this somewhat (spirit weapons aren't too shabby these days I'm told), but I don't feel like it's quite there yet because my next point of balance is actually something far more impactful.

 

Weapon skills and the cost of ''utility''. To me, the weapons you choose impact your gameplay far more than any other aspect of your build, and Guardians were an absolute disaster for weapon balancing, and they aren't the only class in this slump. When I discovered how much I loved Dragonhunter gameplay, and the Longbow to pair with it I was deadset on playing it. I especially disliked Guardian Greatsword (you can probably see where this is going now right?). But the damage wasn't there. The damage wasn't even close to there. Longbow meant I could do damage from range, and had more utility than Greatsword, but the cost of those two things made the weapon uncompetitive in PvE content. To make matters worse, my 2nd favourite Guardian weapon was the Hammer, which brought utility already covered by Chronos/Druids at the expense of dealing relevant damage, and CC which was covered by half the meta builds in the game, again at the expense of relevant damage. Essentially, a lose/lose/lose situation when it really didn't have to be. Sure, make Hammer weaker than Greatsword for the utility and CC it provides, but don't make it absolute trash beyond comparison. Sure, make Longbow weaker than Scepter/Focus, but not to the point where it serves no purpose.

 

There is a rule in PvE group content in MMOs, that being you sacrifice everything you can for DPS to get the job done faster. With a Longbow/Hammer build that still did enough damage to not be an anchor in T4 Fractals, I was constantly being told off by players rocking meta builds. But that wasn't as bad as the alternative, playing with weapons I disliked just to deal more damage.

 

I understand the safety of range, and the addition of utility should be taxed in some way, but all weapons should be balanced around a competitive baseline, with the majority of weapons existing within a +/- 10% range of the average. I feel this should apply to some utility traits as well, to open up new build pathways (i.e. "I sacrifice 5% of my damage to pick up [utility effect]" instead of upwards of 20% for individual traits in some cases). Furthermore, content should be designed to be inclusive of these different build paths. If range makes someone too safe, then design content with more threats to ranged damage dealers. There is no excuse for so many weapons and builds across all the classes to be so horribly uncompetitive.

 

It is critical to the success of RPG gameplay that someone is able to be inventive with their character and still contribute relative to other players. That isn't to say there cannot be dud / noobtrap builds, but the scales are tipped too far towards cookie cutter buildpaths being miles and miles and miles more successful than anything else.

 

The second big ticket is quite simple. Game optimisation and performance. GW2 turns my computer into a bonfire, when it can run just about everything else without any issue. I've done a lot of investigating into why this is the case, as well as anything I can do to mitigate it's impact on my computer, but the end result is always having to watch my internal temps constantly and sighing as they hover around the "probably not that great for the part" and "approaching permanent damage" temp range. If this were fixed, I'd have very little issue with playing casually in the long term.

 

And from here on out, I think I'll just be mentioning smaller things that I'd love to see improved upon, but aren't super critical to my enjoyment of the game.

 

More variance in end game content, and better balancing between maps (hello release Istan).

Stronger rewards for atypical content i.e. achievements, jump puzzles etc.

A re-assessment of the game's economy, especially with the value and transferability of gold (as in, more rewards that do not interface with gold to provide value for less gold-profitable content)

More long term collections than legendaries (like, game/lore-relevant mount skins or something)

 

But seriously the main things are being able to play how I want and not be dead in the water compared to meta, and running the game without creating a new sun in my computer.

 

**If I've said something that is wrong or has been improved upon because of changes since I last played, please let me know!!! I'd love a good excuse to start playing again. **

[Kam.4092]

As a Guardian main, this post greatly irritates me. People look at the Guardian as the best balanced class with its weapons, traits, and skills. Your post comes off as someone being too stubborn to learn their class. What would be the point to all weapons being near equal? Also wanting to use Hammer with Longbow is a bad mix, because both are heavy area control weapons. Which is why they see more play in PvP. All weapons have a use still though, and it’s silly to refuse to Greatsword. Guardians have amazing utilities too. GW2 isn’t a game where you can just choose a weapon, and solely use it. It forces variety, and weapon swapping is probably my favorite part of the whole game. You can play how you want in open world, and not get questioned, but in group content be the best you can be, and don’t cripple the group. Especially in T4 Fractals, and Raids. Its rude to be that one guy that makes runs take longer due to wanting to use inferior setups. You’re playing an MMO sadly with group content that goes way more smoothly when having proper setups. Metas will always be a thing in any game with group content.

 

I agree with your optimization comment, and pretty much everything else.

 

You can play how you want to in open world :)

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Kam.4092" said:

> As a Guardian main, this post greatly irritates me. People look at the Guardian as the best balanced class with its weapons, traits, and skills. Your post comes off as someone being too stubborn to learn their class. What would be the point to all weapons being near equal? Also wanting to use Hammer with Longbow is a bad mix, because both are heavy area control weapons. Which is why they see more play in PvP. All weapons have a use still though, and it’s silly to refuse to Greatsword. Guardians have amazing utilities too. GW2 isn’t a game where you can just choose a weapon, and solely use it. It forces variety, and weapon swapping is probably my favorite part of the whole game. You can play how you want in open world, and not get questioned, but in group content be the best you can be, and don’t cripple the group. Especially in T4 Fractals, and Raids. Its rude to be that one guy that makes runs take longer due to wanting to use inferior setups. You’re playing an MMO sadly with group content that goes way more smoothly when having proper setups. Metas will always be a thing in any game with group content.

>

> I agree with your optimization comment, and pretty much everything else.

>

> You can play how you want to in open world :)

 

I'm not sure how you can claim Guardian is the best balanced class while pushing "No. You have to use Greatsword." in the same post, unless that's a jab at the poor balancing through the rest of the game. Just look at the Guardian forums, there's dozens and dozens of posts of people begging for Longbow damage buffs, and others like me who do not enjoy how Guardian Greatsword plays.

 

Also, I have gone through everything and tried SO MANY builds that run contrary to the cookie cutter builds that I find unenjoyable, and nothing comes remotely close (other than switching to Soulbeast on an alt, which I was enjoying but ended up quitting before I completed a set of Ascended gear for it)

 

In T4 Fractals, I would make adjustments to my build to ensure I wasn't deadweight and contributing enough. Your presumption that I was crippling the group is nonsensical and my own experiences make me laugh at this comment. There have been plenty of times I've saved wipes from using certain traits and kills a typical Guardian build would not have had.

[ReaverKane.7598]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> Hoi, I used to be a big fan of GW2 and still kind of am, though I have little immediate desire to pick up the game again, it is likely I'll fall back into it some day.

>

> I figured I'd make this thread to gather my thoughts on GW2 and what I'd like to see from it in the future. There are some big ticket points that will IMMEDIATELY pull me back to the game if ever one or more of them get resolved.

>

> The things I enjoyed the most about GW2 are its world design and freedom of experience. It really felt like the first MMO I could play exactly how I wanted to play and not feel bad about that, but this was a feeling that didn't survive end game content.

>

> This first big ticket item I wanted to address is game balance, and this is an issue that stretches all the way down to fundamental class design. I played a Guardian (mostly Dragonhunter) for the majority of my time with GW2, which I feel gave me some unique insight into the structure of classes. I picked Guardian because it was sold to me by the game itself as a utility fighter, and in a game without the combat triangle, I loved the idea of that. Initially, I was quite dazzled by all the tools I unlocked but very quickly came to realise the vast majority of them were simply useless, and this got even worse when I was exposed to the design of other classes. Not only were my already useless tools irrelevant, but some of the other abilities I'd flagged as potentially useful were annihilated by what Druids and Chronos were capable of.

>

> I came to look at my skill repertoire as a cluttered mess. I had a dozen shouts and signets and spirit weapons that I would never even consider picking, and the list only grew when I was doing group content like T4 Fractals. I'm aware balance changing since I last played has improved on this somewhat (spirit weapons aren't too shabby these days I'm told), but I don't feel like it's quite there yet because my next point of balance is actually something far more impactful.

>

> Weapon skills and the cost of ''utility''. To me, the weapons you choose impact your gameplay far more than any other aspect of your build, and Guardians were an absolute disaster for weapon balancing, and they aren't the only class in this slump. When I discovered how much I loved Dragonhunter gameplay, and the Longbow to pair with it I was deadset on playing it. I especially disliked Guardian Greatsword (you can probably see where this is going now right?). But the damage wasn't there. The damage wasn't even close to there. Longbow meant I could do damage from range, and had more utility than Greatsword, but the cost of those two things made the weapon uncompetitive in PvE content. To make matters worse, my 2nd favourite Guardian weapon was the Hammer, which brought utility already covered by Chronos/Druids at the expense of dealing relevant damage, and CC which was covered by half the meta builds in the game, again at the expense of relevant damage. Essentially, a lose/lose/lose situation when it really didn't have to be. Sure, make Hammer weaker than Greatsword for the utility and CC it provides, but don't make it absolute trash beyond comparison. Sure, make Longbow weaker than Scepter/Focus, but not to the point where it serves no purpose.

>

> There is a rule in PvE group content in MMOs, that being you sacrifice everything you can for DPS to get the job done faster. With a Longbow/Hammer build that still did enough damage to not be an anchor in T4 Fractals, I was constantly being told off by players rocking meta builds. But that wasn't as bad as the alternative, playing with weapons I disliked just to deal more damage.

>

> I understand the safety of range, and the addition of utility should be taxed in some way, but all weapons should be balanced around a competitive baseline, with the majority of weapons existing within a +/- 10% range of the average. I feel this should apply to some utility traits as well, to open up new build pathways (i.e. "I sacrifice 5% of my damage to pick up [utility effect]" instead of upwards of 20% for individual traits in some cases). Furthermore, content should be designed to be inclusive of these different build paths. If range makes someone too safe, then design content with more threats to ranged damage dealers. There is no excuse for so many weapons and builds across all the classes to be so horribly uncompetitive.

>

> It is critical to the success of RPG gameplay that someone is able to be inventive with their character and still contribute relative to other players. That isn't to say there cannot be dud / noobtrap builds, but the scales are tipped too far towards cookie cutter buildpaths being miles and miles and miles more successful than anything else.

>

> The second big ticket is quite simple. Game optimisation and performance. GW2 turns my computer into a bonfire, when it can run just about everything else without any issue. I've done a lot of investigating into why this is the case, as well as anything I can do to mitigate it's impact on my computer, but the end result is always having to watch my internal temps constantly and sighing as they hover around the "probably not that great for the part" and "approaching permanent damage" temp range. If this were fixed, I'd have very little issue with playing casually in the long term.

>

> And from here on out, I think I'll just be mentioning smaller things that I'd love to see improved upon, but aren't super critical to my enjoyment of the game.

>

> More variance in end game content, and better balancing between maps (hello release Istan).

> Stronger rewards for atypical content i.e. achievements, jump puzzles etc.

> A re-assessment of the game's economy, especially with the value and transferability of gold (as in, more rewards that do not interface with gold to provide value for less gold-profitable content)

> More long term collections than legendaries (like, game/lore-relevant mount skins or something)

>

> But seriously the main things are being able to play how I want and not be dead in the water compared to meta, and running the game without creating a new sun in my computer.

>

> **If I've said something that is wrong or has been improved upon because of changes since I last played, please let me know!!! I'd love a good excuse to start playing again. **

 

Agree with you in most things, although i do like greatsword, and it's been my favourite weapon on Guardian, which was also my first and sorta main character, it does sting that most other weapons aren't nearly as viable as greatsword for power builds (which will be nerfed severely in the future patch, so goodbye to that).

I too struggle to find a reason to play GW2, i've loved the game and keep current to the living story, but aside from that i can't find the fun in the game anymore. A big reason for this is also that all my guildmates have also quit way before me, and that's a big part of what makes MMORPGs work. But that isn't the only problem, i've simply grown too weary of watching a game i love get worse and worse, without doing anything to change that downward motion.

Balance is the worse aspect of the game, and no real measures are taken to improve it, a Test server would be one major step to avoid having broken metas for 3 months. More frequent balance patches are something essential, and honestly, i don't know how in this day and age with so few classes to balance they still find it "fine" to only release a balance patch every month and a half to two months.

Then there's really questionable monetization questions that half turned away a lot of people, and a big dip in quality of the game.

Everything takes too long to make, and still comes out feeling rushed, i don't know how people can feel comfortable managing a game with that kind of pace and attitude.

And that's why i'm like you, mostly just lurking in the forums, giving my two cents, hoping that something brings me back in... Might be that the warclaw does it, but its already looking like a major grind to get, so... We'll see.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> Agree with you in most things, although i do like greatsword, and it's been my favourite weapon on Guardian, which was also my first and sorta main character, it does sting that most other weapons aren't nearly as viable as greatsword for power builds (which will be nerfed severely in the future patch, so goodbye to that).

> I too struggle to find a reason to play GW2, i've loved the game and keep current to the living story, but aside from that i can't find the fun in the game anymore. A big reason for this is also that all my guildmates have also quit way before me, and that's a big part of what makes MMORPGs work. But that isn't the only problem, i've simply grown too weary of watching a game i love get worse and worse, without doing anything to change that downward motion.

> Balance is the worse aspect of the game, and no real measures are taken to improve it, a Test server would be one major step to avoid having broken metas for 3 months. More frequent balance patches are something essential, and honestly, i don't know how in this day and age with so few classes to balance they still find it "fine" to only release a balance patch every month and a half to two months.

> Then there's really questionable monetization questions that half turned away a lot of people, and a big dip in quality of the game.

> Everything takes too long to make, and still comes out feeling rushed, i don't know how people can feel comfortable managing a game with that kind of pace and attitude.

> And that's why i'm like you, mostly just lurking in the forums, giving my two cents, hoping that something brings me back in... Might be that the warclaw does it, but its already looking like a major grind to get, so... We'll see.

 

It's infinitely frustrating that they split the damage between PvE and PvP and didn't do anything significant with it. Why bother if they aren't going to attempt to balance for PvE? There's so much potential in this game's design but how it's executed is just gaaahhhh. I just hope they make the changes that make this game as great as it can be.

[ReaverKane.7598]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> > Agree with you in most things, although i do like greatsword, and it's been my favourite weapon on Guardian, which was also my first and sorta main character, it does sting that most other weapons aren't nearly as viable as greatsword for power builds (which will be nerfed severely in the future patch, so goodbye to that).

> > I too struggle to find a reason to play GW2, i've loved the game and keep current to the living story, but aside from that i can't find the fun in the game anymore. A big reason for this is also that all my guildmates have also quit way before me, and that's a big part of what makes MMORPGs work. But that isn't the only problem, i've simply grown too weary of watching a game i love get worse and worse, without doing anything to change that downward motion.

> > Balance is the worse aspect of the game, and no real measures are taken to improve it, a Test server would be one major step to avoid having broken metas for 3 months. More frequent balance patches are something essential, and honestly, i don't know how in this day and age with so few classes to balance they still find it "fine" to only release a balance patch every month and a half to two months.

> > Then there's really questionable monetization questions that half turned away a lot of people, and a big dip in quality of the game.

> > Everything takes too long to make, and still comes out feeling rushed, i don't know how people can feel comfortable managing a game with that kind of pace and attitude.

> > And that's why i'm like you, mostly just lurking in the forums, giving my two cents, hoping that something brings me back in... Might be that the warclaw does it, but its already looking like a major grind to get, so... We'll see.

>

> It's infinitely frustrating that they split the damage between PvE and PvP and didn't do anything significant with it. Why bother if they aren't going to attempt to balance for PvE? There's so much potential in this game's design but how it's executed is just gaaahhhh. I just hope they make the changes that make this game as great as it can be.

 

Honestly, i'm a bit beyond hope that they steer it correctly, i mean, it's been drifting off-course since HoT came out pretty much, that's ~4 years ago. And in that time span, they barely did anything. They certainly didn't change policy or routines, which are the main factors contributing to the game's flaws. You can pretty much sum up the major problem with Guild Wars 2 development as "rigid adherence to established procedures". In some areas this is a good methodology, but in game design, which is a creative effort, rigid conformism just leads to stagnation.

 

But you can see that rigidity in most flaws of the game. Balance is stifled by their rigid adherence to a way to long period between patches. Also by rigid adherence to "skill's identity". They'd rather keep the game broken and imbalanced than have a dimorphic skill.

That rigidity is also manifested in lack of creativity in balance. They don't dare make deeper redesigns, and limit themselves to numbers games. For example, they preferred to gut Scourge by nerfing numbers than to change Shades to add interactivity and counter play to them.

That rigidity is also seen in the cookie cutter living world releases, since Season 3 it's always been a very predictable format: new map, new stats, new currency, new ascended items, new home node, new dailies, new achievements. On paper this seems pretty awesome, except that after a while, it all blends together, maps become forgettable, achievements become a chore, and the rest is more often than not just noise, the stat sets are usually useless, which means that armor and weapon sets with that stat are just cosmetic changes (if at all), and the maps are never revisited.

I mean, Season 2 had 2 new maps, and i had a much more memorable experience in those maps than the whole of season 4. I've revisited the silverwastes and Dry top many more times, even post PoF than most Season 3 and 4 maps.

That rigidity, and treating us like we have an attention deficit and just going for the new, new, new, and giving us intricate powerful, quality experiences is doing the game a disservice.

[Tiviana.2650]

I think its silly that a ranger cant use a longbow to dps with, i mean thats the iconic weapon of the archtype. I dont mind standing in closer to shoot, but must the damage be so pitiful?

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> > Agree with you in most things, although i do like greatsword, and it's been my favourite weapon on Guardian, which was also my first and sorta main character, it does sting that most other weapons aren't nearly as viable as greatsword for power builds (which will be nerfed severely in the future patch, so goodbye to that).

> > I too struggle to find a reason to play GW2, i've loved the game and keep current to the living story, but aside from that i can't find the fun in the game anymore. A big reason for this is also that all my guildmates have also quit way before me, and that's a big part of what makes MMORPGs work. But that isn't the only problem, i've simply grown too weary of watching a game i love get worse and worse, without doing anything to change that downward motion.

> > Balance is the worse aspect of the game, and no real measures are taken to improve it, a Test server would be one major step to avoid having broken metas for 3 months. More frequent balance patches are something essential, and honestly, i don't know how in this day and age with so few classes to balance they still find it "fine" to only release a balance patch every month and a half to two months.

> > Then there's really questionable monetization questions that half turned away a lot of people, and a big dip in quality of the game.

> > Everything takes too long to make, and still comes out feeling rushed, i don't know how people can feel comfortable managing a game with that kind of pace and attitude.

> > And that's why i'm like you, mostly just lurking in the forums, giving my two cents, hoping that something brings me back in... Might be that the warclaw does it, but its already looking like a major grind to get, so... We'll see.

>

> It's infinitely frustrating that they split the damage between PvE and PvP and didn't do anything significant with it. Why bother if they aren't going to attempt to balance for PvE? There's so much potential in this game's design but how it's executed is just gaaahhhh. I just hope they make the changes that make this game as great as it can be.

 

Seems to me the problem is that you don't accept the game for what it is; you're hoping it turns into something you want it to be. I have yet to play an MMO that does that.

[Yasi.9065]

What you want would kill the flavor of each weapon. Guardian is actually very well balanced in that regard, so your example really is a bad one. Hammer is control, longbow is ranged and control, sword is a gap closer, scepter is ranged dps, greatsword is melee dps, staff is pure support etc.

What you want, is typical easy single player rpg, where no one cares that you blow throw content because of an OP skillset, all while choosing weapons and armor purely by fashion. But gw2 is an mmorpg. And while the balance has serious problems, what you are describing is NOT a problem at all. ESPECIALLY in gw2 its not a problem, because you can still do openworld and story content, as well as lower fractals and dungeons without any trouble on literally any build you want to play. Thats very rare in mmos.

But in every mmo theres a point that you transcend from being a casual newbie carrying around that yellow shiny hammer because it looks good, to a meta build playing veteran. Thats part of mmos, and for me personally, its part of the charm of mmos. In gw2, that fluffy casual newbie world is already very much extended into endcontent, so I really do not understand your complaints - at all.

So you want to do veteran content? Then you have to develop that mindset for it. You dont want to develop that mindset? Also fine in gw2, nothing and nobody forces you into that content. Literally. You can totally not go into raids and high tier fractals, and not miss out on anything in gw2. They are, like PvP, an area of the game thats for players dedicated to that kind of mindset. If its not for you... then thats all okay. You still have HUGE parts of the game for YOUR kind of gaming style. More than 90% of gw2 is dedicated to your playstyle, please, at one point... stop being greedy with your demands.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> What you want would kill the flavor of each weapon. Guardian is actually very well balanced in that regard, so your example really is a bad one. Hammer is control, longbow is ranged and control, sword is a gap closer, scepter is ranged dps, greatsword is melee dps, staff is pure support etc.

> What you want, is typical easy single player rpg, where no one cares that you blow throw content because of an OP skillset, all while choosing weapons and armor purely by fashion. But gw2 is an mmorpg. And while the balance has serious problems, what you are describing is NOT a problem at all. ESPECIALLY in gw2 its not a problem, because you can still do openworld and story content, as well as lower fractals and dungeons without any trouble on literally any build you want to play. Thats very rare in mmos.

> But in every mmo theres a point that you transcend from being a casual newbie carrying around that yellow shiny hammer because it looks good, to a meta build playing veteran. Thats part of mmos, and for me personally, its part of the charm of mmos. In gw2, that fluffy casual newbie world is already very much extended into endcontent, so I really do not understand your complaints - at all.

> So you want to do veteran content? Then you have to develop that mindset for it. You dont want to develop that mindset? Also fine in gw2, nothing and nobody forces you into that content. Literally. You can totally not go into raids and high tier fractals, and not miss out on anything in gw2. They are, like PvP, an area of the game thats for players dedicated to that kind of mindset. If its not for you... then thats all okay. You still have HUGE parts of the game for YOUR kind of gaming style. More than 90% of gw2 is dedicated to your playstyle, please, at one point... stop being greedy with your demands.

 

You seem to have conflated build diversity with easy content. These are two independent things, and a well balanced game does not have only a small pool of their large options as viable.

 

I am all for difficult content. I would even want T4 Fractals to be more challenging if the game was more balanced (I see the meta specs/builds as overtuned).

 

Your assumption is plainly wrong and leaps to many conclusions. You have presented your view of what makes a game good or challenging is the assumption that one has to be limited in their options.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

>

> Seems to me the problem is that you don't accept the game for what it is; you're hoping it turns into something you want it to be. I have yet to play an MMO that does that.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. GW2 has separate balancing values for PvP and PvE. This is a fact. It is also a fact that ANet has not made a strong effort to balance the large pool of options available to a player.

 

Another game that offers separate PvP and PvE balancing is WoW, which is considerably more balanced on both fronts than GW2 has ever been.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> >

> > Seems to me the problem is that you don't accept the game for what it is; you're hoping it turns into something you want it to be. I have yet to play an MMO that does that.

>

> I'm not sure what you mean by this. GW2 has separate balancing values for PvP and PvE. This is a fact. It is also a fact that ANet has not made a strong effort to balance the large pool of options available to a player.

>

> Another game that offers separate PvP and PvE balancing is WoW, which is considerably more balanced on both fronts than GW2 has ever been.

 

It is a fact, and it's also a fact that there are things you are hoping Anet does they don't and haven't ever done. Therefore my comment; you have to accept the game for what it is, not what you want it to be. I'm willing to bet that Anet hasn't made that strong effort because it's not needed more than other things in the game. Anet hasn't done lots of things we want; if everyone thought like you , no one would play.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

>

> It is a fact, and it's also a fact that from your post, I can deduce that there are things you are hoping Anet does they don't and haven't ever done. Therefore my comment; you have to accept the game for what it is, not what you want it to be.

 

Then why do they make threads like this?

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/69915/balance-notes-preview-discussion

 

ANet creates the illusion they are balancing the game. My frustration is that they aren't actually balancing the game. I would be playing this game if it were balanced better, the same goes for many ex-players.

 

It is no secret GW2 has passed its peak. If ANet wants to entice players back into their game, then they should consider updates that are less taxing on their content developers, like game balance.

[Obtena.7952]

No, you create the illusion that Anet should be balancing how you think balance should be. There isn't just one version of balance, and it just happens to be the one you decide. GW2 past it's peak? Maybe ... but it's purely conjecture that the answer to that is your version of balance.

 

Wait, i'm betting you haven't heard about how Anet balances the game ... check my sig if you want to learn.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> No, you create the illusion that Anet should be balancing how you think balance should be. There isn't just one version of balance, and it just happens to be the one you decide. GW2 past it's peak? Maybe ... but it's purely conjecture that the answer to that is your version of balance.

>

> Wait, i'm betting you haven't heard about how Anet balances the game ... check my sig if you want to learn.

 

If you think balance is a state anything other than allowing every option to be comparable (this does NOT mean equal, or homogenous) then I question why you would even comment on game balance because you clearly do not stand for balance.

[Yasi.9065]

Simply put: no.

What you are proposing, is turning each and every weapon into a clone with different animations. Same with skills and traits. Thats for one thing incredibly boring, and for another really not what mmorpgs are about. Good balance in mmorpgs makes you choose between having more utility, defense, support or dps. And the guardian is very well balanced in that regard. Part of that decision, in gw2, is the weapon choice. You want to play a supporty guardian? Staff, mace and shield offer defensive support. You want to go about sniping enemies, keeping them from you while more or less slowly killing them? Longbow and scepter. You want to smash enemies in melee combat? Greatsword. Thats just how gw2 was designed. Thats a core function of this game. If you dont like it, then you dont like the game. Period.

 

And build diversity? Sorry? But how does that even figure in this discussion? Do you even know what that means?

 

You want to do veteran content - or even beyond, but you dont want to play meta builds because of the limited weapon choices in those builds. And then you blame balancing for this? Ehm what? Reality check here, the problem... isnt the game or its balancing. Its you and your fixed notions.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> Simply put: no.

> What you are proposing, is turning each and every weapon into a clone with different animations. Same with skills and traits.

 

I had to stop here because you clearly haven't read what I've said, so I'm not going to read what you've said.

 

Have a nice day.

[Cyninja.2954]

Not all weapons are balanced around doing the same damage: true.

 

All weapons are balanced around their overall performance which includes but is not limited to: damage, movement, boons, conditions, crowd control, knock backs, boon removal, range, etc.

 

Your example of hammer is exactly why hammer will never be in a top spot damage wise. It provides a lot of utility (permanent protection while in its sigil, knock backs, roots).

 

As far as utilities, guardian has always been the go-to class for passive survival group utilities, as far back as vanilla where any dungeon or fractal party wanted at least 1 guardian. The only dip for this demand came with Hot until guardian got its damage reworked. Ever since PoF, guardian and its elite specializations are once again among the top utility and most useful skills in game.

 

It seems your desires are not in line with the current game balance or with what would constitute realistic balance expectations.

 

As far as weapon choice: no class gets to pick and chose any weapon they desire for all roles. Not even chrono(Mesmer) or druid(ranger) which most of the time are even forced into using their elite specialization specific weapons. Lucky enough, this is only of consequence for T4 challenge modes and raids.

[Yasi.9065]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > Simply put: no.

> > What you are proposing, is turning each and every weapon into a clone with different animations. Same with skills and traits.

>

> I had to stop here because you clearly haven't read what I've said, so I'm not going to read what you've said.

>

> Have a nice day.

 

So mature. Ive read your posts. All parts pertaining to guardian are different variations of "make hammer do top dps so I can play this game with a hammer in hand because thats how I want to play this game do it now or I call this game a dead game with bad balancing and I wont play it anymore because you wouldnt buff hammer dmg and make it OP".

[Angelweave.1856]

I agree with your sentiments and would love that from a RP perspective, the issue I think comes if this option is taken where is the deep customisation. There are millions of way to still achieve this (i.e. stances that reduce dps but pump out boons) though the counter to that is stale gameplay as you just click a button and go from dps to tank/heal/boon/corruption etc. I don't think there is a perfect solution that will satisfy everyone

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Not all weapons are balanced around doing the same damage: true.

>

> All weapons are balanced around their overall performance which includes but is not limited to: damage, movement, boons, conditions, crowd control, knock backs, boon removal, range, etc.

>

> Your example of hammer is exactly why hammer will never be in a top spot damage wise. It provides a lot of utility (permanent protection while in its sigil, knock backs, roots).

>

> As far as utilities, guardian has always been the go-to class for passive survival group utilities, as far back as vanilla where any dungeon or fractal party wanted at least 1 guardian. The only dip for this demand came with Hot until guardian got its damage reworked. Ever since PoF, guardian and its elite specializations are once again among the top utility and most useful skills in game.

>

> It seems your desires are not in line with the current game balance or with what would constitute realistic balance expectations.

>

> As far as weapon choice: no class gets to pick and chose any weapon they desire for all roles. Not even chrono(Mesmer) or druid(ranger) which most of the time are even forced into using their elite specialization specific weapons. Lucky enough, this is only of consequence for T4 challenge modes and raids.

 

I never said I expected something like hammer to be a top DPS weapon, quite the opposite. I agree that it is good to be balancing a weapon in regard to its overall performance, but I stated that the way weapons are taxed for non-damage aspects is far too much, in a way that limits choice.

 

There is no consistent baseline that weapons exist on. It's ride or die for the best options.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > Simply put: no.

> > > What you are proposing, is turning each and every weapon into a clone with different animations. Same with skills and traits.

> >

> > I had to stop here because you clearly haven't read what I've said, so I'm not going to read what you've said.

> >

> > Have a nice day.

>

> So mature. Ive read your posts. All parts pertaining to guardian are different variations of "make hammer do top dps so I can play this game with a hammer in hand because thats how I want to play this game do it now or I call this game a dead game with bad balancing and I wont play it anymore because you wouldnt buff hammer dmg and make it OP".

 

Clearly you haven't.

 

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

>Sure, make Hammer weaker than Greatsword for the utility and CC it provides, but don't make it absolute trash beyond comparison. Sure, make Longbow weaker than Scepter/Focus, but not to the point where it serves no purpose.

 

So either engage with what I've actually written and stop making up rubbish/leaping to conclusions to flame about, or get out of my thread :)

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > No, you create the illusion that Anet should be balancing how you think balance should be. There isn't just one version of balance, and it just happens to be the one you decide. GW2 past it's peak? Maybe ... but it's purely conjecture that the answer to that is your version of balance.

> >

> > Wait, i'm betting you haven't heard about how Anet balances the game ... check my sig if you want to learn.

>

> If you think balance is a state anything other than allowing every option to be comparable (this does NOT mean equal, or homogenous) then I question why you would even comment on game balance because you clearly do not stand for balance.

 

I'm not at all telling you what I think balance is; it's irrevelant what I think it is or should be ... just like your version of what balance should be is irrevelant too. I'm simply telling you that whatever Anet is doing for balance is different than what you want, and that it's highly unlikely to change because balance simply isn't a business consideration ... at least not yet.

 

Anyways, that link in my sig is a VERY good example of how Anet balances the game. You don't need to take issue with me about it, it's not my idea. I'm simply giving you the information to help you clarify your view of the game and make a judgement accordingly.

 

Maybe you think arguing with me and everyone else somehow makes a difference; it won't. You have to play GW2 for what it is. If the balance is something that keeps you away, that's not a problem. The game can't be everything for everyone. You took the right approach; don't play it.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Not all weapons are balanced around doing the same damage: true.

> >

> > All weapons are balanced around their overall performance which includes but is not limited to: damage, movement, boons, conditions, crowd control, knock backs, boon removal, range, etc.

> >

> > Your example of hammer is exactly why hammer will never be in a top spot damage wise. It provides a lot of utility (permanent protection while in its sigil, knock backs, roots).

> >

> > As far as utilities, guardian has always been the go-to class for passive survival group utilities, as far back as vanilla where any dungeon or fractal party wanted at least 1 guardian. The only dip for this demand came with Hot until guardian got its damage reworked. Ever since PoF, guardian and its elite specializations are once again among the top utility and most useful skills in game.

> >

> > It seems your desires are not in line with the current game balance or with what would constitute realistic balance expectations.

> >

> > As far as weapon choice: no class gets to pick and chose any weapon they desire for all roles. Not even chrono(Mesmer) or druid(ranger) which most of the time are even forced into using their elite specialization specific weapons. Lucky enough, this is only of consequence for T4 challenge modes and raids.

>

> I never said I expected something like hammer to be a top DPS weapon, quite the opposite. I agree that it is good to be balancing a weapon in regard to its overall performance, but I stated that the way weapons are taxed for non-damage aspects is far too much, in a way that limits choice.

>

 

Yes you've stated that. Given current game balance and diversity in weapon choice based on desired performance, you are incorrect.

 

Non damage components are often vastly more powerful in their areas of performance. Hammer in this case simply is of no use in a pve environment where protection might not be needed or gained via other means similar to crowd control. Simply put: hammer does not fit into pve well.

 

> @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> There is no consistent baseline that weapons exist on. It's ride or die for the best options.

 

That is highly unlikely and neither represented in builds nor logical to assume since I guarantee you, internal balance baselines exist. They always do for a developer or get developed over the years otherwise balance would be impossible.

 

The chance is far more likely that you disagree with the balance or lack understanding for it.

[Gyousa.5609]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > Not all weapons are balanced around doing the same damage: true.

> > >

> > > All weapons are balanced around their overall performance which includes but is not limited to: damage, movement, boons, conditions, crowd control, knock backs, boon removal, range, etc.

> > >

> > > Your example of hammer is exactly why hammer will never be in a top spot damage wise. It provides a lot of utility (permanent protection while in its sigil, knock backs, roots).

> > >

> > > As far as utilities, guardian has always been the go-to class for passive survival group utilities, as far back as vanilla where any dungeon or fractal party wanted at least 1 guardian. The only dip for this demand came with Hot until guardian got its damage reworked. Ever since PoF, guardian and its elite specializations are once again among the top utility and most useful skills in game.

> > >

> > > It seems your desires are not in line with the current game balance or with what would constitute realistic balance expectations.

> > >

> > > As far as weapon choice: no class gets to pick and chose any weapon they desire for all roles. Not even chrono(Mesmer) or druid(ranger) which most of the time are even forced into using their elite specialization specific weapons. Lucky enough, this is only of consequence for T4 challenge modes and raids.

> >

> > I never said I expected something like hammer to be a top DPS weapon, quite the opposite. I agree that it is good to be balancing a weapon in regard to its overall performance, but I stated that the way weapons are taxed for non-damage aspects is far too much, in a way that limits choice.

> >

>

> Yes you've stated that. Given current game balance and diversity in weapon choice based on desired performance, you are incorrect.

>

> Non damage components are often vastly more powerful in their areas of performance. Hammer in this case simply is of no use in a pve environment where protection might not be needed or gained via other means similar to crowd control. Simply put: hammer does not fit into pve well.

>

> > @"Gyousa.5609" said:

> > There is no consistent baseline that weapons exist on. It's ride or die for the best options.

>

> That is highly unlikely and neither represented in builds nor logical to assume since I guarantee you, internal balance baselines exist. They always do for a developer or get developed over the years otherwise balance would be impossible.

>

> The chance is far more likely that you disagree with the balance or lack understanding for it.

 

You may be right in saying I disagree/do not understand it. Personally, I see no way something can be considered balanced when a large majority of options available to a player are simply far below viability