Stop Complaining About Scrapper, It Isn't OP - Now With Video Proof

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

> @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > > I literally do not care about AT's. I'm talking about ranked since the ratio of AT to ranked matches is at least 99-1 and thus are more important by a factor of 99-1.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you understand why the game will be (and is) balanced around people being coordinated and able to use their classes properly?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Give me a link from Ben saying ATs are the only thing they care about in conquest. I think PvP is balanced around a drinking competition in the office and whoever drinks the most gets to make all the balance changes that patch once they sober up. It's easy to say things.

> > > > >

> > > > > Of course AT's are definitely why stuff like Core Guard and Fresh Air Weaver got nerfed. Definitely. It is known.

> > > > >

> > > > > If conquest is "dead", ATs are deader than dead. The number of games and time played in ranked outstrip AT's by a comical degree. Why should conquest be balanced around the same cliche of about 15 people passing AT wins between themselves over the astronomically most time everyone including AT players are exposed to rank?

> > > >

> > > > The balance team balances the whole game simultaneously and forgets to exclude PvP from them. Therefore, random tweaks to fresh air Weaver. It's foolish to attribute those changes to ATs. I'm certainly not saying that.

> > > >

> > > > I'm not "just saying" that ArenaNet balances PvP around ATs, it's a demonstrable fact the game is balanced around high level play.. Look at the class balance of Scourge/Firebrand/Thief/Rev. Try to say with a straight face these 4 meta specs are balanced with teammates who don't peel, support, or position properly.

> > > >

> > > > The fact that Scourge/FB/Thief/Rev exist as they do is demonstrable proof that the game is balanced around being coordinated. Not necessarily ATs, possibly high level ranked matches. It's you whose making it about "15 people passing wins" as if I'm supporting elitism or wintrading.

> > > >

> > > > Half the professions are balanced around being good and having good teammates who know their role. So if you enter the solo queue zoo, just accept that half the professions will be favoured. If you want to see where the game is balanced, do custom arena scrims with 10 good players and balanced roles. I do this. I never intended to say ATs are the only format that can be balanced.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Scourge and Firebrand dominated ranked and were an omnipresent fixture until until about season 13. The idea that Firebrand+Scourge were only ever good in AT's is never true. They were all over ATs. They were all over ranked. They were nerfed for both.

> > >

> > > And yeah despite the "Coordinated player only" examples you gave, you still see rev, thief, necro and Firebrand mains in the top 100 right now.

> > >

> > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > > I literally do not care about AT's. I'm talking about ranked since the ratio of AT to ranked matches is at least 99-1 and thus are more important by a factor of 99-1.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you understand why the game will be (and is) balanced around people being coordinated and able to use their classes properly?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Give me a link from Ben saying ATs are the only thing they care about in conquest. I think PvP is balanced around a drinking competition in the office and whoever drinks the most gets to make all the balance changes that patch once they sober up. It's easy to say things.

> > > > >

> > > > > Of course AT's are definitely why stuff like Core Guard and Fresh Air Weaver got nerfed. Definitely. It is known.

> > > > >

> > > > > If conquest is "dead", ATs are deader than dead. The number of games and time played in ranked outstrip AT's by a comical degree. Why should conquest be balanced around the same cliche of about 15 people passing MAT wins between themselves over the astronomically higher level of time everyone including AT players are exposed to rank?

> > > >

> > > > The last 2-3 rounds of the monthly AT is like the one sample that actually is important to pay attention to for any serious evaluation of balance. We can INB4 discussion of "balancing of skill floor vs. skill ceiling." Yes, a game needs both. But in all seriousness, balancing of skill ceiling is a priority over skill floor, it has to be that way.

> > > >

> > > > But I would like to point out that I don't think the game has too many OP vs. UP situations at the moment. From what I'm seeing, the new problem is within every class being able to do everything, literally. Everything is OP power creeped too the point that all of the classes are losing their flavor.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Team USA can roll into a MAT running completely off meta stuff and still have a really, really strong chance at winning the MAT and everyone knows it. Calling ATs helpful for balance is a joke when the sample size is literally about 50 people. Statistics 101 literally explains how sample sizes work.

> >

> > The biggest reason why Team USA wins every monthly AT is the incentive present for them to do so. Most of them are streamers, and it look goods when streamers stick together and win as a team together. Other players, do not have this kind of incentive to stick together through their problems. There are plenty of players out there who compete at the level of Team USA members, but they get caught up in social stigma or otherwise drama, and then good groups fall apart because they have no incentive to play together outside of "Is it even fun to be in a discord with these guy right now?" And this current era of tournament reward isn't exactly drawing in more incentive to tolerate good players in your team that you don't like. Now if there were things like WTS cash reward again, you'd see these good players that don't like each other, inviting each other to teams again, due to mutual incentive. But right now, the only serious incentive to form some semi-pro team for a monthly AT, is streamer reputation. Otherwise the in-game rewards are casual pve rewards at best. And even when it comes to these pve in-game goldish rewards, a pve player could make more profit by grinding map completion and selling legendary weapons through the trade post.

> >

> > I believe the above to be 100% true. I was once part of an AT team that was so strong, we chewed through every team and every round, winning like 500 to 20 or better, and this was against other teams that had great players in them. We reached the final round against Team USA and Team USA declined the match. Then one of the Team USA members messaged one of our players and gave him a dozen reasons why they declined the match. One can only wonder what the real reason was. But point being, people were arguing and kitten talking each other in the discord. Despite the excellent performance, this group of players absolutely refused to play together ever again.

> >

>

> "ATs are the only thing worth balancing around!"

>

> "Also the reason there's only one team that wins them is because they have unfair financial incentives and the rest of us can't play nice together and we'd totally win if we fought them but balancing around these five players is still really important."

 

You're drawing conclusions about something without understanding it. The reason why Team USA is so good, is because they have incentive to take it to that level. Other players just stay in the casual zone right now, even if they are talented. A potentially great player is only so great if he only plays 1 game a day and logs off, with no practice before or after. A potentially great player can be nearly god tier perfect in a given meta, if he logs in and practices extremely often, with some strong drive & purpose. But what purpose would anyone have to do that in GW2 right now?

 

[Chaith.8256]

@"Trevor Boyer.6524"

 

You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

[Phantaram.4816]

IDC what is balanced around I just want it to be fun.

[BlackTruth.6813]

I like that scrapper makes the game honest and forces people to play power builds, but like there is legit no point in playing condition builds vs. one.

 

It does objectively lower build variety in a sense, and strangely I'm fine with it.

 

Another thing is that effective HP < invulns so Scrapper is actually a lot less evil than Mirage from last patch.

 

Sure you can say "burst damage" counters scrapper, but what is to stop a Scrapper from using toolkit shield, sanctuary runes, and elixir X to mitigate power burst? With "cleanse conditions on protection" on the toolbelt gyro heal and elixir gun cleanse, you don't lose much by only having bulwark gyro. Literally if you think you're going to get bursted just pop the stability from bulwark gyro toolbelt or pop elixir X before hand and they waste time on you even as power. Getting tornado is ACTUALLY good right now (because wells work while the elixir is going off so you virtually can be tanky and useful even if you get RNG tornado'd) if you're a scrapper because vs. certain match ups you can full cap them and they'll never get the point back from you.

 

Don't get me wrong, **scrapper perpetuates a greater good** but it is still too strong and NEEDS a small shave. Not something big like 0.25 seconds off mirage dodge.

 

Let's start with the barrier passive on it's trait line, that might be good enough. Or maybe a cd increase on some of the gyros too. A small change on those will make the complaining stop and we'll actually have an okay meta.

 

 

[Fortus.6175]

WoW PvP had one of those situations where the classes were being balanced around 3v3 and 5v5, however the most popular mode and the mode most streamed by people was 2v2, this was actually one [of many] of the main reasons WoW esport scene started losing audience and pros, and prospective players like me that were highly ranked in their 2v2. I just couldnt be bothered to find 1 more person or 3 more, coordinating practice, coordinating getting on at the same time for the same amount of time; it is easier to coordinate this stuff with 1 person, than 2 or 4. It reached a point they had made healers (my main) so undesireable to play that I stopped altogether at some point (some healers were balanced to be really strong with few people, like priest with mana burn and high single target heals, but others like shaman elem and druid tree's single target heals and mana costs were nerfed to account for being to apply it to more targets and being more mobile, however, when it is a 2v2, all that matters is single target heals, a priest/warrior combo was a death sentence between healing reduction on focus target, while the priest mana burn healer and applied shield/quick healings to warrior, because in 3v3 and 5v5 it was balanced since you could just have the other people burst the priest).

 

I think the game should be 'mostly' balanced with ranked in mind, they are the ones that play and watch the game, and the ones that can participate on the ATs, if you cather to only the AT crowd, thats all you will have left in the end. Likewise it is understandable that the strongest class combinations are taken into account when used with maximal communication.**At the end of the day, the problem is actually communication**: overwatch solved this to some extent by allowing voice chat, the higher you go up in rank, the more people get on it and coordinate (in general). We dont have the case of WoW with multiple modes, we have only one, balancing around it shouldnt be difficult, but you gotta tackle the problem at the root, not the symptoms.

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

>

> You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

 

If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs in as large an amount as you did as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

 

If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

 

This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

 

 

[mortrialus.3062]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

> >

> > You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

>

> If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

>

> If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

>

> This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

 

I remember when Flandre won the MAT as Boonbeast on a team with no mesmers and then a bunch of Mirages were like "Do we really deserve to be nerfed? We didn't win the monthly AT." and people like Trev were sooooooo understanding of that lol.

[Chaith.8256]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

> >

> > You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

>

> If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs in as large an amount as you did as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

>

> If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

>

> This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

>

>

 

I think Mesmer before several nerfs was insanely good at a high skill ceiling, I think it's objectively way more balanced now. I'm not a hypocrite because I didn't put effort into waging a forum war for FB/Scourge/Rev nerf.. that's not on me.

[Chaith.8256]

> @"Phantaram.4816" said:

> IDC what is balanced around I just want it to be fun.

 

The game is fun if you're not a Weaver. Especially if you're a Strength Warrior and able to take out a Scrapper and cap a side node. Or a Chrono possibly able to take out a Strength Warrior and cap a side node. Some matchups do end.

 

Teamfights are pretty dynamic and awesome. Weaver is possible the most un-fun archetype to play ever is all. I'm truly sorry

 

Edit: I've made a few comments about Ele in particular ITT and I think that ideally everything besides Ele needs to come down in overall influence, or Ele is introduced to another unique role or good role in PvP. It's more likely ArenaNet will buff Ele somehow than nerf everything else.

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

> > >

> > > You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

> >

> > If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs in as large an amount as you did as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

> >

> > If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

> >

> > This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

> >

> >

>

> I think Mesmer before several nerfs was insanely good at a high skill ceiling, I think it's objectively way more balanced now. I'm not a hypocrite because I didn't put effort into waging a forum war for FB/Scourge/Rev nerf.. that's not on me.

 

We're not interested in that, what I'm pointing out is you're saying balance around top level team play which mirage was absent from certainly in EU.

 

This is your opinion on mirage and I include the full quote to not be disingenuous:

"There wasnt a single rational logical descision made at all."

 

Hmm..

 

1) Mirage cloak reduction does reduce its defense uptime potency and is indeed a nerf. Never thought I would've had to say this.

 

2) Your predictions about Mesmer are premature and not logical to shrug them all off as meaningless.

 

Just a PSA for readers to not put much stock in exaggerated knee-jerking before the patch goes live.

 

I find Mirage very toxic and un-fun, yet I'm not expecting more nerfs this patch.

I'm happy to see it getting hit harder than other specs. The only logical response to the Mirage changes are that they are getting hit harder than other specs. Don't be greedy

 

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/843826/#Comment_843826

 

I'm not debating whether you're right or wrong just that what you've put in this thread and your position from above are in contrast with each other.

[Chaith.8256]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

> > > >

> > > > You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

> > >

> > > If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs in as large an amount as you did as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

> > >

> > > If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

> > >

> > > This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I think Mesmer before several nerfs was insanely good at a high skill ceiling, I think it's objectively way more balanced now. I'm not a hypocrite because I didn't put effort into waging a forum war for FB/Scourge/Rev nerf.. that's not on me.

>

> We're not interested in that, what I'm pointing out is you're saying balance around top level team play which mirage was absent from certainly in EU.

>

> This is your opinion on mirage and I include the full quote to not be disingenuous:

> "There wasnt a single rational logical descision made at all."

>

> Hmm..

>

> 1) Mirage cloak reduction does reduce its defense uptime potency and is indeed a nerf. Never thought I would've had to say this.

>

> 2) Your predictions about Mesmer are premature and not logical to shrug them all off as meaningless.

>

> Just a PSA for readers to not put much stock in exaggerated knee-jerking before the patch goes live.

>

> I find Mirage very toxic and un-fun, yet I'm not expecting more nerfs this patch.

> I'm happy to see it getting hit harder than other specs. The only logical response to the Mirage changes are that they are getting hit harder than other specs. Don't be greedy

>

> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/843826/#Comment_843826

>

> I'm not debating whether you're right or wrong just that what you've put in this thread and your position from above are in contrast with each other.

 

The guy I was replying to was saying Mirage will still be OP after patch and nothing has changed.

 

His comment didn't age well, did it? Is Mirage OP after the patch? I was saying the nerfs were enough and significant. I'm not wrong... (edit) Your actual point, just because players chose to not run Mesmer in an AT is not proof that Mesmer was weak at high skill levels. I still maintain that Mesmer is balanced at high skill levels and was undervalued by a few certain teams in previous MaTs.

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524"

> > > > >

> > > > > You're triggering @"mortrialus.3062" by saying that AT's are the only thing worth balancing around, perhaps a better way would be to say: "It's best to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps." Or as you've said before, closer to the skill ceiling than skill floor.

> > > >

> > > > If this was even remotely close to what you and Mr Boyer believed neither of you would have advocated for mirage nerfs in as large an amount as you did as mirage was barely represented in EU mAT at that level. However Mr Boyer was one of the main proponents of the nerf mirage train, a train that used hyperbole and a lack of critical thinking to get the butchering in largely the wrong areas we just saw in the last patch.

> > > >

> > > > If you both truly believed what you were saying you'd have been making posts about nerfing FB, Scourge, Rev and Soulbeast as all of these classes have dominated ATs for a while now but looking through what comments I've seen neither of you have really propelled that train of thought as much as the nerf mirage because it's unfun.

> > > >

> > > > This isn't me commenting on the validity of your comments, I'm pointing out the juxtaposition certainly one of you has put themselves in.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > I think Mesmer before several nerfs was insanely good at a high skill ceiling, I think it's objectively way more balanced now. I'm not a hypocrite because I didn't put effort into waging a forum war for FB/Scourge/Rev nerf.. that's not on me.

> >

> > We're not interested in that, what I'm pointing out is you're saying balance around top level team play which mirage was absent from certainly in EU.

> >

> > This is your opinion on mirage and I include the full quote to not be disingenuous:

> > "There wasnt a single rational logical descision made at all."

> >

> > Hmm..

> >

> > 1) Mirage cloak reduction does reduce its defense uptime potency and is indeed a nerf. Never thought I would've had to say this.

> >

> > 2) Your predictions about Mesmer are premature and not logical to shrug them all off as meaningless.

> >

> > Just a PSA for readers to not put much stock in exaggerated knee-jerking before the patch goes live.

> >

> > I find Mirage very toxic and un-fun, yet I'm not expecting more nerfs this patch.

> > I'm happy to see it getting hit harder than other specs. The only logical response to the Mirage changes are that they are getting hit harder than other specs. Don't be greedy

> >

> > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/843826/#Comment_843826

> >

> > I'm not debating whether you're right or wrong just that what you've put in this thread and your position from above are in contrast with each other.

>

> The guy I was replying to was saying Mirage will still be OP after patch and nothing has changed.

>

> His comment didn't age well, did it? Is Mirage OP after the patch? I was saying the nerfs were enough and significant. I'm not wrong... what is your point

 

My point, for the third time now, is that you are saying balance around the top end of PvP, AT's and mAT's however before the nerfs mirage was absent from the upper levels and noticeably stacking them usually resulted in a loss towards the quarter finals.

 

By your own comments in this thread mirage should never have been nerfed because it was not well represented at the level of balance you said the game should be balanced around.

 

My quote above is showing you saying you find it toxic and un-fun with the natural implication that this is why you think it should be nerfed so hard compared to everything else. That is not in line with what you have put in this thread.

[Chaith.8256]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> My point, for the third time now, is that you are saying balance around the top end of PvP, AT's and mAT's

 

Top end of skill =/= and MaTs results. I keep saying this, if we used this logic than any suggestions to nerf Holo would be unfair too, since there were no Holosmith winners.. is everything that didn't win or show in the finals of the last MaT last month never deserving of nerfs? It's incredibly specific. I think Mesmer is represented in high skill play, just possibly not a single MaT, can you get where I'm coming from? I'm not using MaTs as examples, you are.

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > My point, for the third time now, is that you are saying balance around the top end of PvP, AT's and mAT's

>

> Top end of skill =/= and MaTs results. I keep saying this, if we used this logic than any suggestions to nerf Holo would be unfair too, since there were no Holosmith winners.. is everything that didn't win or show in the finals of the last MaT last month never deserving of nerfs? It's incredibly specific.

 

OK then how do you get proper data on top end of skill in organised groups?

 

Edit: Or in your words exactly "to balance around classes being played properly and assuming good comps."

I see where you're coming from but how do you get actionable data on that from ANet's side? What constitutes a good comp and how often is it played out against all other variations of other comps and builds?

[Chaith.8256]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> OK then how do you get proper data on top end of skill in organised groups?

 

5v5 Scrims especially, duels vs. great players, lengthy conversations with great players about their matchups and opinions on every spec. Being a student of the game. This is how top players have always evaluated the meta after balance patches. MaTs results are significantly based on execution and player skill, not necessarily representative of balance.

 

But anyways your whole point about Mesmer nerfs in the past are not hugely relevant here, I think they were good and Mesmer is still competitive with power Chrono, power Mirage (if you're Zeromis) and possibly condi Mirage in certain matchups that are favorable for it (more testing needed).

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"apharma.3741" said:

> > OK then how do you get proper data on top end of skill in organised groups?

>

> 5v5 Scrims especially, duels vs. great players, lengthy conversations with great players about their matchups and opinions on every spec. Being a student of the game. This is how top players have always evaluated the meta after balance patches. MaTs results are significantly based on execution and player skill, not necessarily representative of balance.

>

> But anyways your whole point about Mesmer nerfs in the past are not hugely relevant here, I think they were good and Mesmer is still competitive with power Chrono, power Mirage (if you're Zeromis) and possibly condi Mirage in certain matchups that are favorable for it (more testing needed).

 

Who defines who is a great player? If Incissorr is indeed the highest rated mesmer player in EU then by what you've said his opinion should carry hefty weight? I think we all know how bad that would be. That's without addressing how many are either biased or never actually back up their reasoning often throwing out misplaced suggestions.

 

Additionally many will have different views on what aspect is too strong from the point of view of their class.

 

I think balancing really should be driven by metrics primarily then by player feedback personally, preferably with a balance team that can look through the complaints and say "does this have counterplay" and if the answer is yes and it has a lot of counterplay they need to look into why it's not being used.

 

In terms of mesmer my issue was that a lot of the "feedback" was hyperbole filled with spite while they weren't performing that well at the higher levels of group play. In duels they were slightly too strong depending on match up where the Imaginary Axes and mirage cloak change would have tipped it sufficiently on its own but the forums and even people you might consider "great players" were giving terrible feedback without context or reasoning a lot of the time with very obvious bias.

[EnderzShadow.2506]

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Not even Mirage saw this amount of representation before the last nerf...

> that's just cuz engi is way more fun to play!

>

 

uh, you just might be alone with that opinion

 

everyone I talk to says it's absolutely boring

[Chaith.8256]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

 

> Who defines who is a great player? If Incissorr is indeed the highest rated mesmer player in EU then by what you've said his opinion should carry hefty weight?

 

You've already suggested that 'highest rated', AKA Ranked Queue is how I would determine who is good.. hell no. You can't start with that assumption that Ranked queue rating = top players. I'd say to weight the opinions of players more heavily who:

 

- Have a proven track record with creating good builds and comps over the years.

- Are consistently objective and as unbiased as possible in regards to all professions.

- Put the time in to test things in custom arenas vs. players of as high mechanical skill as possible.

 

Like for example the work I did after the balance patch to test Scrapper changes. I practiced and and discussed Scrapper vs. Spellbreaker duels with Boyce. We've seen Strength warrior easily dismantle Angeels' variation of Scrapper with Tools, demolish my anti-condi Scrapper teamfight variation even harder (the most poorly equipped to fight vs Strength Spellbreaker,) and vs Helio's best equipped build of the 3 to face Warrior, with a Hybrid of Gyros/Elixirs & mortar still not able to ever triumph (but surviving the longest). I started using Helio's build as well myself alongside my teamfight Scrapper build.

 

We agreed based on this info that life sucks when you're vs. a competent Spellbreaker as Scrapper. This is kind of how one successfully determines matchups and overall balance.. just an example.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

> @"EnderzShadow.2506" said:

> > @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> > that's just cuz engi is way more fun to play!

> uh, you just might be alone with that opinion

>

> everyone I talk to says it's absolutely boring

this game definitely prefers damage and most people like that fact.

 

[apharma.3741]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"apharma.3741" said:

>

> > Who defines who is a great player? If Incissorr is indeed the highest rated mesmer player in EU then by what you've said his opinion should carry hefty weight?

>

> You've already suggested that 'highest rated', AKA Ranked Queue is how I would determine who is good.. hell no. You can't start with that assumption that Ranked queue rating = top players. I'd say to weight the opinions of players more heavily who:

>

> - Have a proven track record with creating good builds and comps over the years.

> - Are consistently objective and as unbiased as possible in regards to all professions.

> - Put the time in to test things in custom arenas vs. players of as high mechanical skill as possible.

>

> Like for example the work I did after the balance patch to test Scrapper changes. I practiced and and discussed Scrapper vs. Spellbreaker duels with Boyce. We've seen Strength warrior easily dismantle Angeels' variation of Scrapper with Tools, demolish my anti-condi Scrapper teamfight variation even harder (the most poorly equipped to fight vs Strength Spellbreaker,) and vs Helio's best equipped build of the 3 to face Warrior, with a Hybrid of Gyros/Elixirs & mortar still not able to ever triumph (but surviving the longest). I started using Helio's build as well myself alongside my teamfight Scrapper build.

>

> We agreed based on this info that life sucks when you're vs. a competent Spellbreaker as Scrapper. This is kind of how one successfully determines matchups and overall balance.. just an example.

 

This is why you should say what you mean by great player, for the record I don't think ranked rating is indicative, at least anymore, of someone being a great player though it does at least mean they're good and maybe shouldn't flippantly dismiss what they say unless especially poorly thought out.

 

So all of this data is where? All these duels and the testing you've done with Boyce, Angeels, Helios and all the good players is where for Anet and the wider community to actually look at? I know "great players" can often get a lot of stick from the forums when they post but surely in the interest of good feedback it would be an idea to at least make a post on the results and counters you've been able to test?

 

I mean I've seen some of the duels on some streams but unless you're in the right stream on the right day/time you aren't going to see it.

 

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" Use your words please, not old memes.

 

Edit: The best example being that menders bunker scrapper is receiving a lot of disdain at the moment, for me the jury is out, I want to see wider performance game wide and across multiple levels of play before I really make a decision but one look at the PvP front page and you'd think the wells poop pink butterflies. These kinds of tests would help reduce the hyperbole.

[Eurantien.4632]

The fact scrapper has no counter pressure which makes it unable to kill in 1v1s makes it sub par to the former dps God specs. Some things about it might need to be toned down (like stealth gyro) but I don't think it's over powered.

[Lincolnbeard.1735]

I'd say revert the nerfs on druid, fb and bring back s1 chronobunker. And let's all enjoy the "now fine" bunker wars.

[DaShi.1368]

Wow, the defense of scrapper here is very amusing. And trying to use the same arguments that mesmers used just shows how disingenuous engy mains were from the beginning.

[Solori.6025]

> @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > > I literally do not care about AT's. I'm talking about ranked since the ratio of AT to ranked matches is at least 99-1 and thus are more important by a factor of 99-1.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you understand why the game will be (and is) balanced around people being coordinated and able to use their classes properly?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Give me a link from Ben saying ATs are the only thing they care about in conquest. I think PvP is balanced around a drinking competition in the office and whoever drinks the most gets to make all the balance changes that patch once they sober up. It's easy to say things.

> > > > >

> > > > > Of course AT's are definitely why stuff like Core Guard and Fresh Air Weaver got nerfed. Definitely. It is known.

> > > > >

> > > > > If conquest is "dead", ATs are deader than dead. The number of games and time played in ranked outstrip AT's by a comical degree. Why should conquest be balanced around the same cliche of about 15 people passing AT wins between themselves over the astronomically most time everyone including AT players are exposed to rank?

> > > >

> > > > The balance team balances the whole game simultaneously and forgets to exclude PvP from them. Therefore, random tweaks to fresh air Weaver. It's foolish to attribute those changes to ATs. I'm certainly not saying that.

> > > >

> > > > I'm not "just saying" that ArenaNet balances PvP around ATs, it's a demonstrable fact the game is balanced around high level play.. Look at the class balance of Scourge/Firebrand/Thief/Rev. Try to say with a straight face these 4 meta specs are balanced with teammates who don't peel, support, or position properly.

> > > >

> > > > The fact that Scourge/FB/Thief/Rev exist as they do is demonstrable proof that the game is balanced around being coordinated. Not necessarily ATs, possibly high level ranked matches. It's you whose making it about "15 people passing wins" as if I'm supporting elitism or wintrading.

> > > >

> > > > Half the professions are balanced around being good and having good teammates who know their role. So if you enter the solo queue zoo, just accept that half the professions will be favoured. If you want to see where the game is balanced, do custom arena scrims with 10 good players and balanced roles. I do this. I never intended to say ATs are the only format that can be balanced.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Scourge and Firebrand dominated ranked and were an omnipresent fixture until until about season 13. The idea that Firebrand+Scourge were only ever good in AT's is never true. They were all over ATs. They were all over ranked. They were nerfed for both.

> > >

> > > And yeah despite the "Coordinated player only" examples you gave, you still see rev, thief, necro and Firebrand mains in the top 100 right now.

> > >

> > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > > > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said:

> > > > > > > I literally do not care about AT's. I'm talking about ranked since the ratio of AT to ranked matches is at least 99-1 and thus are more important by a factor of 99-1.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you understand why the game will be (and is) balanced around people being coordinated and able to use their classes properly?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Give me a link from Ben saying ATs are the only thing they care about in conquest. I think PvP is balanced around a drinking competition in the office and whoever drinks the most gets to make all the balance changes that patch once they sober up. It's easy to say things.

> > > > >

> > > > > Of course AT's are definitely why stuff like Core Guard and Fresh Air Weaver got nerfed. Definitely. It is known.

> > > > >

> > > > > If conquest is "dead", ATs are deader than dead. The number of games and time played in ranked outstrip AT's by a comical degree. Why should conquest be balanced around the same cliche of about 15 people passing MAT wins between themselves over the astronomically higher level of time everyone including AT players are exposed to rank?

> > > >

> > > > The last 2-3 rounds of the monthly AT is like the one sample that actually is important to pay attention to for any serious evaluation of balance. We can INB4 discussion of "balancing of skill floor vs. skill ceiling." Yes, a game needs both. But in all seriousness, balancing of skill ceiling is a priority over skill floor, it has to be that way.

> > > >

> > > > But I would like to point out that I don't think the game has too many OP vs. UP situations at the moment. From what I'm seeing, the new problem is within every class being able to do everything, literally. Everything is OP power creeped too the point that all of the classes are losing their flavor.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Team USA can roll into a MAT running completely off meta stuff and still have a really, really strong chance at winning the MAT and everyone knows it. Calling ATs helpful for balance is a joke when the sample size is literally about 50 people. Statistics 101 literally explains how sample sizes work.

> >

> > The biggest reason why Team USA wins every monthly AT is the incentive present for them to do so. Most of them are streamers, and it look goods when streamers stick together and win as a team together. Other players, do not have this kind of incentive to stick together through their problems. There are plenty of players out there who compete at the level of Team USA members, but they get caught up in social stigma or otherwise drama, and then good groups fall apart because they have no incentive to play together outside of "Is it even fun to be in a discord with these guy right now?" And this current era of tournament reward isn't exactly drawing in more incentive to tolerate good players in your team that you don't like. Now if there were things like WTS cash reward again, you'd see these good players that don't like each other, inviting each other to teams again, due to mutual incentive. But right now, the only serious incentive to form some semi-pro team for a monthly AT, is streamer reputation. Otherwise the in-game rewards are casual pve rewards at best. And even when it comes to these pve in-game goldish rewards, a pve player could make more profit by grinding map completion and selling legendary weapons through the trade post.

> >

> > I believe the above to be 100% true. I was once part of an AT team that was so strong, we chewed through every team and every round, winning like 500 to 20 or better, and this was against other teams that had great players in them. We reached the final round against Team USA and Team USA declined the match. Then one of the Team USA members messaged one of our players and gave him a dozen reasons why they declined the match. One can only wonder what the real reason was. But point being, people were arguing and kitten talking each other in the discord. Despite the excellent performance, this group of players absolutely refused to play together ever again.

> >

>

> *ATs are the only thing worth balancing around when the class isn't mesmer*

>

> "Also the reason there's only one team that wins them is because they have unfair financial incentives and the rest of us can't play nice together and we'd totally win if we fought them but balancing around these five players is still really important."

 

 

 

FTFY

[otto.5684]

> @"Rusty.9348" said:

> The more I read this the more want Scrapper to return to his pre-patch state. Now if he is nerfed due to the whining he may become total trash.

 

And that is the issue. Scrapper was not meta but was not bad either. It had good sustainability and decent utility. It just needs a bit more damage and improvements in some skills to create diversity.

 

But courtesy of the geniuses at Anet the decided to buff sustainability and utility significantly, making scrapper ultra broken.