Drop In Population - Discussion - Suggestions

[Exedore.6320]

> @"Reikou.7068" said:

> Bad matchamking mechanics have always been around though, even back when the population was higher, so this isn't new.

 

Matchmaking needs some base population threshold to work; any lower and the matchmaking is little better than rolling dice. GW2 used to have more than enough population to sustain good matchmaking (season 5 and a few after). No matchmaking is perfect, but it worked well enough back then. Failure to curtail the HoT power creep and introduction of even more power creep with PoF drove away too many people (on top of not being able to play ranked with friends) such that the population dipped below the minimum viable threshold. You can't fix matchmaking without growing the population. The only way to grow the population in the long-term is to fix crappy gameplay from power creep.

 

[Reikou.7068]

> @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > Bad matchamking mechanics have always been around though, even back when the population was higher, so this isn't new.

>

> Matchmaking needs some base population threshold to work; any lower and the matchmaking is little better than rolling dice. GW2 used to have more than enough population to sustain good matchmaking (season 5 and a few after). No matchmaking is perfect, but it worked well enough back then. Failure to curtail the HoT power creep and introduction of even more power creep with PoF drove away too many people (on top of not being able to play ranked with friends) such that the population dipped below the minimum viable threshold. You can't fix matchmaking without growing the population. The only way to grow the population in the long-term is to fix crappy gameplay from power creep.

>

 

 

My contention is that even if all balance issues were solved, matches would still feel unfair/unfun to play in because of the spread of player skill in the match.

 

For example; it doesn't matter how balanced the game of chess is if average players are constantly pitted against grandmasters.

 

This might be acceptable and even fun once in a while (like Once in a few months once in a while)but if its a constant occurrence, its definitely not enjoyable for the average player.

 

 

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

> @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > > Bad matchamking mechanics have always been around though, even back when the population was higher, so this isn't new.

> >

> > Matchmaking needs some base population threshold to work; any lower and the matchmaking is little better than rolling dice. GW2 used to have more than enough population to sustain good matchmaking (season 5 and a few after). No matchmaking is perfect, but it worked well enough back then. Failure to curtail the HoT power creep and introduction of even more power creep with PoF drove away too many people (on top of not being able to play ranked with friends) such that the population dipped below the minimum viable threshold. You can't fix matchmaking without growing the population. The only way to grow the population in the long-term is to fix crappy gameplay from power creep.

> >

>

>

> My contention is that even if all balance issues were solved, matches would still feel unfair/unfun to play in because of the spread of player skill in the match.

>

> For example; it doesn't matter how balanced the game of chess is if average players are constantly pitted against grandmasters.

>

> This might be acceptable and even fun once in a while (like Once in a few months once in a while)but if its a constant occurrence, its definitely not enjoyable for the average player.

>

>

 

I agree with both of you actually and that is the scary state that pvp is in right now.

 

As far as the analogy that Reikou used, I have another to add. Let's use Michael Jordan as example.

 

Right now the match maker is doing funny stuff to solo que players, that is the equivalent of placing Michael Jordan in a 5v5 where he is supposed to carry a team of 6th grade basketball players vs. a team of college level basketball players. I mean.. it's Michael Jordan but let's get real. There are very human limitations in play here. It's not like he can be in two places at once and pass the ball to himself. Like he has to rely on these 6th graders to actually have a chance of winning the basketball game. And these are 6th graders who don't quite understand the rules of the game yet, who can't quite dribble the ball correctly without dropping it. These are 6th graders who can't shoot hoops to save their lives.

 

^ This is exactly what playing ranked feels like right now. You're either the college level team who is trashing a pro player with his 6th graders, or you're the highest rated player with a bunch of lows who is being trashed by a team of averages.

 

I ran what, maybe 10 ranked games tonight? Only 3 of the end game results were within about 50 pts of each other such as 500 to 450. The other 7 matches were all blowouts like 500 to 50 situations. I think there was one game that was around 500 to 225, something like that.

[Reikou.7068]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > > @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > > > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > > > Bad matchamking mechanics have always been around though, even back when the population was higher, so this isn't new.

> > >

> > > Matchmaking needs some base population threshold to work; any lower and the matchmaking is little better than rolling dice. GW2 used to have more than enough population to sustain good matchmaking (season 5 and a few after). No matchmaking is perfect, but it worked well enough back then. Failure to curtail the HoT power creep and introduction of even more power creep with PoF drove away too many people (on top of not being able to play ranked with friends) such that the population dipped below the minimum viable threshold. You can't fix matchmaking without growing the population. The only way to grow the population in the long-term is to fix crappy gameplay from power creep.

> > >

> >

> >

> > My contention is that even if all balance issues were solved, matches would still feel unfair/unfun to play in because of the spread of player skill in the match.

> >

> > For example; it doesn't matter how balanced the game of chess is if average players are constantly pitted against grandmasters.

> >

> > This might be acceptable and even fun once in a while (like Once in a few months once in a while)but if its a constant occurrence, its definitely not enjoyable for the average player.

> >

> >

>

> I agree with both of you actually and that is the scary state that pvp is in right now.

>

> As far as the analogy that Reikou used, I have another to add. Let's use Michael Jordan as example.

>

> Right now the match maker is doing funny stuff to solo que players, that is the equivalent of placing Michael Jordan in a 5v5 where he is supposed to carry a team of 6th grade basketball players vs. a team of college level basketball players. I mean.. it's Michael Jordan but let's get real. There are very human limitations in play here. It's not like he can be in two places at once and pass the ball to himself. Like he has to rely on these 6th graders to actually have a chance of winning the basketball game. And these are 6th graders who don't quite understand the rules of the game yet, who can't quite dribble the ball correctly without dropping it. These are 6th graders who can't shoot hoops to save their lives.

>

> ^ This is exactly what playing ranked feels like right now. You're either the college level team who is trashing a pro player with his 6th graders, or you're the highest rated player with a bunch of lows who is being trashed by a team of averages.

>

> I ran what, maybe 10 ranked games tonight? Only 3 of the end game results were within about 50 pts of each other such as 500 to 450. The other 7 matches were all blowouts like 500 to 50 situations. I think there was one game that was around 500 to 225, something like that.

 

Its a multi-pronged issue that has compounded over years to where we are today. There are no easy solutions unfortunately.

 

The way I see it, with regard to matchmaking anyway, is that there are two ways forward to try to improve the situation, and hopefully draw players back into the game.

 

1) Tighten matchmaking significantly. - Implement hard limits on matchmaking regardless of how long one waits in queue. Matches are only ever put together with/against players that are within 100 MMR of each other.

 

Pros;

- Far higher quality matches that are funner to play in.

- Game balance actually becomes a relevant factor.

 

Cons;

- Potentially longer wait time.

- Some players may be unable to get a match depending on time of day.

 

2) Remove matchmaking completely. - Just remove it completely. Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies, and the only factor affecting outcome really becomes individual player ability, instead of the current situation where the matchmaker also has an effect by trying to make "balanced" teams.

 

Pros;

- Matches are put together faster, and more "fairly." (Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies.)

 

Cons;

- Match quality goes completely out the window.

 

Both of the above are of course contingent on removal of duo queue as well.

[Glider.5792]

How about we actualy get a use and a gamemode for those two 1v1/2v2 maps which were made..... That would be a refreshment...

[bluri.2653]

> @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > > > @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > > > > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > > > > Bad matchamking mechanics have always been around though, even back when the population was higher, so this isn't new.

> > > >

> > > > Matchmaking needs some base population threshold to work; any lower and the matchmaking is little better than rolling dice. GW2 used to have more than enough population to sustain good matchmaking (season 5 and a few after). No matchmaking is perfect, but it worked well enough back then. Failure to curtail the HoT power creep and introduction of even more power creep with PoF drove away too many people (on top of not being able to play ranked with friends) such that the population dipped below the minimum viable threshold. You can't fix matchmaking without growing the population. The only way to grow the population in the long-term is to fix crappy gameplay from power creep.

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > My contention is that even if all balance issues were solved, matches would still feel unfair/unfun to play in because of the spread of player skill in the match.

> > >

> > > For example; it doesn't matter how balanced the game of chess is if average players are constantly pitted against grandmasters.

> > >

> > > This might be acceptable and even fun once in a while (like Once in a few months once in a while)but if its a constant occurrence, its definitely not enjoyable for the average player.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I agree with both of you actually and that is the scary state that pvp is in right now.

> >

> > As far as the analogy that Reikou used, I have another to add. Let's use Michael Jordan as example.

> >

> > Right now the match maker is doing funny stuff to solo que players, that is the equivalent of placing Michael Jordan in a 5v5 where he is supposed to carry a team of 6th grade basketball players vs. a team of college level basketball players. I mean.. it's Michael Jordan but let's get real. There are very human limitations in play here. It's not like he can be in two places at once and pass the ball to himself. Like he has to rely on these 6th graders to actually have a chance of winning the basketball game. And these are 6th graders who don't quite understand the rules of the game yet, who can't quite dribble the ball correctly without dropping it. These are 6th graders who can't shoot hoops to save their lives.

> >

> > ^ This is exactly what playing ranked feels like right now. You're either the college level team who is trashing a pro player with his 6th graders, or you're the highest rated player with a bunch of lows who is being trashed by a team of averages.

> >

> > I ran what, maybe 10 ranked games tonight? Only 3 of the end game results were within about 50 pts of each other such as 500 to 450. The other 7 matches were all blowouts like 500 to 50 situations. I think there was one game that was around 500 to 225, something like that.

>

> Its a multi-pronged issue that has compounded over years to where we are today. There are no easy solutions unfortunately.

>

> The way I see it, with regard to matchmaking anyway, is that there are two ways forward to try to improve the situation, and hopefully draw players back into the game.

>

> 1) Tighten matchmaking significantly. - Implement hard limits on matchmaking regardless of how long one waits in queue. Matches are only ever put together with/against players that are within 100 MMR of each other.

>

> Pros;

> - Far higher quality matches that are funner to play in.

> - Game balance actually becomes a relevant factor.

>

> Cons;

> - Potentially longer wait time.

> - Some players may be unable to get a match depending on time of day.

>

> 2) Remove matchmaking completely. - Just remove it completely. Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies, and the only factor affecting outcome really becomes individual player ability, instead of the current situation where the matchmaker also has an effect by trying to make "balanced" teams.

>

> Pros;

> - Matches are put together faster, and more "fairly." (Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies.)

>

> Cons;

> - Match quality goes completely out the window.

>

> Both of the above are of course contingent on removal of duo queue as well.

 

Tighten the matchmaker will not work:

 

We ran some experiments on the unranked matchmaker a while back, as some might recall. We tried several tweaks, but all it really did was make put some people in queue for 40+ minutes, with little discernible increase in match quality by the time they did finally make it in.

[sephiroth.4217]

As an average player for those speaking on my behalf.

 

I never once cared about balance, winning or losing when I was allowed to play with friends.

[Drakz.7051]

The singular problem is that since it takes too much work to balance PvP they won't. It would require the pve only players to voice concerns for them to actually do something about it since that is their cash cow.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> Maybe we need a new competitive game mode where characters walk out on a runway and display their fashion. It could be like a monthly AT thing.

i would win.

[Caedmon.6798]

Theres a learning curve in every mmo. I think Gw2 atm is just very unbalanced. When youre a new guy and you come into pvp against some meta guy that really knows how to roll his build its not gonna be a fun time. If that happens a few times the guy isn't even gonna bother anymore. Its hard for new players to actually "Learn how to pvp" when they dont get the chance to do so because they insta blow up or get cc locked to death and panic button. Dueling is the only way to learn that but thats locked behind a guild arena or closed servers with a pass. Give players the ability to learn their stuff atleast in some way because it seems impossible for new players to do so. Have to join a proper guild first and then find out if the ones in there ar really proper or not to teach you what you need to know. There needs to be an easier way in pvp to test and practice for new players. Golems and npc's aren't cutting it.

[Exedore.6320]

> @"Reikou.7068" said:

> Its a multi-pronged issue that has compounded over years to where we are today. There are no easy solutions unfortunately.

>

> The way I see it, with regard to matchmaking anyway, is that there are two ways forward to try to improve the situation, and hopefully draw players back into the game.

>

> 1) Tighten matchmaking significantly. - Implement hard limits on matchmaking regardless of how long one waits in queue. Matches are only ever put together with/against players that are within 100 MMR of each other.

>

> Pros;

> - Far higher quality matches that are funner to play in.

> - Game balance actually becomes a relevant factor.

>

> Cons;

> - Potentially longer wait time.

> - Some players may be unable to get a match depending on time of day.

>

> 2) Remove matchmaking completely. - Just remove it completely. Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies, and the only factor affecting outcome really becomes individual player ability, instead of the current situation where the matchmaker also has an effect by trying to make "balanced" teams.

>

> Pros;

> - Matches are put together faster, and more "fairly." (Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies.)

>

> Cons;

> - Match quality goes completely out the window.

>

> Both of the above are of course contingent on removal of duo queue as well.

Neither solution will work. You seem to be ignoring that the algorithm fails because there are so few people. 1) won't do anything. Even ANet said that, which someone quoted. You'd have to just make them sit in queue forever; "The reward for being good is that you can't play." That won't go over well.

2) is worse than today, as you're throwing top players with people below 50th percentile at that point (1200 rating is approximately 50th percentile - it is exactly 50th in theory, but a few factors throw that off a bit in practice). The current system at least prevents that.

 

Part of the reason there's such a perceived dichotomy is due to power creep. There's little difference between mid-gold and low platinum - mostly how quickly you can faceroll. And that's a lot of people due to the Gaussian distribution. Power creep has caused a [first-order-optimal](

"first-order-optimal") problem and very few players break out of that to compete vs. the absolute top.

[Reikou.7068]

> @"Exedore.6320" said:

> > @"Reikou.7068" said:

> > Its a multi-pronged issue that has compounded over years to where we are today. There are no easy solutions unfortunately.

> >

> > The way I see it, with regard to matchmaking anyway, is that there are two ways forward to try to improve the situation, and hopefully draw players back into the game.

> >

> > 1) Tighten matchmaking significantly. - Implement hard limits on matchmaking regardless of how long one waits in queue. Matches are only ever put together with/against players that are within 100 MMR of each other.

> >

> > Pros;

> > - Far higher quality matches that are funner to play in.

> > - Game balance actually becomes a relevant factor.

> >

> > Cons;

> > - Potentially longer wait time.

> > - Some players may be unable to get a match depending on time of day.

> >

> > 2) Remove matchmaking completely. - Just remove it completely. Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies, and the only factor affecting outcome really becomes individual player ability, instead of the current situation where the matchmaker also has an effect by trying to make "balanced" teams.

> >

> > Pros;

> > - Matches are put together faster, and more "fairly." (Everyone has the same random chance to get good/bad opponents and allies.)

> >

> > Cons;

> > - Match quality goes completely out the window.

> >

> > Both of the above are of course contingent on removal of duo queue as well.

> Neither solution will work. You seem to be ignoring that the algorithm fails because there are so few people. 1) won't do anything. Even ANet said that, which someone quoted. You'd have to just make them sit in queue forever; "The reward for being good is that you can't play." That won't go over well.

> 2) is worse than today, as you're throwing top players with people below 50th percentile at that point (1200 rating is approximately 50th percentile - it is exactly 50th in theory, but a few factors throw that off a bit in practice). The current system at least prevents that.

>

> Part of the reason there's such a perceived dichotomy is due to power creep. There's little difference between mid-gold and low platinum - mostly how quickly you can faceroll. And that's a lot of people due to the Gaussian distribution. Power creep has caused a [first-order-optimal](

"first-order-optimal") problem and very few players break out of that to compete vs. the absolute top.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly, neither solution will work well right away, but these really are the only two solutions i can see going forward with the aim of creating at the very least "fair" matches, and at the very least a hope to grow the population over time.

 

We tighten matchmaking with the aim of creating even/balanced matches so that every player in the match is of relatively equal skill, and matches are competitive/enjoyable to play. Matches are no longer swung because of outlier (both high and low) players being brought in.

 

The other would be to throw the idea of balanced/even matches out the window and just leave everything to chance. Matches themselves would probably feel rather random, but the only constant over a span of games would truly be the individual player.

 

Both will have their own various growing pains and issues as outlined in the cons area.

 

The final alternative is to just stick to our current guns which is the worst of both situations while having none of the pros of either a lot of the time, and we all know where this is going.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

Not gonna go into detail but uh, this piss poor match quality concerning the algorithm and unchecked manipulation has become too much for me to handle. It's been good times boys, but I've got to walk away from this. With any luck, maybe I'll find a new game with a more fair & clean competitive scene.

[Twilight Tempest.7584]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> Not gonna go into detail but uh, this kitten poor match quality concerning the algorithm and unchecked manipulation has become too much for me to handle. It's been good times boys, but I've got to walk away from this. With any luck, maybe I'll find a new game with a more fair & clean competitive scene.

 

So many veterans walking away recently. Sadness :cry:

[otto.5684]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> Not gonna go into detail but uh, this kitten poor match quality concerning the algorithm and unchecked manipulation has become too much for me to handle. It's been good times boys, but I've got to walk away from this. With any luck, maybe I'll find a new game with a more fair & clean competitive scene.

 

While I agree that you want your game to be as balanced and fair as possible, is competitive scene an objective in MMO? Vast majority of people who play MMOs do not play it for competitive PvP. We surely want the experience to as fun as possible for everyone involved. One sided games are not fun (winning or losing). Limited build options and degrading class balance is not fun. And definitely game manipulation is not good.

 

My experience with games with dwindling population is that all these issues become further exaggerated. Are they the cause or the result, it does not matter. But I think things will only get worse as the game gets older.

[Jimarius.2843]

Tried to post a comment in the stupid pvp weapons skins thread about this but it got deleted. No patch in months and months has made the pvp meta stale and fairly boring. My guess is the resources are being spent on pve stuff, which, I guess that's what more players want. Maybe not though. The game is prolly gonna die of old age pretty soon here. They don't seem to have the competent marketing team that say, Blizzard has to keep infusing fresh value to their player base.

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> Not gonna go into detail but uh, this kitten poor match quality concerning the algorithm and unchecked manipulation has become too much for me to handle. It's been good times boys, but I've got to walk away from this. With any luck, maybe I'll find a new game with a more fair & clean competitive scene.

 

See ya. Hope to see you again if morale has a reason to be restored.

[tacoclaw.8251]

I enjoy playing unranked. I like that there is no pressure. PVP ranked seems a little too intense. People get worked up and I just like to play for fun. Even in unranked some people get uptight, but it's easier to think that is on them. I know the population doesn't support it, but I truly wish there were was a hard line between bronze silver gold, etc, where you only play in your medal range. I know a lot of players here get upset because their teammates suck. But as someone who finds their teammates or opponents so much better, I'm telling you that sucks too. I think that if the game were more welcoming I would be exactly the kind of player who would pursue it, but as it is now I'm happy to just fiddle around in unranked. Anyway, that's my two cents.

[Daishi.6027]

I'll probably never happen but I'll toss this in.

 

**So you take something like this as a base for every class.**

-Has telegraphed OR anticipate-able/read-able, but strong burst. -> Should be the only heavy hitting combo across all weapons.

-Decent but frequent sized 12ish sec cooldown between.

-Requires being melee while squishy, and no hard personalized defensive cooldowns on the same weapon.

-Does not ignore Line of sight.

-Requires some resource management to be optimal.

-Applies little to no offensive pressure while on the defensive trying to sustain. -> Some of the sustain must require resource.

-No passive pressure, beyond psychological pressure. (should not be poking for significant damage at a steady rate, from behind a wall that cannot be reliably cleaved without expending the main burst.)

-Attack requires good enough positioning for the attack to land (Example: Power mes requiring proper positioning for mirror blade bounces)

-Does not ignore Line of Sight.

-Any instant stealth has a minimum of 10 seconds cooldown per 1 second of stealth -> No instant stealth lasts longer than 3 seconds. -> Anything longer must have *Over* a 1 second cast time, that is punishable in melee.

-Max 2 Hard CC (Stun, Knock back, Fear, etc.) per build, anything over 2 should require inefficient investment (like giving up the strong burst combo), No cooldowns below 25 seconds. -> Cast times minimum of 1/2 second or require travel distance.

 

**Game wide:**

-Cull Stability make it calculated on par with access to stun breaks depending on classes. -> No more pulsing -> (Calculate Mirage cloak while stunned on the same grounds as Stability)

-100% completely remove quickness.

-Reduce might so it becomes primarily a team fight mechanic, balance the game around coefficients. - Might no longer affects Condis.

 

**With this as the basis, Re-balance the ENTIRE roster to match the same standards.**

Giving a little more in certain areas, but only in exchange from taking from somewhere else, so long as it opens up a wide enough vulnerability, or a large enough sacrifice. If you want to live forever, give up your burst and your CC -> But doesn't simply win on a flat in close quarters by out sustaining an opponent's cooldowns, If both players are fighting optimally this should be a perpetual stalemate until one genuinely screws up.

 

**Condis** either become bursty and rely on the same formula, or become sticky and last a long time, but become a sustain spec with the same criteria as mentioned for if you want to "live forever"

-The dynamic shift I wish to accomplish with this: Where Direct damage sustain would have to consistently trade substantial blows until someone screws up to get a kill or die, a condi sustain build would have to focus much harder on landing their defenses at the right time to get a kill or die, while the damage was more passive.

 

**Remove Conquest as the main game type**, make the game type solely about fighting and "player killing" your opponent.

-Other game modes may be fine, but no more strict 5v5 Matches unless it has lanes you push and joust in, requiring 1v1s and 2v2s to start. Rest is either big fights of 8v8+ or small fights as 1v1, 2v2, 3v3.

 

If entire weapon skills need to change from PvE, fine, this game mode should be it's own thing that happens to use the GW2 engine.

[Usagi.4835]

> @"otto.5684" said:

> I agree with OP. I t I have a couple of specific issues, some came with PoF, but some came after. Before that I want list the meta builds. It is clearly my opinion, but looking at the forums feedback, there is a general acceptance for this stance.

>

> Top meta (S tier): FB, Holo, SB

> Meta (A tier): Scrapper, Soul beast, herald, scourge.

> Fringe meta (B tier): Core thief, weaver, reaper.

>

> 1. Boon application. If you just look at the builds in S tier and A tier, there boon spam is a common thread. Fighting one of these with 6-8 different boons is not uncommon. And it is not only quantity, it is also quality. 15+ might stacks are not uncommon. 50% protection uptime. Some classes have high uptime on quickness too.. If your build cannot dump that many boons, you have a disadvantage against a build that does, you will also run into the second issue...

> 2. Boon RIP. Boon rip was always in the game, but it was always kind of limited. It started to become an issue with the introduction of annulment sigil, but with PoF, we had an explosion of boon rip. Your class is highly reliant on 1-2 boons and you cannot dump them like no tomorrow? Too bad. No sPvP for you bud.

> 3. No condi damage. Okay we have 1 build (used to be 2). The decision by Anet to nerf condi intensity and increase duration was the worst balance decision in the game's history. For scourge, only the ridiculous amount of boon corruption is what keeps it viable. Mirage (until the recent nerfs) was viable through the sheer amount of condi dumping + high difficulty to land to damage against. Nothing else is remotely viable. There is another side to this issue as well. Classes/build that are specifically weak to condi damage have know limited to no counter. Hi SB and hearld!

> 4. Sustain. It is one thing for a build to have good sustain with high investment in toughness and/or healing power. It is another thing to be able to sit there with mara/demo/bersrker amulet and being able to avoid, block or heal incoming damage, from more than 1 target, for a prolonged period of time. SB, holo and scrapper are particularly problematic in this regard. Technically FB and weaver. But FB, you must invest in healing power heavily to do that, and weaver damage is meh, is susceptible to CC and will eventually run out of evades.

> 5. CC. CC is necessary in PvP games. It allows the players to skillfully interrupt key opponents skills. Or that is what CC was supposed to be. Now it is more chain CC the target to death. SB and holo in particular have multiple spammable CCs. Though, every single build listed, even the B tier, have at least 2-3 CCs, of which the majority are on demand. I used to think that herald with 3 AOE CCs had too much CC at HoT release. Now I miss those days.. Well there is stability. And honestly, there is a lot of stability. But unless your have a pulsing stability skill or your build can dump stability, I would give you 2 secs before it is ripped and you are CCed in a team fight.

> 6. HP pools. Only FB support is in the top meta builds. It is no coincidence that low HP pool classes are falling out of favor. The issue has many folds, but to narrow it down, whatever is the primary reason guardian, ele or thief had low HP pool, is now completely invalidated (particularly with PoF elites release). This makes the low HP pools a liability with no other advantages. Thief still has some exception to this, since the mobility and high evasiveness is still highly viable, but even here, classes with higher HP pool can give them pretty strong competition on both.

> 7. Passive play. To be fair, Anet did take a stab at reducing passive procs, but that was a mediocre move. It either completely invalidated the proc, making it an unusable sPvP trait, or did not resolve the issue. Anet should just remove all passive traits and procs completely and substitute them with active skills/traits. MMOs will always have a degree of inherent passivity in the design, since to a large extent is what separate classes. But things like auto breaking CC or auto boons, should not be a thing.

> 8. Spam. This is a combination of the above. When boons are too spammable, CC is too spammable, unblockble damage and so on, the need to skillfully apply skills is becoming more limited. Also, the counter to counter mechanics, is just a bad design. If we have too many blocks, you do not add more unblockble damage. Instead, you reduce the number and/or duration of blocks. And you definitely to not add unblockble CC :/ . This is the part of power creep that surely needs to go.

>

> To summarize, you need a high sustain build, with a large amounts CC, that can dump boons like no tomorrow and preferably high damage. These builds should not exist to begin with. But they do, and they are limited. That is why we have no diversity in sPvP. And Anet, if you read this, **NO THE SOLUTION IS NOT TO GIVE EVERY OTHER BUILD MORE OF THIS KITTEN.**

>

>

 

Sister... PREACH!

[ZhouX.8742]

> @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> Theres a learning curve in every mmo. I think Gw2 atm is just very unbalanced. When youre a new guy and you come into pvp against some meta guy that really knows how to roll his build its not gonna be a fun time. If that happens a few times the guy isn't even gonna bother anymore. Its hard for new players to actually "Learn how to pvp" when they dont get the chance to do so because they insta blow up or get cc locked to death and panic button. Dueling is the only way to learn that but thats locked behind a guild arena or closed servers with a pass. Give players the ability to learn their stuff atleast in some way because it seems impossible for new players to do so. Have to join a proper guild first and then find out if the ones in there ar really proper or not to teach you what you need to know. There needs to be an easier way in pvp to test and practice for new players. Golems and npc's aren't cutting it.

 

Don't get the chance to? Like any pvp game you need to learn, you're not expected to just go into a match and automatically win and get a pat on the back. It takes 1000's of duels per class to even garner a mastering of the mechanics , and that's against decent to good players let alone learning conquest mechanics on top of it.

 

We are in an age where there are so many videos deeply explaining class mechanics, matchup mechancs, what to do / what not to do in a conquest match , metabattle to get an overview of those very meta builds...

 

It's an overflow of information nowadays on every aspect of the game mode itself. It's up to **_you_** though if you want to take the time to actually put the work in to learn them, that's with any game's PvP environment though.

[bluri.2653]

> @"ZhouX.8742" said:

> > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > Theres a learning curve in every mmo. I think Gw2 atm is just very unbalanced. When youre a new guy and you come into pvp against some meta guy that really knows how to roll his build its not gonna be a fun time. If that happens a few times the guy isn't even gonna bother anymore. Its hard for new players to actually "Learn how to pvp" when they dont get the chance to do so because they insta blow up or get cc locked to death and panic button. Dueling is the only way to learn that but thats locked behind a guild arena or closed servers with a pass. Give players the ability to learn their stuff atleast in some way because it seems impossible for new players to do so. Have to join a proper guild first and then find out if the ones in there ar really proper or not to teach you what you need to know. There needs to be an easier way in pvp to test and practice for new players. Golems and npc's aren't cutting it.

>

> Don't get the chance to? Like any pvp game you need to learn, you're not expected to just go into a match and automatically win and get a pat on the back. It takes 1000's of duels per class to even garner a mastering of the mechanics , and that's against decent to good players let alone learning conquest mechanics on top of it.

>

> We are in an age where there are so many videos deeply explaining class mechanics, matchup mechancs, what to do / what not to do in a conquest match , metabattle to get an overview of those very meta builds...

>

> It's an overflow of information nowadays on every aspect of the game mode itself. It's up to **_you_** though if you want to take the time to actually put the work in to learn them, that's with any game's PvP environment though.

 

Casuals expect everything to be handed to them. Rewards, should be easy to play and force a 50% winratio!

[Bazooka.3590]

The weakest point of Anet was always the communication. It's a nice thing to come up with ideas about balance and MM fixes, new game modes etc but the sad truth is no one reads it and give a kitten on behalf Anet. This mistake was what led them to the edge of the cliff and they are still not recognized they gonna fall. I don't think there is a road back for them with this attitude.

[thepolishman.2348]

> @"bluri.2653" said:

> > @"ZhouX.8742" said:

> > > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > Theres a learning curve in every mmo. I think Gw2 atm is just very unbalanced. When youre a new guy and you come into pvp against some meta guy that really knows how to roll his build its not gonna be a fun time. If that happens a few times the guy isn't even gonna bother anymore. Its hard for new players to actually "Learn how to pvp" when they dont get the chance to do so because they insta blow up or get cc locked to death and panic button. Dueling is the only way to learn that but thats locked behind a guild arena or closed servers with a pass. Give players the ability to learn their stuff atleast in some way because it seems impossible for new players to do so. Have to join a proper guild first and then find out if the ones in there ar really proper or not to teach you what you need to know. There needs to be an easier way in pvp to test and practice for new players. Golems and npc's aren't cutting it.

> >

> > Don't get the chance to? Like any pvp game you need to learn, you're not expected to just go into a match and automatically win and get a pat on the back. It takes 1000's of duels per class to even garner a mastering of the mechanics , and that's against decent to good players let alone learning conquest mechanics on top of it.

> >

> > We are in an age where there are so many videos deeply explaining class mechanics, matchup mechancs, what to do / what not to do in a conquest match , metabattle to get an overview of those very meta builds...

> >

> > It's an overflow of information nowadays on every aspect of the game mode itself. It's up to **_you_** though if you want to take the time to actually put the work in to learn them, that's with any game's PvP environment though.

>

> Casuals expect everything to be handed to them. Rewards, should be easy to play and force a 50% winratio!

 

I mean, you're not wrong, but your line of thinking is basically why there's a low population. When you're new and get absolutely destroyed in 2 seconds, it's not fun. No casual player is going to be watching videos and getting destroyed in hundreds of matches in the hopes of improving. That's hardcore pvper type stuff.

 

If you want population to improve, even a new player needs to have some chance of winning against an experienced player. It may only be a 1 in 10 chance, but there needs to at least be a chance. Imo, best way of getting there is to start by getting rid of all these bunker and insta-kill builds.

[ZhouX.8742]

> @"thepolishman.2348" said:

> > @"bluri.2653" said:

> > > @"ZhouX.8742" said:

> > > > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > > Theres a learning curve in every mmo. I think Gw2 atm is just very unbalanced. When youre a new guy and you come into pvp against some meta guy that really knows how to roll his build its not gonna be a fun time. If that happens a few times the guy isn't even gonna bother anymore. Its hard for new players to actually "Learn how to pvp" when they dont get the chance to do so because they insta blow up or get cc locked to death and panic button. Dueling is the only way to learn that but thats locked behind a guild arena or closed servers with a pass. Give players the ability to learn their stuff atleast in some way because it seems impossible for new players to do so. Have to join a proper guild first and then find out if the ones in there ar really proper or not to teach you what you need to know. There needs to be an easier way in pvp to test and practice for new players. Golems and npc's aren't cutting it.

> > >

> > > Don't get the chance to? Like any pvp game you need to learn, you're not expected to just go into a match and automatically win and get a pat on the back. It takes 1000's of duels per class to even garner a mastering of the mechanics , and that's against decent to good players let alone learning conquest mechanics on top of it.

> > >

> > > We are in an age where there are so many videos deeply explaining class mechanics, matchup mechancs, what to do / what not to do in a conquest match , metabattle to get an overview of those very meta builds...

> > >

> > > It's an overflow of information nowadays on every aspect of the game mode itself. It's up to **_you_** though if you want to take the time to actually put the work in to learn them, that's with any game's PvP environment though.

> >

> > Casuals expect everything to be handed to them. Rewards, should be easy to play and force a 50% winratio!

>

> I mean, you're not wrong, but your line of thinking is basically why there's a low population. When you're new and get absolutely destroyed in 2 seconds, it's not fun. No casual player is going to be watching videos and getting destroyed in hundreds of matches in the hopes of improving. That's hardcore pvper type stuff.

>

> If you want population to improve, even a new player needs to have some chance of winning against an experienced player. It may only be a 1 in 10 chance, but there needs to at least be a chance. Imo, best way of getting there is to start by getting rid of all these bunker and insta-kill builds.

 

Hmm that's just PvP in general in every single game though. If you want progression you need to practice and get better.... It's not rocket science it's a very straight forward process. You might lose 50 times but it's about what you take from losing those 50 games and adjust based on that and I understand some games are just beyond saving due to matchmaking at times. The problem though is a lot of people just give up hope and stop trying to learn because they think the game mode is shit based on 50-100 matches when this should be looked at differently.. I'm not going to deny the matchmaking is bad at times and that the game mode doesn't have faults , it does but I think in this respect it's not one of them.

 

When you're a baby and you learn to walk, you fall down what, 100+ times? Through that failure you eventually learn it through understanding mechanics and knowledge of using your legs and feet and build up a neurological connection to them until it becomes automated. What you're asking the community for is to essentially be picked up and carried over to the destination so they feel good about themselves without learning initial PvP mechanics.

 

**_How do they learn from that?_**

 

If we play PvE , we progress by leveling, farming and building up gold or whatever your goal is and improving your gear do you not? You get noticeable rewards for exploring and learning that content.

 

It's the same with PvP except most of that progression in our equalized PvP combat is through mechanics, knowledge of other classes, conquest mechanics, IQ of the game in general.

 

PvP is essentially the same as PvE you just learn strategies instead of get gear and as such it should be looked at the very same when approaching each game mode respectively. The problem is most people don't, they look at PvE as it should, but they feel PvP should be simple and straight forward like it's PvE counterpart without looking at it from a different mentality.

 

**_That PvP is comprised of roles, rotations, matchups, class IQ_**

 

Maybe , just maybe you're getting it mixed up like a lot of people in that **_if you don't have the mentality to want to get better, that is not a fault on the game mode _** and giving up on the game mode is generally not the answer because you most likely will do that in every PvP game and complain about every PvP game in general equally for that very reason. It's the people who understand PvP and know the stages of learning it that stick with it.