Aza.2105 Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 > @"otto.5684" said: > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > 1) core is not viable. > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iozeph.5617 Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019  Trade-offs is just the latest offering in the ANet, nothing-speak phrase book. As has been pointed out here it's something that should have been done all along, but suddenly they've latched onto the word the way a five year old might with four letter expletives and they're doing their level best to wear it out. Similar to foodies throwing around the word 'sustainability,' or Boeing suddenly discovering the word 'teamwork.' And I suppose the trade-off for playing core Engineer is that it's objectively the worst at everything? Also included under that umbrella its once upon a time much-vaunted 'versatility.' E-specs were supposed to change the flavour of the base professions. They were supposed to offer that build variety being bandied about here without rendering the base professions obsolete. Didn't bloody well happen though, did it? And on the 'knocking-people-over-then-stomping-on-their-genitalia-with-hobnailed-boots-when-they're-down' front, as of late they've nerfed our rifle -a medicore weapon at best(mostly- no, pretty much only in the hands of engineers) but one of the few base weapons we have. Because? Oh right. Because...  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stand The Wall.6987 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 also its just devolving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blocki.4931 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 Honestly can't complain about powercreep when nerfs just earn laughs from the professional balance posters. Once every spec has got their fill things will look much better. There will always be 1 or 2 overperformers, no matter what. You don't have to agree with their decisions either. Every power down should be welcomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.7864 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"alain.1659" said: > Anet should have done this for all professions at the same time. This once in a million years balance patch things the main culprit. Bring the bloody drawbacks to all professions, observe for 2 weeks and fix the problems. It is easy. Bringing drawbacks to a single profession is not clever. Agreed, they'll slowly kill the community while we either quit or struggle to find other currently unnerfed professions to remain ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigmoid.7082 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 I think people have gotten far to used to their elite specs being a) far to strong in general and b) straight upgrades on base classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.5684 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"Aza.2105" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. You think this is 3 year project? This is a fucking 7 year old game and now the devs to are working figure out what works and what does not?! It’s done. And whatever the devs are currently doing is not working and will only alienate the remaining players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aza.2105 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"otto.5684" said: > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. > > You think this is 3 year project? This is a kitten 7 year old game and now the devs to are working figure out what works and what does not?! It’s done. And whatever the devs are currently doing is not working and will only alienate the remaining players. Its a mmo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Safandula.8723 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 i rly like the idea of trade-offs - it gives more possibilities to the game. but if core specs are not becoming viable in the moment u "rework" elites, than something went bad as mentioned chrono in wvw is useless now, u wont get any clone up there, and without them u cant do anything now. It killed shiton of gameplay diversity both in pve and pvp modes. same for thief - as i dont mind 600 range on swipe THAT MUCH, i just think the unblockable part is very poorly designed, and not thought that well - as it should be when ur reworking spec. as long as i think that trade-offs are fine, than execution of them is terrible now i just want to see trade-offs for firebrand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazze.9870 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > @"Flandre.2870" said: > > The whole "elite specs must have a drawback" thing is only alineating even more playres from the game. > > Nah. Tradeoffs are fine. They give people a reason to play core over making them feel like they're just watered down versions of elites. Does anyone seriously think that, down the road when every class has 4-5 elite spec (if we ever get there), that people won't play the elite spec designed to fulfill a certain role, but instead play a core build that doesn't really excell at anything? People talk about how trade offs are good so that elite specs won't be a necessarry upgrade, but I don't picture core builds ever being relevant once every profession has a handfull of choices to go with. Druid might be complete crap in pvp atm, but it's still the ranger's best pick for support. The only thing Anet has done with their nerfs to druid is forcing the elite spec out of pvp (and with it ranger's ability to do that role in any capacity whatsoever), they haven't made core ranger compete with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 If core lines were where they shoulda been in the first place and if old useless trates were revamped to actually be usefull than trade off on especs woulda or shoulda been the loss of a core traitline in itself if elites were actually designed as side grades. Now there just ruining especs by giving them badly designed trade offs ie swipe and chrono changes as a example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis.7864 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"Safandula.8723" said: > i rly like the idea of trade-offs - it gives more possibilities to the game. Congratulations! They're succeeding on that and making the elites feel like a handicap and more beneficial and higher QoL to use core specs. Why bother with a headache by grabbing an elite when you can have better gameplay with core traitlines? That's the direction they went with Chrono and Druid in PvP / WvW. And Chrono in solo PvE so far. I haven't tried scrapper yet but healer and condi doesn't look too good. Seems power is the only viable option now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.5684 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"Aza.2105" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > > > > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. > > > > You think this is 3 year project? This is a kitten 7 year old game and now the devs to are working figure out what works and what does not?! It’s done. And whatever the devs are currently doing is not working and will only alienate the remaining players. > > Its a mmo. Not sure what that means. I do expect constant improvements. However, "change" for the sake of "change" is a terrible idea. It is a waste of dev resources, will alienate active veteran players and has no impact on obtaining new players or bringing inactive veteran players back to the game. > @"Lazze.9870" said: > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > > @"Flandre.2870" said: > > > The whole "elite specs must have a drawback" thing is only alineating even more playres from the game. > > > > Nah. Tradeoffs are fine. They give people a reason to play core over making them feel like they're just watered down versions of elites. > > Does anyone seriously think that, down the road when every class has 4-5 elite spec (if we ever get there), that people won't play the elite spec designed to fulfill a certain role, but instead play a core build that doesn't really excell at anything? People talk about how trade offs are good so that elite specs won't be a necessarry upgrade, but I don't picture core builds ever being relevant once every profession has a handfull of choices to go with. > > Druid might be complete kitten in pvp atm, but it's still the ranger's best pick for support. The only thing Anet has done with their nerfs to druid is forcing the elite spec out of pvp (and with it ranger's ability to do that role in any capacity whatsoever), they haven't made core ranger compete with it. > > It is not a question of wither druid (or any build) is the best support option for ranger. It is a questions of: 1. Why should you play support ranger at all. Is the support provided by druid enough to justify it being played over soul beast (or even core) as dps? 2. Where support druid stands compared to other support builds. In druids case, in addition to that there significantly better support options, playing soul beast as dps will be much better for you and your team. The trade-off does not exist, cuz whatever druid is offering cannot compete with other ranger options or other classes as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithranArkanere.8957 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 The whole "Elite specs must have a tradeoff" was the whole point of the design. The only real problem here is that they had straight updates over core specs for so long that people got used to them and ended up thinking that's how it should be. When a balance issue like that arises it has to be addressed ASAP, before it settles as normalcy. Because once players get used to something that should not be there in the first place, it'll be harder to take it away from them, even though they should not have had it in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azure The Heartless.3261 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 > @"Lazze.9870" said: > Does anyone seriously think that, down the road when every class has 4-5 elite spec (if we ever get there), that people won't play the elite spec designed to fulfill a certain role, but instead play a core build that doesn't really excell at anything? People talk about how trade offs are good so that elite specs won't be a necessarry upgrade, but I don't picture core builds ever being relevant once every profession has a handfull of choices to go with. You're basing that opinion on a presumption of what is going to happen to core (namely, that it will become irrelevant) if we get more elite specs, despite the fact that the balance changes are currently specifically working to counteract that presumption. So what are you saying, exactly? Anet devs are making the core builds excel at specific things with the tradeoff patches. The core builds will always be at least marginally relevant, because new players start with those builds. If absolutely nothing else, players will be using those to venture into pvp, and if I were a new player I would definitely like to not have to purchase an Xpack just to be relevant in the competitive scene. If Arenanet can keep them relevant and have each of them fill a specific niche of play, then more power to them. Just because you think it -can't- be done doesn't mean they can't try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth.7623 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 yea we know... you just want to be able to walk into your enemies and they die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazsi.2734 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Elite specs having tradeoffs isn't a bad thing. It's actually quite a nice idea, a way to reduce the powercreep. What i REALLY dislike though is how they are going about implementing it. Namely, some elite specs get the tradeoff now, some elite specs in the next update, some after that... and mind you, we have a balance patch every 3 month so... some elite specs won't have a tradeoff for a year or possibly even longer, while others are already toned down. So yeah, keep the tradeoff patches coming, speed them up if possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortrialus.3062 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 > @"Aza.2105" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. Even before the introduction of Druid trade offs core ranger had better conquest builds than Druid despite Druid "not having any trade offs." Not all of the elite specs are Chrono or Mirage. Some of them were designed to be such an extreme specialization in the literal definition of the profession that just taking the traitline fundamentally sacrificed things your core build could do. A Druid could never do as much damage as a core ranger because of how singularly focused everything taking Druid gave you was towards healing and healing alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonArkanio.6419 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Literally, what?? The way Shatters now work the way they should have always worked. I absolutely disagree with the OP. E-Specs provide things **on top of** Core classes - that's bad. They should **change** how the Core class works. That's why we have powercreep and Devs are slowly but surely fixing it. Back to the Shatters. What about Revenant? Why don't people moan about Renegades F-skills costing 10-20-35 (out of 50 base energy)? Because that's the way these skills should work. You don't get Invulnerability, Blind, Confusion or Daze for just pressing the button. That is lazy and uninteractive gameplay design. In order to Shatters Illusions, you have to have Illusions, period. Just like Berserker goes full F1 on E-Spec. Just like Daredevil's Steal has 600 range. Just like Engi loses toolbelt skills on E-Spec. Just like Rev has to use energy to use skills. Shatters aren't just utilities. They are very powerful skills that need a resource - now it's fixed. All classes need trade-offs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 > @"Flandre.2870" said: > > @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > Well said > > Are you really FOR less options and complexity? Is it what this games community is about rn? Tell me what kind of tradeoffs core proffs had? Necro not having mobility. Nothing besides that. He/she said that having tradeoffs is a good thing and reins down on the powercreep. Not that the tradeoffs we have rn are very good or well thought out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tycura.1982 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Zerker mains? Feelsbadman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Boyer.6524 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 > @"otto.5684" said: > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. > > You think this is 3 year project? This is a kitten 7 year old game and now the devs to are working figure out what works and what does not?! It’s done. **And whatever the devs are currently doing is not working and will only alienate the remaining players.** I think the bolded is the most important point out of anything mentioned in this thread. Anet needs to be really careful about this. The game is 7 years old and the reason why we still play the game is because certain things feel a certain way and it's comfortable, familiar, and appeasing to play. We aren't here still in the era of "Oh let me see how this new class feels." Most of us are waaaaay past that game experimentation phase. We are still here because we like how the game has felt up to this point. The game is in a new era, the almost decade old era, which means that the player base is mostly comprised of older hardcore diehard players who are still here because things have had a certain historical "feel" to them up to this point. But all of a sudden, Arenanet is pumping out some really weird mechanical game changers, most of which are not exactly favorable. If they are going to pump out complete class/specialization overhauls to how something feels mechanically, especially in competitive modes, they need to be 100% sure that the change is a quality upgrade and not something that is going to disappoint & dirty up the play experience of that hardcore player base, who has expectations. As the title of the thread says "Why are we de-evolving a 7 year old game?" And that is exactly what I mean. That is not what a veteran player base should be feeling, if the company wants to survive into the decade life span era. That's the kind of disappointing feeling that makes veteran player base look for a new game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwolf.9571 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 I think Nike put it best. Anet is currently running aimless with no Public road map in PVE content, so it's pretty much exacerbated in all other game modes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.5684 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > > @"Aza.2105" said: > > > > > I disagree, trade offs are a great change. Its how the game was designed originally. Each profession had trade offs. With the introduction of elite specs, what happened was the elite specs filled in the gaps each profession had. Effectively removing the weaknesses they were designed with. Its no coincidence that the massive power creep happened when elite specs were introduced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trade-offs do not exist if: > > > > > > > > 1) core is not viable. > > > > 2) the entire elite line is not sPvP viable. > > > > > > > > Examples: Chrono, Druid, berserker, renegade, need I keep going? > > > > > > > > If Anet is serious about trade-offs (they are not), they had to buff core lines and nerf elites. What Anet currently doing can only be called throwing darts on to a board with blind on. It has nothing to do with balance, trade-offs, quality of life improvements or overall game improvement. > > > > > > How can you say any of this when you know they aren't done doing their trade off rework. We have 3 or so elite specs with trade offs now? Out of how many. Lets talk what is viable and whats not when they are done. > > > > You think this is 3 year project? This is a kitten 7 year old game and now the devs to are working figure out what works and what does not?! It’s done. **And whatever the devs are currently doing is not working and will only alienate the remaining players.** > > I think the bolded is the most important point out of anything mentioned in this thread. > > Anet needs to be really careful about this. The game is 7 years old and the reason why we still play the game is because certain things feel a certain way and it's comfortable, familiar, and appeasing to play. We aren't here still in the era of "Oh let me see how this new class feels." Most of us are waaaaay past that game experimentation phase. We are still here because we like how the game has felt up to this point. The game is in a new era, the almost decade old era, which means that the player base is mostly comprised of older hardcore diehard players who are still here because things have had a certain historical "feel" to them up to this point. But all of a sudden, Arenanet is pumping out some really weird mechanical game changers, most of which are not exactly favorable. If they are going to pump out complete class/specialization overhauls to how something feels mechanically, especially in competitive modes, they need to be 100% sure that the change is a quality upgrade and not something that is going to disappoint & dirty up the play experience of that hardcore player base, who has expectations. > > As the title of the thread says "Why are we de-evolving a 7 year old game?" And that is exactly what I mean. That is not what a veteran player base should be feeling, if the company wants to survive into the decade life span era. That's the kind of disappointing feeling that makes veteran player base look for a new game. Add to that, Anet already made it clear that the next expansion is at least two years away. For PvP (and most of the game) that means we are stuck with the current builds for the foreseeable future. If Anet is going to get into re-creating the wheel without putting out new content, the player base will be decimated. I honestly do not understand what is Anet's business strategy in the upcoming period. And personally, I am beginning to phase out from playing GW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnfall.9573 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 > @"rwolf.9571" said: > I think Nike put it best. Anet is currently running aimless with no Public road map in PVE content, so it's pretty much exacerbated in all other game modes. > The Truth in all of this; communicating and engaging with your players for the same goal. Including myself; the majority of players want Anet to embrace healthy competitiveness balance for the game. For the past 6 years including the last balance; it proves once again that Anet rather continue to chose the opposite. Honestly; i do not understand why Anet refuse to align with the healthy competitive majority. All the years of healthy competitive positive suggestions by all players alike to reduce Power-Creep, Condition Creep, Sustain-Creep and Bunker Creep with Toxic Bad Designs (stealth, +1 shot) were ignored and continue to be ignored, The question is why? While other gaming platforms are striving in punishing and reducing Toxicity; they are taking the player base including others away from the game. In the end; what is left is Loneliness. That is what Toxicity does; it strips of everything and leave emptiness. (Like a after nature-Disaster-) **'Hope requires change for a better tomorrow'** **'Hope requires same aim'** Like Nike said; there is no Hope for the game. I agree -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now