Balance Patch Preview - WvW

[Mokk.2397]

This is not a balance patch but a reset. The balancing will come later in small increments. Nobody likes their classes to be singled out for nerfing. But everyone likes buffs. With the current Meta only a small proportion would need nerfing to properly balance combat. The easiest way that doesn't single anyone out is to nerf everybody and then buff various traits and skills in small increments as to not offend anyone.This also brings the power creep down to a more manageable level.

Things will undoubtedly be rough for everyone in the short term.

[Jski.6180]

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> This is not a balance patch but a reset. The balancing will come later in small increments. Nobody likes their classes to be singled out for nerfing. But everyone likes buffs. With the current Meta only a small proportion would need nerfing to properly balance combat. The easiest way that doesn't single anyone out is to nerf everybody and then buff various traits and skills in small increments as to not offend anyone.This also brings the power creep down to a more manageable level.

> Things will undoubtedly be rough for everyone in the short term.

 

Its not a true rest as long as the class has a boon that it did not use to have or a roll it did not use to have. Your just nerfing the old classes with out as many effects at the same rate as your nerfing the new classes with more effects. Its a core nerf more then an elite spec nerf.

[Navoe.4283]

And to add to the last comment by havenstance the lag will actually get worse ( if the players all stay instead of moving on) because the fights will be longer therefor the players will all be concentrated into one area for a longer amount of time. stressing the servers even more

 

[Dralor.3701]

Feels like an unrelated topic but I don’t understand why there is any concern or debate over core classes vs elites. Elites will/should always be better and power creep (within reason) is natural in every game.

 

Have they made some pretty bad elite designs? Absolutely, but some of the core designs were flawed from day one.

[XenesisII.1540]

Not really. Longer cooldowns are coming also, so it's not like it'll be longer fights with just as much skill/trait/auto proc spamming. Zerg fights won't last that much longer as people will still drop quickly with multiple skills dropping on them at once if they're not prepared, especially if boon balling doesn't last as long.

[Junkpile.7439]

No idea why anybody would think that elite spec should be better. That is just stupid.

[lodjur.1284]

> @"Dralor.3701" said:

> Feels like an unrelated topic but I don’t understand why there is any concern or debate over core classes vs elites. Elites will/should always be better and power creep (within reason) is natural in every game.

 

Because people don't like change, unless it explicitly is 100% buffs to their favorite builds.

 

Elites should be better than core specs as they're generally more specialized, I think the biggest mistake was actually making them take up a traitline instead of it being 3 core lines+elite spec (even if a lot of stuff would need toning down even more then). This would also stop the endless whine about it, but alas it's too late for that.

 

> Have they made some pretty bad elite designs? Absolutely, but some of the core designs were flawed from day one.

 

Ye, the problematic elite specs have mostly been for problematic core classes too.

 

I really think the low number of elite specializations doesn't do the system any favors.

 

> @"Junkpile.7439" said:

> No idea why anybody would think that elite spec should be better. That is just stupid.

 

There should just be a larger number of them. Trying to balance core vs elite I doubt was ever the intention nor does it really make sense, the spec that adds new mechanics will generally be stronger unless the stuff is very small stuff.

[Junkpile.7439]

Every elite spec should have some role or only one playstyle that works. Core should be go to spec if you don't wanna play specific role.

[blackgamma.1809]

> @"SloRules.3560" said:

> > @"blackgamma.1809" said:

> > > @"SloRules.3560" said:

> > > > @"blackgamma.1809" said:

> > > > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > > > You've missed the part where this patch is just the beginning and they mention follow up balance patches around every 6 weeks following this. It's a very important first step and honestly a large change thatmisses the mark on many, but also hits the mark on many smaller changes is better than not changing anything about the big picture at all.

> > > >

> > > > 6 week is a lot to wait on, heck, 3 days is too much if it ends up being a face flop of a patch.

> > > > It only takes 5 mins to find out if its a good or a bad patch. people wont wait for a hot fix because we are too jaded to know hot fixes dont do anything, nor 6 weeks for something to fix the issues. when you can easily just turn to a simpler game with more fun or rewards.

> > > >

> > > > Because remember, Gw2 is not the only game to play, Gw2 is not in a vacuum. and its not like im trying to advocate people to play other games, its just a simpler option to play something else rather than deal with potential bad patches, which historically, WvW has for the most part had trash patches that created more problems than solutions.

> > > >

> > > > Infact lets throw the Devs integrity under a burning bus, we are dealing with a team, that refused to force reset the matchup when a server had 5 links on its own side when it bugged out. when in the past they were able to reset matchups willingly 2 days in a matchup

> > > >

> > > > 6 week window is an god horrible cop out excuse to do less work, when they cant do the bare minimum to make wvw a function game mode

> > >

> > > Actually it takes a whole lot longer to see effect of such patch than 5 minutes...

> > >

> > > Usually it's 1 to 2 weeks testing different things (3 times a week) and than settling on something, but adapt to what you see than. So yeah, you could push next non-hotfix balance patch in 4 weeks, anything sooner and it's actually too soon to see full effect. 6 weeks is a streach, that i do agree on.

> >

> > that not entirely true, true in general, but not in regards to gw2 in wvw, you only have to read patch notes to know how bad the patch is, the patch doesn't have to be live for you to know its a bad patch. in fact it can take something as quick as seconds to know a patch can be bad, just by reading the notes.

> >

> > and generally, i like the idea of dont knock it until you tried it, things should be tested, that the problem, its not, and when it is, its done badly. the statement you have said could very well apply to many things in gw2, but that statement doesnt hold true in WvW in the past year of this game. because there has been times where a patch has been straight up bad before its been implemented

> >

> > example. when they remove reveal from scrapper, zerg fights became terrible and unplayable, fights became dictated based on became whoever came out from reveal first, lost the fight. people who played wvw that read the patch notes KNEW it was a bad patch for wvw from the get go, regardless of its fixes, devs were completely oblivious to how bad the changes were.

> >

> > these changes were not fixed for a whole for 2 and a half months. people had to play a toxic zerg meta that no one liked. the devs didnt rectify the situation for the entire duration of that patch

>

> Actually even with reveal it's the same, the one that is revealed first dies, just that it doesn't depend on execution, but luck of scrapper player... Example of terrible patch is chrono and removal of IP.

>

> As for upcoming patch, i can't evaluate it. I can't predict where meta will go in 2 months time. Because every time major balance hits (expansion for example), it's always pirateship first than something else shows up. As for pugs, i couldn't care less. A commander from vanilla could lead and most people wouldn't even know the difference.

 

thats relatively true in some sense, but the difference is at least you had defensive option when you saw a scrapper coming in with the reveal. you had evades, blocks, aegis. at least a good proportion of gameplay was spread out through the entire fight.

 

during the scrapper nerf, 90 percent of the gameplay was in setup, ensuring everyone properly blasting smoke fields and waiting it out

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"havenstance.1746" said:

> Frankly, let's not do any of this, let's leave the classes as they are because that's not what's broken with WvW.

*The day after Anet announces that they will leave everything as is due to community demand:*

 

**"OMG this powercreep is ruining the game thief OP mesmer OP stale meta too many boons!!!** - 5+ page, 30+ thumbs up thread, everyone agrees it should take priority over content

[SloRules.3560]

> @"blackgamma.1809" said:

> > @"SloRules.3560" said:

> > > @"blackgamma.1809" said:

> > > > @"SloRules.3560" said:

> > > > > @"blackgamma.1809" said:

> > > > > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > > > > You've missed the part where this patch is just the beginning and they mention follow up balance patches around every 6 weeks following this. It's a very important first step and honestly a large change thatmisses the mark on many, but also hits the mark on many smaller changes is better than not changing anything about the big picture at all.

> > > > >

> > > > > 6 week is a lot to wait on, heck, 3 days is too much if it ends up being a face flop of a patch.

> > > > > It only takes 5 mins to find out if its a good or a bad patch. people wont wait for a hot fix because we are too jaded to know hot fixes dont do anything, nor 6 weeks for something to fix the issues. when you can easily just turn to a simpler game with more fun or rewards.

> > > > >

> > > > > Because remember, Gw2 is not the only game to play, Gw2 is not in a vacuum. and its not like im trying to advocate people to play other games, its just a simpler option to play something else rather than deal with potential bad patches, which historically, WvW has for the most part had trash patches that created more problems than solutions.

> > > > >

> > > > > Infact lets throw the Devs integrity under a burning bus, we are dealing with a team, that refused to force reset the matchup when a server had 5 links on its own side when it bugged out. when in the past they were able to reset matchups willingly 2 days in a matchup

> > > > >

> > > > > 6 week window is an god horrible cop out excuse to do less work, when they cant do the bare minimum to make wvw a function game mode

> > > >

> > > > Actually it takes a whole lot longer to see effect of such patch than 5 minutes...

> > > >

> > > > Usually it's 1 to 2 weeks testing different things (3 times a week) and than settling on something, but adapt to what you see than. So yeah, you could push next non-hotfix balance patch in 4 weeks, anything sooner and it's actually too soon to see full effect. 6 weeks is a streach, that i do agree on.

> > >

> > > that not entirely true, true in general, but not in regards to gw2 in wvw, you only have to read patch notes to know how bad the patch is, the patch doesn't have to be live for you to know its a bad patch. in fact it can take something as quick as seconds to know a patch can be bad, just by reading the notes.

> > >

> > > and generally, i like the idea of dont knock it until you tried it, things should be tested, that the problem, its not, and when it is, its done badly. the statement you have said could very well apply to many things in gw2, but that statement doesnt hold true in WvW in the past year of this game. because there has been times where a patch has been straight up bad before its been implemented

> > >

> > > example. when they remove reveal from scrapper, zerg fights became terrible and unplayable, fights became dictated based on became whoever came out from reveal first, lost the fight. people who played wvw that read the patch notes KNEW it was a bad patch for wvw from the get go, regardless of its fixes, devs were completely oblivious to how bad the changes were.

> > >

> > > these changes were not fixed for a whole for 2 and a half months. people had to play a toxic zerg meta that no one liked. the devs didnt rectify the situation for the entire duration of that patch

> >

> > Actually even with reveal it's the same, the one that is revealed first dies, just that it doesn't depend on execution, but luck of scrapper player... Example of terrible patch is chrono and removal of IP.

> >

> > As for upcoming patch, i can't evaluate it. I can't predict where meta will go in 2 months time. Because every time major balance hits (expansion for example), it's always pirateship first than something else shows up. As for pugs, i couldn't care less. A commander from vanilla could lead and most people wouldn't even know the difference.

>

> thats relatively true in some sense, but the difference is at least you had defensive option when you saw a scrapper coming in with the reveal. you had evades, blocks, aegis. at least a good proportion of gameplay was spread out through the entire fight.

>

> during the scrapper nerf, 90 percent of the gameplay was in setup, ensuring everyone properly blasting smoke fields and waiting it out

 

Actually you didn't see scrapper, he was also stealthed and aegis(also any other block) was countered by basilisk venom.

[Navoe.4283]

I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of Zerg fighting I am not able to participate in that wvw mode thus I am a scout. My main concern is what its going to do to my survivability build vs. 1 to 3 foes and NPC's how ever if it doesn't create longer fights then it's not really a balance

[Dralor.3701]

> @"Junkpile.7439" said:

> No idea why anybody would think that elite spec should be better. That is just stupid.

 

Companies need to make money, this is why there are expansions and new specs.

[XenesisII.1540]

Elite specs should not be better than the rest of the specs for the simple fact that gw2 runs their competitive sections, spvp/wvw, in one giant pool of players (f2p/core/hot/pof), and not tiered by expansions/higher levels like other games do. When other games introduce new spells or class mechanics it's usually closed off to the levels of the expansion it's in and so others lower level or don't own that expansion don't have to deal with that power creep.

 

It's fine to sell expansions, new classes, new specs, as long as you try to keep balance or some separation between all the class and specs you offer, otherwise the game turns into pay to win if the newest expansion class/spec is always the must have to play. People hate pay to win, and this game rides the line with it, but they've at least made an effort to keep core specs up.

[DeadlySynz.3471]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> So what? many games have skills and traits that are changed many times over time to fit with new mechanics in the game. Especially when expansions are launched with new classes. You seem to forget during those "6" years there were two expansions and 19 more specs added to the game on top of the original 8, with power creep of boons, conditions, gear, and stats, and a lot of outliner stuff were allowed to stay around for long periods of time. Each expansion destroyed the balance before it, a giant example was stability.

>

> You're right, this isn't a balance patch, this is a reset patch, lowering most damage down 30% and reducing problem support skills and traits, from there on balance will happen on a faster cadence than previously.

>

> If you don't think terrible power creep and balance didn't play a part in chasing people away from wvw you're deluding yourself.

 

Power creep is a fallacy. Players simply cannot differentiate between being hit by 1 player vs 5-10 players at once. The amount of damage one does in a 1v1 scenario for the most part against a **typical target in WvW with 'x' amount of toughness** is quite pitiful. Hitting someone on average from 500-1500 damage is anything but power creep.

This is where we then here "what about ranger?" or "what about thief?". Well seeing as that most zergs seem to consist of an overabundance of thieves and rangers... oh wait..... Looking at it from a roaming or small group perspective shouldn't even be a thought in WvW when it comes to balance or any type of adjustments.

 

The only actual "power creep" or dominance creep that happened was when they released Firebrand. Even to this day, I see plenty of core specs running around in WvW so obviously this fallacy of a "power creep" isn't exactly a thing.

[Burnfall.9573]

> @"SnowHawk.3615" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"Burnfall.9573" said:

> > > > @"SnowHawk.3615" said:

> > > > What a joke.

> > >

> > > here's another joke that will continue after the patch

> > > (as always, not attacking Thief Profession players but attacking Thief Profession Toxic design)

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -no amount of 'nerfing' will fix this profession until it is completely redesigned -

> > >

> > > **In Fact, the next upcoming patch will force them to use their conditions more**

> >

> > I take it you haven’t actually watched the video...

> >

> > Lmao..

>

> redesign for thief and mesmer at this point.

 

Mesmer Profession needs its identity back by returning to its original self in Guild Wars 1. Thief Profession is in need to be either redesign or have itself completely removed for the health of the game

 

9 years is way overdue really and nerfing them will never work.

 

seriously, (it is like throwing a small cup of water at a large fire for 8 years and thinking that it will go away)

 

**IT WON'T!!**

[XenesisII.1540]

Oh those 15k CoR hits wasn't actually 1 hit from one rev? it was from 10 different cor's just listed as one?, we were all reading the combat logs all wrong all this time?!

 

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Burnfall.9573" said:

> > @"SnowHawk.3615" said:

> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > > @"Burnfall.9573" said:

> > > > > @"SnowHawk.3615" said:

> > > > > What a joke.

> > > >

> > > > here's another joke that will continue after the patch

> > > > (as always, not attacking Thief Profession players but attacking Thief Profession Toxic design)

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -no amount of 'nerfing' will fix this profession until it is completely redesigned -

> > > >

> > > > **In Fact, the next upcoming patch will force them to use their conditions more**

> > >

> > > I take it you haven’t actually watched the video...

> > >

> > > Lmao..

> >

> > redesign for thief and mesmer at this point.

>

> Mesmer Profession needs its identity back by returning to its original self in Guild Wars 1. Thief Profession is in need to be either redesign or have itself completely removed for the health of the game

>

> 9 years is way overdue really and nerfing them will never work.

>

> seriously, (it is like throwing a small cup of water at a large fire for 8 years and thinking that it will go away)

>

> **IT WON'T!!**

 

Ok.. now I know you are just spouting nonsense.. 9 years?? Lmao.

[primatos.5413]

Diminishing returns

 

Diminishing returns means that certain spells and abilities become less effective against a target if used frequently within a short period of time. While diminishing returns mostly applies to player characters, some abilities also have diminishing returns in PvE. The table below contains a list of abilities that are affected by DR, and under what circumstances. In addition, DR categories are listed. Effects within the same category share diminishing returns.

 

When an ability with diminishing returns is used against a target in PvP, the first effect has full PvP duration. If the same category of effect (e.g. root) is used on that target within 18 seconds, that effect's duration is reduced by 50%. On the third use, the duration is reduced by 75%. After this, the target is immune from all effects in that category for the next 18 seconds. Note that when used against another player, effects will only last for their PvP duration, often far shorter than the duration stated in the ability's tooltip. The maximum PvP duration is 8 seconds.

 

Spells must be used on the same target within 18 seconds of the * end* of the duration in order to be diminished. In other words, if a target hasn't had a root spell active on them for more than 18 seconds, this category of diminishing returns will be reset on the target, and the next rooting spell will have full effect.

 

Getting atomary nuked while perma stunned is not fun

 

 

Need plx kkthxbb

[Infusion.7149]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> Oh those 15k CoR hits wasn't actually 1 hit from one rev? it was from 10 different cor's just listed as one?, we were all reading the combat logs all wrong all this time?!

>

lol, this.

Literally no way to refute it since CoR has an invuln frame when hit by more than one. It's been reduced heavily from its former status (down to 1.5 coefficient) and the aim/pathing is wonky now, however. Against people with toughness it's usually much less though; I run Notoriety+ Incensed Response just to push out damage when I play rev. Phase Smash actually pushes out more damage these days with its 1.75 coefficient ; Drop the Hammer is 1,5 coefficient but is a delayed skill with an absurdly large animation. Obviously the damage boost from Burst of strength (consume skill) factors into damage as well.

The major alternative for ranged power damage at this point is staff weaver running Power Overwhelming + Pyromancer's Puissance paired with Air traitline's Raging Storm if you have heralds to supply fury , whereas Bountiful Power in the Arcane line is the alternative. However since Lava Font is damage over time / DOT , the high burst isn't there unless you drop meteor shower and eat all the retaliation ; staff 2 skills such as Ice Spike, Eruption are delayed and around 1.5 coefficient while lightning surge has a 1.44 coefficient. The fire+air dual attack, plasma blast, has 1.66 coefficient but has a projectile time.

 

By the way Vault daredevil generally hits more , even if it is a melee skill. That's probably not going to change (as it doesn't carry any CC, only an evade), albeit the magnitude will be lower.

 

[KryTiKaL.3125]

> @"DeadlySynz.3471" said:

> > @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> > So what? many games have skills and traits that are changed many times over time to fit with new mechanics in the game. Especially when expansions are launched with new classes. You seem to forget during those "6" years there were two expansions and 19 more specs added to the game on top of the original 8, with power creep of boons, conditions, gear, and stats, and a lot of outliner stuff were allowed to stay around for long periods of time. Each expansion destroyed the balance before it, a giant example was stability.

> >

> > You're right, this isn't a balance patch, this is a reset patch, lowering most damage down 30% and reducing problem support skills and traits, from there on balance will happen on a faster cadence than previously.

> >

> > If you don't think terrible power creep and balance didn't play a part in chasing people away from wvw you're deluding yourself.

>

> Power creep is a fallacy. Players simply cannot differentiate between being hit by 1 player vs 5-10 players at once. The amount of damage one does in a 1v1 scenario for the most part against a **typical target in WvW with 'x' amount of toughness** is quite pitiful. Hitting someone on average from 500-1500 damage is anything but power creep.

> This is where we then here "what about ranger?" or "what about thief?". Well seeing as that most zergs seem to consist of an overabundance of thieves and rangers... oh wait..... Looking at it from a roaming or small group perspective shouldn't even be a thought in WvW when it comes to balance or any type of adjustments.

>

> The only actual "power creep" or dominance creep that happened was when they released Firebrand. Even to this day, I see plenty of core specs running around in WvW so obviously this fallacy of a "power creep" isn't exactly a thing.

 

It really isn't a fallacy, power creep hasn't directly come from ANet increasing the numbers or coefficients on skills (even though that has happened a bit), it has more to do with the availability of Might and other Boons that increase damage and how **easy** it has been these past 3+ years to build 20+ stacks of Might without the aid of even a group of people, you can just do it by yourself. Thats why Might durations and stack numbers have come down, because they were ultimately **excessive** in their application and created long lasting, large stacks of Might that were easily attainable by the classes that benefited from them the most (i.e Warrior, Soulbeast, Revenant, etc). Many of those classes as well could dump a pretty hefty stack of Vulnerability onto their targets relatively easily which only compounded the damage increases when paired with Traits that provided percentage based damage bonuses.

 

It genuinely has nothing to do with people not realizing they are getting hit by 5 to 10 players and not just one, it is that they *do* notice that a lot of damage is coming off of one player. Can you really sit there and pretend like Sic Em Soulbeast wasn't a thing with its 23k+ damage Mauls or Worldly Impacts? That Malicious Backstab DE wasn't hitting for 23k+ as well after building Malice and Might stacks? Heralds hitting for 20k+ with Coalescence of Ruin? Their auto attacks alone able to chunk health off of targets as well.

 

I'm aware that you're referencing zerg play and that you don't see some of those classes within zergs but just the same damage coming from zergs has exponentially increased as well over the years. Much of that has come from Scourge and conditions but it has also come from power as well, not to mention cleanses in a zerg are much more abundant as well. I know you're likely concerned over the reduction in damage creating a pirate ship meta but honestly what do you think they can even do to balance out zerg fights? Is what they have currently actually even *fun*? I know that is subjective on an individual basis but the large scale fights have seen better days in GW2 and due to sheer numbers its a difficult thing to really balance around if its even possible to do so under the climate that WvW provides. It needs to account for how numbers work when in larger groups of people, the stat buffs you get from WvW, Might stacks and Stability stacks, durations on Boons, food buffs, whether or not people are defending a keep or castle or tower. Zerg play has always been and will always be a mess.

 

As for your number examples...I don't know what you're doing but those are definitely **not** the numbers I see in 1v1s. Ever. That is unless the person is quite literally only mashing 1 the whole time in which case...*wut*?

[Jaruselka.5943]

I would love to hear the Dev's reasoning behind nerfing Engie pistols. They are already the worst weapon set for any class in the game why trash them even further? Is there a real reason or is it simply for "completeness"?

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

> @"Jaruselka.5943" said:

> I would love to hear the Dev's reasoning behind nerfing Engie pistols. They are already the worst weapon set for any class in the game why trash them even further? Is there a real reason or is it simply for "completeness"?

 

Blanket nerf on everything as a 'reset.' they will adjust as needed afterwards, so Engi pistols won't stay nerfed.

 

In fact everyone needs to remember this and stop QQing on each nerf in this patch.

[Navoe.4283]

It is not really a blanket nerf as not all professions, skills or weapons will be nerfed to the same degree or by the same percentage. If any adjustments are made it will be to the most popular professions and builds to so called balance them. The lesser played classes and weapons like engi. pistol will be last to get adjusted if at all. end result anything considered overpowered now still will be.

[Navoe.4283]

My hope is that A-net will realize this and make the proper adjustments in the correct areas in a quick timely manner. I don't know all we can do is wait and see