Raids are not balanced when there is a 9-10k Difference between professions.

[Brujeria.7536]

I also dont like the general argument here "necro dps must lower because of shroud".

 

1. Every class has ways to negate / reduce damage. Wether its trough mobility, blocks, natural health, evade, aegis, stealth, etc. Shroud is just a lazy mechanic compared to some others, but that does not mean its better.

2. In really good groups people rarely go down and almost never die. That doenst happen with eles / thieves, so why should it happen as necro? A "second healthbar" does not matter, if you dont need it, and the fact that other professions dont need it just proves this point. There is totally no hardlock to need "shroud" in any raid encounter.

3. Bringing necromancer DPS, or the DPS of all professions for that regard to a same level would not matter as much as people value it. There are 2 types of players:

A.) Players that love their profession: these guys will ALWAYS play their profession, or the profession they feel like if all DPS numbers are roughly equal. If a player wants to play ele he will play ele, if the DPS numbers are the same, it doenst matter if its "harder" or different, they just do it.

B.) Players that love the most efficient way - these are most of the current meta raid players, they just pick the highest DPs class and call it a day. Nothing will change here, these people, will also just pick the most meta classes not depending on meta shift. the people that dont shift belong to group A.

C.) Player B will see no difference- meta changes, mentality stays, doesnt matter if ele, warrior or necro is Meta. Player A will see a lot of difference, because he now can play his class at another gamemode, without limits or being a burden on "equal footing" . These will lead to a rise in raid interest and people engaging, because they actually can play their favorite profession there without being a burden and needing to learn / play / gear another profession, that they dont really want to play.

D.) Furthermore, in the current balance style you force Player A into the role of Player B, if you dont want player A to make things harder for the team. This is leading to demotivation - why cant Player A just play his profession and be on equal footing?

E.) Furthermore, this forces player A to not play the content because its fun - needing to play another class you dont like, is never fun for this kind of mindset - It just forces them to play this content, with other professions because they want the rewards. Rewards in raids are VERY finite, Fun is not. Fun ultimately is the biggest encouragement to stay motivated, its not fun if you wanna play profession X and your maximum DPs number is 10 k less, just because you play class X.

F.) Furthermore, in B.) are the most "Diehard" fans and players, these want to achieve the best result in the smallest amount of time, these players will ultimately still do raids / instanced content. In A. However are also a lot of casual players, new players, players that play because of fun.

 

4. The "dps" difference in real scenarios is also no argument, if the ele DPS varies by 30% between golem and real raid scenarios, so will the necromancers DPS. Both are close range, both are affected by enemy movement to a certain extend.. If the ele / DH is not good at this profession, or rotations, etc. he just plays this class only because its the strongest. The same can be said about a "bad" necromancer player, he will also lose roughly the same percentage of DPS, the only difference is, if the optimal DPS number is 10k dps higher, the total outcome is the same. Most people that say "i outdps / have equal dps to eles" is not because of the necromancer shroud, its because they are good at their class. If these necromancer players would be DH or ele players, their DPS would be equally higher, as shroud does not matter, its just a noobsafe argument.

 

5. Ultimately, the Meta would shift, but only because the meta players might, or might not play another class. But these players would always play the meta class anyway, while people playing a profession for fun are ultimately left out of the content, or feel like a burden.

 

6. Of course you can beat raid content with every class, Even 5 Reapers would work. But The driving force for players is:

A.) Not be left out, or be a burden to the group - if you have 5 players that play reaper and do 5 k dps less each compared to DH or ELE you ultimately have 25 k dps less, meaning longer bossfights, more stress, more time investment, etc.

B.) No real way to improve, or be at the top. The total damage you can get is limited JUST because you play profession X. Even if you reach near golem level DPS because you know your profession, the other profession will deal more DPS, even if it plays better, just because he plays a higher DPS profession.

 

7. Reality is people = the players of the game actualyl judge professions based on numbers. Just look at the LFG. If all the DPS numbers would be equal, there would just be DPS and not "DH/Ele" in LFG.

 

In all seriousness, classes should feel different because of playstyles, not because of DPS numbers. I really cant understand why they discontinue the developement of raids, because nobody plays them and its "so hard to get into" and "so hard to get a group" to do them if they, on the other hand, forcefully eliminate a huge part of the playerbase simply by the bad DPS balance. Its like building bridge after bridge while limiting random cars to cross it and then ask OHHH WHY ARENT OUR BRIDGES MORE POPULAR? Its simply because their own balance decisions limit the content for some big parts of the playerbase.

 

 

 

[Dadnir.5038]

> @"ZDragon.3046" said:

> I wish you would stop trying to blame the shroud defense (get rid of shroud) for the reasons that necromancer cant deal damage (especially in pve situations) Fact is some professions are just out right busted with pve balancing the burn condition is insanely strong and everyone knows that its always been insanely strong. I think ive said enough tbh. Ill keep playing my reaper even if it sits at the bottom of the test charts. Its always nice to out dps people playing professions sitting at the top ;)

>

 

To make things short, it's less the fact that the shroud shield health than the fact that the shroud have been pushed to be the necromancer's main dps tool that bother me. If it was just a tanking/supporting tool and that you had to take risks and go out of shroud to deal damage then I wouldn't complain about it or "blame" it. But, no, ANet choose to push half the necromancer's dps traits on making the shroud deal enough damage to be a main component of the dps rotation while health is shielded.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Josiah.2967" said:

> I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

 

That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

 

See, all the things you are talking about ... it's related to players making choices. it's not a deficiency with the game. The ANSWER is choice that you have the ability to make and use to do what you want with other players that also do what they want.

 

The irony of your request to fix something class related is exactly the attitude that perpetuates this class exclusivity among players. In otherwords, you are part of the problem that you want fixed. If you change your attitude and acknowledge the tools in the game that allow you to play how you want, your problem gets solved.

 

TLDR: this isn't a problem with the game and it's solved by making choices that align with how you want to play.

[Black Storm.6974]

I feel like it is a good thing having Reaper Shroud doing most of the damage, for multiple reasons:

1- It shield our Health, but if we don’t avoid taking damage, we loose Life Force very fast, loosing a lot of dps too.

2- It forces us to put effort into regenerating Life Force.

3- It makes Reaper more complex and for most people far less boring to play.

4- While using it, we loose all the heal from allies, and that allows to add more power to it without making Reaper “too strong”.

 

For me, the current Reaper is very fun to play, it is almost the only thing I enjoy playing in Gw2.

 

One of its main strengths is its mobility. I mean, Reaper can use every skill while moving (the only exception is Shroud 2, which is a leap skill). I love that and it helps it to perform better in real fight situations.

 

I can’t even play professions not able to freely move while attacking.

[VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.]

> @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> I totally agree, balancing DPS by the numbers is not exactly hard. Also from a logical standpoint it doesnt make any sense that pure DPS specs with 0 utility and teambuffs such as reaper does less damage than a warrior or elementalist which naturally can easily provide support.

>

> The balance decisions in PVE are really mind boggling and make no sense.

 

except that a full dps ele does not provide support.

 

But great ideas. Really. Make every class do the same damage. Also on the same rotation, so they are all 'easy'. To be totally fair, all the classes should also provide the same boons, have the same hp, armor and sustain.

 

Wait... why do we have 9classes+elites again?

[Brujeria.7536]

> @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > I totally agree, balancing DPS by the numbers is not exactly hard. Also from a logical standpoint it doesnt make any sense that pure DPS specs with 0 utility and teambuffs such as reaper does less damage than a warrior or elementalist which naturally can easily provide support.

> >

> > The balance decisions in PVE are really mind boggling and make no sense.

>

> except that a full dps ele does not provide support.

>

 

 

He can always dip into watter atunement to provide some kind of support, if the group would need it, thats most likely never the case.

 

> But great ideas. Really. Make every class do the same damage. Also on the same rotation, so they are all 'easy'. To be totally fair, all the classes should also provide the same boons, have the same hp, armor and sustain.

>

 

Classes cant have the same rotations as they are completly different. Classes should provide different boons, thats also totally fine, also the means to negate / heal / block damage all should be very different as they are right now. But the DPS, the cornerstone of every measurement in PvE content, should be equal if the specs all aim for max dps.

 

> Wait... why do we have 9classes+elites again?

 

Because the classes play completly different. The dps does not change a single bit about gameplay, rotations, they stay the same no matter if skills do 5k damage or 8k damage.

 

[ZDragon.3046]

> @"Dadnir.5038" said:

> > @"ZDragon.3046" said:

> > I wish you would stop trying to blame the shroud defense (get rid of shroud) for the reasons that necromancer cant deal damage (especially in pve situations) Fact is some professions are just out right busted with pve balancing the burn condition is insanely strong and everyone knows that its always been insanely strong. I think ive said enough tbh. Ill keep playing my reaper even if it sits at the bottom of the test charts. Its always nice to out dps people playing professions sitting at the top ;)

> >

>

> To make things short, it's less the fact that the shroud shield health than the fact that the shroud have been pushed to be the necromancer's main dps tool that bother me. If it was just a tanking/supporting tool and that you had to take risks and go out of shroud to deal damage then I wouldn't complain about it or "blame" it. But, no, ANet choose to push half the necromancer's dps traits on making the shroud deal enough damage to be a main component of the dps rotation while health is shielded.

 

Again though whats the problem here?

That health is shielded or that the shroud is forced to be used for dps like almost every other professions f skills?

I cant understand the reason for complaint.

 

Warrior burst act as a very important part of their dps and they have traits tied to landing or using burst that increase their damage for doing so.

Shattering on chrono is a very important part of the dps rotation

overloads and combo attunements are very important part of dps tool for for ele.

 

Basically why should the shroud mechanic not be a very critical point of the necromancers dps like the other professions in having traits tied to it that increase damage for using it?

 

I just cant understand the problem that you have really.

Every profession has a mass amount of its traits looking at its "f skills" to do damage or increase damage for using those skills there is no reason why the necromancer should not be this way like everyone else.

 

In terms of shroud guarding hp, if there was an option to remove that for more dps people would certainly take it but that does not mean its something that all players would want forced on them all the time by default.

[Nimon.7840]

> @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > @"Brujeria.7536" said:

> > I totally agree, balancing DPS by the numbers is not exactly hard. Also from a logical standpoint it doesnt make any sense that pure DPS specs with 0 utility and teambuffs such as reaper does less damage than a warrior or elementalist which naturally can easily provide support.

> >

> > The balance decisions in PVE are really mind boggling and make no sense.

>

> except that a full dps ele does not provide support.

>

> But great ideas. Really. Make every class do the same damage. Also on the same rotation, so they are all 'easy'. To be totally fair, all the classes should also provide the same boons, have the same hp, armor and sustain.

>

> Wait... why do we have 9classes+elites again?

 

That's not true. Sure ele does no real support if he's playing strictly for rotation. But good players can also adapt.

 

While we're at ele. Take sword/focus Condi Weaver, it has a small heal and water/water and a projectile Destruktion in air.

Yes it is a dps loss swapping to those. But you don't sacrifice a utility slot for the whole fight.

If for example the reaper wants to somehow support, you have to switch out a utility skill, which will lower the dps for the whole boss fight, not just for maybe 10 seconds.

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

>

> That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

Yea, you're right, except for the fact that some people have far more choice available than others which is purely imposed by the makers of this game! The Necro simply doesnt have the choice to do 32K+ dps on the golem (or ...K+ dps in real raid scenarios), whereas all other classes have!

Furthermore, a choice is _never_ made in a real vacuum which only affects _you_! Not in the real world, and not in this game either. As an example, anyone who raid will all choose to go for a successful run (maybe with the exception of pure roleplay characters ;) ). Which happily ever after will mean that all class, specialisation, even skill choices are still on the table for everyone to choose. But a second choice someone might make (which actually happens a LOT) is to try to accomplish this within a reasonable time or even as fast as possible. Now this is already an interesting choice, that will either limit other peoples choices or this direct choice itself!

In other words: 100% free choice is _always_ an illusion: not only in the real world, but also in this game. It's just that in a game: a "maker" can heavily steer those choices into a certain direction. Now, here comes **balance** into play!

What the "maker" **should** do is present its players, whatever class they choose (making this unanimously the primary balance divider, I think we all agree there) as much choices available as possible, on how they want to play the game! Which clearly isn't the case right now if you've chosen _certain_ professions!

 

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

> >

> > That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

> Yea, you're right, except for the fact that some people have far more choice available than others which is purely imposed by the makers of this game!

 

No, everyone has the SAME access to choices for playing how they want according to the factors they decide influences that choice. All classes are available to every player.

 

 

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > > > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

> > >

> > > That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

> > Yea, you're right, except for the fact that some people have far more choice available than others which is purely imposed by the makers of this game!

>

> No, everyone has the SAME access to choices for playing how they want according to the factors they decide influences that choice. All classes are available to every player.

>

>

 

That's just not true again! What if my choice is to play the class theme I like **and** be capable of doing the highest DPS possible in Raids. Which is not even a very weird way of thinking, really: it's actually a common question for newbies, i.e.: "I like dark/summoning classes, and I like doing the highest DPS possible, what class do you recommend?". That choice is literally impossible to make! Simple! In this particular case, you can _not_ even say: "well you're so close to the top, if you're min-maxing the sh*t out of your class and have some good RNG, you might actually be lucky". There is a HUGE discrepancy between top and bottom in this game when it comes to PvE.

 

And the "good" thing about this example is that this particular choice (or actually lack thereof) is imposed by the makers themselves: by **their** set of rules. Hence: they can fix that! Imo, it's just a matter of acknowledging it and residing the resources to it. And I really hope they'll do that soon.

**Although** (big although here!): I can also understand that PvP and WvW balance comes first! Which it really does right now.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > > > > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

> > > >

> > > > That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

> > > Yea, you're right, except for the fact that some people have far more choice available than others which is purely imposed by the makers of this game!

> >

> > No, everyone has the SAME access to choices for playing how they want according to the factors they decide influences that choice. All classes are available to every player.

> >

> >

>

> That's just not true again! What if my choice is to play the class theme I like **and** be capable of doing the highest DPS possible in Raids.

 

Well, to start with, that's not even a reasonable request ... because there is only 1 solution for that ... and there are 9 classes ... and the game isn't about you and what you want. If you got that, there would be 8 other classes that didn't. If you don't understand that, you don't understand what 'highest' means.

 

It's unreasonable to think that that as you add more restrictions, you are still within a space where any player can find a solution. That's not Anet's problem to solve; that's simply the fact that it's going to be difficult for Anet to provide solutions to every combination of factors a player can make. That doesn't make what I said wrong though ... EVERYONE has access to the same solutions. It's not Anet's fault if the solutions aren't bound by the problem you present the system.

 

The fact is this: if you aren't reasonable in the restrictions you impose on the game for how you want to play, you won't get a solution and the other fact is that we know Anet doesn't provide they solution you are looking for because it's simply not practical and has little value. You need to choose .. .but you need to do so understanding the boundary of the system you have to make the choice from. You aren't doing that. You are looking for a solution outside of the bounds of the system, so it's not reasonable.

 

This is a math problem of optimization ... because the question of performance is about optimizing. As the factors increase, you don't get more optimal solutions, you get LESS and even approach none in some cases. That's not exceptional, it's normal. That's why it's just not realistic to continually ask for all these classes to have optimal performance in a ever-changing game state.

[Erzian.5218]

Most people aren't asking for all classes to be optimal, they want the gap between the top and the bottom to be smaller, so you lose less group dps by brining a subpar class. As it was said earlier, there are games who do a better job at that and gw2 itself had periods of time where the gap was much smaller as well. Necro as a pure dps does less damage than a banner slave. There is an issue with that.

[lare.5129]

why u want different dps ? may be u want onyl one class at all ?

don't see any issue.

[Josiah.2967]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

>

> That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

>

> See, all the things you are talking about ... it's related to players making choices. it's not a deficiency with the game. The ANSWER is choice that you have the ability to make and use to do what you want with other players that also do what they want.

>

> The irony of your request to fix something class related is exactly the attitude that perpetuates this class exclusivity among players.** In otherwords, you are part of the problem** that you want fixed. If you change your attitude and acknowledge the tools in the game that allow you to play how you want, your problem gets solved.

>

> TLDR: this isn't a problem with the game and it's solved by making choices that align with how you want to play.

 

Nice personal attacks. A lot of "you" being used. I was just the observer, reporting what is actually happening in the game. I did not make any of those decisions, they were just announced by the guild leaders. This is a direct result from the unnecessary DPS gaps. Feel free to keep attacking me though.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Josiah.2967" said:

> > > I raided on a few characters this weekend. This included some introductions to Raids/Strike missions, as well as gold carries. This week marked the point where another guild I know no longer trains Necromancers for raids. The imbalance has gotten so bad that multiple "Raiding Guilds" no longer justifying training Necromancers for their main raid teams.

> >

> > That's not a problem ... they CHOOSE how they want to play. My guild also chooses ... and we run necros all the time ... successfully. Sounds like you just identified another choice you can make if you want to play how YOU want.

> >

> > See, all the things you are talking about ... it's related to players making choices. it's not a deficiency with the game. The ANSWER is choice that you have the ability to make and use to do what you want with other players that also do what they want.

> >

> > The irony of your request to fix something class related is exactly the attitude that perpetuates this class exclusivity among players.** In otherwords, you are part of the problem** that you want fixed. If you change your attitude and acknowledge the tools in the game that allow you to play how you want, your problem gets solved.

> >

> > TLDR: this isn't a problem with the game and it's solved by making choices that align with how you want to play.

>

> Nice personal attacks. A lot of "you" being used. I was just the observer, reporting what is actually happening in the game. I did not make any of those decisions, they were just announced by the guild leaders. This is a direct result from the unnecessary DPS gaps. Feel free to keep attacking me though.

 

There aren't any personal attacks ... if you feel there are, you can report them. Otherwise, I advise you don't troll in your own thread.

 

This is only a result of you not making choices that are relevant to how you want to play. If you want DPS, choose DPS.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Erzian.5218" said:

> Most people aren't asking for all classes to be optimal, they want the gap between the top and the bottom to be smaller, so you lose less group dps by brining a subpar class. As it was said earlier, there are games who do a better job at that and gw2 itself had periods of time where the gap was much smaller as well. Necro as a pure dps does less damage than a banner slave. There is an issue with that.

 

There isn't an issue there because the game is designed so that it doesn't require playing optimal DPS classes in teams to succeed. If losing group dps by bringing a subpar class bothers you, choose better. If it bothers the people you team with ... team with people that it doesn't bother. Not being optimal DPS is definitely NOT a barrier to completing content unless you make choices where it is.

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Erzian.5218" said:

> > Most people aren't asking for all classes to be optimal, they want the gap between the top and the bottom to be smaller, so you lose less group dps by brining a subpar class. As it was said earlier, there are games who do a better job at that and gw2 itself had periods of time where the gap was much smaller as well. Necro as a pure dps does less damage than a banner slave. There is an issue with that.

>

> There isn't an issue there because the game is designed so that it doesn't require playing optimal DPS classes in teams to succeed. If losing group dps by bringing a subpar class bothers you, choose better. If it bothers the people you team with ... team with people that it doesn't bother. Not being optimal DPS is definitely NOT a barrier to completing content unless you make choices where it is.

 

You bring up a good point here that this game is designed a certain way. But that doesn't say anything about how it's _supposed_ to be designed. Or how a majority of people _want_ it to be designed. And I'm certain that even ANet themselves didnt want the game to come out a way where it heavily restricts OR permits further choices available purely on initially choosing a class.

And again: THEY can fix that!

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Erzian.5218" said:

> > > Most people aren't asking for all classes to be optimal, they want the gap between the top and the bottom to be smaller, so you lose less group dps by brining a subpar class. As it was said earlier, there are games who do a better job at that and gw2 itself had periods of time where the gap was much smaller as well. Necro as a pure dps does less damage than a banner slave. There is an issue with that.

> >

> > There isn't an issue there because the game is designed so that it doesn't require playing optimal DPS classes in teams to succeed. If losing group dps by bringing a subpar class bothers you, choose better. If it bothers the people you team with ... team with people that it doesn't bother. Not being optimal DPS is definitely NOT a barrier to completing content unless you make choices where it is. That means there isn't any point to complain about class DPS discrepancy and you should just move on.

>

> You bring up a good point here that this game is designed a certain way. But that doesn't say anything about how it's supposed to be designed.

 

Of course it does. So you think the way the game has worked for the last 7 years is some unhappy accident? Let's have a moment of clarity and honesty here: If Anet didn't want the game to work the way it does, they have had 7 years to change it ... and they haven't. If the current way the game works and has worked for 7 years isn't an indication of how the game is supposed to work, then NOTHING is.

 

>Or how a majority of people want it to be designed. And I'm certain that even ANet themselves didnt want the game to come out a way where it heavily restricts OR permits further choices available purely on initially choosing a class.

 

You don't know what the majority of people want and you aren't certain what Anet wants. From my perspective, Anet hasn't done anything that isn't simply a natural and expected consequence of offering a finite number of choices to players in a game environment where there are optimal solutions. If the particular solution you are looking for isn't contained in the combinations they offer, that's NOT a problem.

 

> And again: THEY can fix that!

 

And I'm not saying they can't fix the DPS discrepancy. I'm saying they don't have to because of how they designed the game. I have no doubts that the there is a strong relationship between Anet's CONSCIOUS decision to design the game with low success thresholds and their approach to making class decisions and changes resulting in the class DPS differences. See, this is where you have it wrong. DPS differences aren't restricting anyone. It's who you decide to play with that's restricting you. I'm not restricted ... and neither is anyone else that plays with people that don't 'invent' class DPS as a barrier to choosing team members.

 

The fundamental question here is why should Anet make unnecessary changes to adjust for these DPS discrepancies when they don't prevent game success? Why are players CHOOSING to take a path that makes this a problem when the game is designed so it's not an issue in the first place? The range of classes and builds that can be played in this game is massive compared to any other game I've ever played ... but players still decide to make choices where they feel restricted to a handful of optimized builds. That's NOT a problem with the mechanics of the game that Anet needs to fix. This is a player-made problem and the solution is player-made as well.

 

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Erzian.5218" said:

> > > > Most people aren't asking for all classes to be optimal, they want the gap between the top and the bottom to be smaller, so you lose less group dps by brining a subpar class. As it was said earlier, there are games who do a better job at that and gw2 itself had periods of time where the gap was much smaller as well. Necro as a pure dps does less damage than a banner slave. There is an issue with that.

> > >

> > > There isn't an issue there because the game is designed so that it doesn't require playing optimal DPS classes in teams to succeed. If losing group dps by bringing a subpar class bothers you, choose better. If it bothers the people you team with ... team with people that it doesn't bother. Not being optimal DPS is definitely NOT a barrier to completing content unless you make choices where it is. That means there isn't any point to complain about class DPS discrepancy and you should just move on.

> >

> > You bring up a good point here that this game is designed a certain way. But that doesn't say anything about how it's supposed to be designed.

>

> Of course it does. So you think the way the game has worked for the last 7 years is some unhappy accident? Let's have a moment of clarity and honesty here: If Anet didn't want the game to work the way it does, they have had 7 years to change it ... and they haven't. If the current way the game works and has worked for 7 years isn't an indication of how the game is supposed to work, then NOTHING is.

WRONG again! And also really heavy on the assumptions side again. You blame others for assuming how ANet thinks, but you're even worse! You don't know if they're happy with the game as it is now, and all odds are against it; otherwise they wouldn't have done ANY balance updates whatsoever. They do (imo still not enough, but they do), which already clearly states that it wasnt exactly designed the way it supposed to do! Simple as that.

Furthermore, designing an MMORPG is complex, it's not easy. Of course there will ALWAYS be discrepancies between a supposed design and how a game finally pans out to be! Hell, I can't even imagine a simple IKEA cabinet to come out exactly how it was supposed to be designed ... let alone a complex MMORPG like this! Therefore, people make mistakes, even ANet employees do, shocking: I know! They should just live up to them and _try_ to fix it when/if they have the resources available. EDIT: _and_ if it's technically possible of course ... again designing an MMORPG is complex!

 

> And I'm not saying they can't fix the DPS discrepancy. I'm saying they don't have to because of how they designed the game. I have no doubts that the there is a strong relationship between Anet's CONSCIOUS decision to design the game with low success thresholds and their approach to making class decisions and changes resulting in the class DPS differences. See, this is where you have it wrong. DPS differences aren't restricting anyone. It's who you decide to play with that's restricting you. I'm not restricted ... and neither is anyone else that plays with people that don't 'invent' class DPS as a barrier to choosing team members.

>

> The fundamental question here is why should Anet make unnecessary changes to adjust for these DPS discrepancies when they don't prevent game success? Why are players CHOOSING to take a path that makes this a problem when the game is designed so it's not an issue in the first place? The range of classes and builds that can be played in this game is massive compared to any other game I've ever played ... but players still decide to make choices where they feel restricted to a handful of optimized builds. That's NOT a problem with the mechanics of the game that Anet needs to fix. This is a player-made problem and the solution is player-made as well.

>

 

You do know that EVERY single RPG out there has that one 'given': that every single class is able to clear (endgame) content, right? I mean, that's literally the first rule of designing a class based RPG game. That every single class has a place in the game. It's what comes next that is actually interesting to discuss. And I actually don't know any game that's as restricting as Guild wars 2 is when it comes to PvE and it's most important pillar (to accomplish stuff): DPS. There's such huge gaps there, again I don't know any other game that does that. It's not for nothing that major gaming sites talk about GW2 having bad class balance, even with games like BDE still on the table. That's NOT good! It simply isnt.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> You do know that EVERY single RPG out there has that one 'given': that every single class is able to clear (endgame) content, right?

 

.. and GW2 isn't exceptional in that regard because people clear endgame content with every single class all the time. For the people that can't do that ... it's due to something THEY are doing, not something wrong with the game that Anet has to fix for them. From where I sit, that 'something' is how they try to team with people that tell them how to play. Don't do that, and the problem is addressed.

 

If Anet weren't happy with the game, they would change it. We know they do. The fact we have class DPS differences for 7 years indicates Anet doesn't think it's the big problem you want to believe it is. You think I'm making assumptions about what they want because they don't change that? OK ... from where I sit, it's a really good assumption to make because they aren't changing to be something else like you think they should be doing. I mean, we already established it's not hard to fix it ... so there is a reason they haven't done it. You aren't asking yourself why this difference exists. You just assume like everyone else it's some sort of mistake that needs to be fixed. Bad assumption.

[Sobx.1758]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> You do know that EVERY single RPG out there has that one 'given': that every single class is able to clear (endgame) content, right? I mean, that's literally the first rule of designing a class based RPG game. That every single class has a place in the game.

 

That's also true for gw2, not sure what you're trying to argue here, but it seems you don't understand the responses you keep reading. At least the ones from the earlier stages of the thread.

[ButcherofMalakir.4067]

> @"Noodle Ant.1605" said:

> Reaper/necro’s design has little do with the current disparity between classes.

>

> In case it slipped anyone’s mind, a number of the specs in question are carried by ‘attack of opportunity’ or similar interactions which function as intended in PvP, but translate poorly throughout PvE - quite literally making up the entire difference between reaper-level dps and the supposed 38k standard, due to their supposed difficulty to satisfy (but can be achieved in organised raid conditions). If it weren’t for these interactions, the playing field in terms of dps would be much more level, since other professions wouldn’t have felt the need to buffed to the same bloated state.

>

> But instead of raising the fact that these conditions were naturally difficult to satisfy, we decided to completely warp the concept of ‘realistic’ conditions in order to facilitate these broken interactions. Instead of asking for an appropriate fix, we decided to list these as proper, ‘this is how X ultimately performs’ benchmarks. And instead of questioning this decision, we accepted it as the new standard and disregarded opinions that argued otherwise.

>

> And so it shouldn’t really be a surprise that Anet decided to follow through with this design and standard. And reaper is left behind because it lacks such interaction.

>

> That being said, reaper is currently in a fairly ideal state if it were in a less volatile environment - an acceptable >30k dps, naturally hardy and reasonably self sufficient, has a variety of important tools e.g. decent amount cc, stab (all of which could’ve been another balance direction for other classes to achieve instead of randomly pushing dmg numbers around). It would be a shame to see reaper ruined by ‘that one janky interaction’ which plague the other professions, because *that’s* actually what’s missing between current reaper and 38k.

 

Most of the classes are balanced, necro is only one left behind. The reason is that it allows to ignore some mechanics and it is generaly safe. If you take defense on other classes then you could go way lower then necrodps and still be less tanky

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > You do know that EVERY single RPG out there has that one 'given': that every single class is able to clear (endgame) content, right?

>

> .. and GW2 isn't exceptional in that regard because people clear endgame content with every single class all the time. For the people that can't do that ... it's due to something THEY are doing, not something wrong with the game that Anet has to fix for them. From where I sit, that 'something' is how they try to team with people that tell them how to play. Don't do that, and the problem is addressed.

>

> If Anet weren't happy with the game, they would change it. We know they do. The fact we have class DPS differences for 7 years indicates Anet doesn't think it's the big problem you want to believe it is. You think I'm making assumptions about what they want because they don't change that? OK ... from where I sit, it's a really good assumption to make because they aren't changing to be something else like you think they should be doing. I mean, we already established it's not hard to fix it ...

Where do I say it's NOT HARD to fix that? That's exactly the opposite what I'm trying to say, really. I've got a feeling it's quite hard, actually. I even believe, this game might be so far off with all its spaghetti code from what the initial designers envisioned it to be right now, that I feel it might be needing quite a lot of resources in order to get this heavy truck back on the road again. And those resources I BELIEVE is the real problem here! If they have **two** full FTE's in the balancing area, it's already a lot, and I KNOW they are at the moment completely focused on PvP and WvW (which imo is not that bad to start with, btw). And I even got the feeling that has only been the case for a couple of months now! So with those 7 years with no real emphasises on balancing: - they were so HEAVILY focused on CONTENT, CONTENT, CONTENT (and monetarization of course)-, it's gonna be a real challenge to balance things out again. But they somewhat **have** to, cause when the new expansion is going to hit the shelves, they don't want all the big media write about the bad class balance in this game (which they HAVE been doing lately). Hence the HUGE PvP/WvW balance update as of late.

 

> so there is a reason they haven't done it. You aren't asking yourself why this difference exists. You just assume like everyone else it's some sort of mistake that needs to be fixed. Bad assumption.

Read above, I **believe** (not an assumption, just an opinion) that is the real reason!

 

Ow and fun fact, which might put things in perspective for you (and maybe others as well) on how heavy and complex this beast of a GW2 is: Guess on what game engine it's designed on? Hint: it dates back to 2005. Balancing a game like this is NOT easy! But they still should do it. Imo it's paramount, definitely now!

 

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > You do know that EVERY single RPG out there has that one 'given': that every single class is able to clear (endgame) content, right? I mean, that's literally the first rule of designing a class based RPG game. That every single class has a place in the game.

>

> That's also true for gw2, not sure what you're trying to argue here, but it seems you don't understand the responses you keep reading. At least the ones from the earlier stages of the thread.

 

Huh? Yea, that's what I'm saying. It's an argument that some of the people here use a LOT to try to silence any class balance related criticism here on these forums, while it's a complete blank. I'm pretty sure the game wouldnt even exist if that wasnt the case (as of any other RPG for that matter). So it's imo a complete non-argument in ANY balance related discussion!