buff > nerf

instead of focusing on nerfing whats most op I wish they would buff all the up stuff and make those builds viable. more variety means more players happy, which means more players playing for longer. also there wouldn't be that situation where a noob is running an off meta build and so your teams chances of losing goes up. its definitely tricky to do tho since weapons/ trait lines that are used in off meta builds can obviously be used in meta ones. this should be the main focus in balance tho imo.

Buffs are way more hype than nerfs. And I totally agree that match quality would be better if there were less noob trap builds that draw new players in, and then then perform like totally garbaj in PvP. Berserker is a fan favorite archetype, perfect example.

There's a whole ONLY NERFS squad and I get why they have that opinion - because innocent buffs turn into power creep very suddenly.

The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen. Also there are times it makes more sense to nerf rather than buff.

There is a whole school of thought devoted to this debate. I think it boils down to: Nerfs are generally healthier for the game but buffs FEEL better to players in the short term.

@Sigmoid.7082 said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

100% this. Actually right now I think we have nerfed about all of the outliers in PvP

Kinda of agree to a point. I find were at a point that everyone or most of the community got so used to dealing with powercreep and wanting it rightly nerfed down that they've some how came to the conclusion no matter what buffs are bad and to be avoided and that's wrong. If a build is fun,effective and has counter play and is seeing a lot of play because so that does not mean that its OP. Also if a build is less effective and not very enjoyable that does not mean that the viable and effective build should automatically be nerfed to the lv of the less effective/less fun build but that seems to be the new mentality and it's not as simple as that. What u end up with is a bunch of un fun,dumbed down classes/builds that see little play lowering class and build diversities. As much as I don't want the game to be in a state of powercreep there are some classes that do rightfully deserve some buffs to make them viable,effective and fun.

@Chaith.8256 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Availability of CC is a little too high at the moment and the distinction between CC used to set up damage (long duration, dodgable cast, prevents actions and movement) and CC used to interrupt (short duration, fast cast, might only prevent casting) could do with a clear up which many would consider nerfs.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

Nah they haven't nerfed even close to enough, though they need to nerf mechanics and not just damage and numbers.

@Quadox.7834 said:Nah they haven't nerfed even close to enough, though they need to nerf mechanics and not just damage and numbers.

This^ need to further dumb the game down, make classes less enjoyable to use and take away all the class mechanics that give classes their identities or nerf them till they they feel useless and unrewarding to play. At least this way we can decrease the already very low pvp population all while making pve even more boring. The game would be going in the proper direction if we did these things.

we still need many more nerfs happening before even considering buff anything.

@anduriell.6280 said:we still need many more nerfs happening before even considering buff anything.

core ele, engi, chrono druid and berserker are clearly underpowered

@Khalisto.5780 said:

@anduriell.6280 said:we still need many more nerfs happening before even considering buff anything.

Yeah and for the majority of the community that doesn't play those classes or specs that's right where they want them to be so...think about the last thread u were in where the topic was the class is underperforming, dropped out of high lv play etc. Players that don't play the class will say no no buffs aren't needed the class is balanced and others just need nerfed. 9/10 times the nerfing to a approximate state never comes or takes years. When other post pops up on the classes that those players play asking for nerfs the defend the class stating the nerfs will make their favorite classes underperform and cause them to drop out of high lv play so pls don't, its actually funny.

@apharma.3741 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Which needs a buffing up of anti-CC tools more than a nerfing of CC, perhaps.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

Well, unless the skill is so bad that it does need a 50% or 100% buff. Not that I can think of many (other than PI which wouldnt even be good with a 200% buff).

ofc they're both important and there are still a few nerfs that could happen, but I hope they start integrating buffs into balance patches so we don't have to live with watered down shells of classes. there are plenty of traits and weapons that could be better choices with some tweaks, ya just need that light touch so as not to make stuff power crept again. I certainly don't envy ppl in charge of balance in mmos lol. so many factors.

perhaps a way to buff without power creep is to slightly address a class/ build weakness. for example scepter ele, it lacks sustain and ele in general needs healing power to achieve this. obviously not going to happen for a power build, so there could be a few skills (ya there are so basically buff whats there) on the weapon that give sustain that don't need the stat (and obviously don't have high coefficients if any). another example is druid. I remember trevor boyer saying that its main drawback is that CA doesn't have any offensive pressure so you're effectively a punching bag for its duration which rings true. maybe give some more weakness/ slow/ blind/ cripple and another cc. put the pull on # 5 in the beginning? idk. CA recharge definitely needs to go back to 10 sec tho, in turn tone down the traits that proc from it. then theres chrono. without illusionary persona there isn't enough shatter power so increase clone gen. make a well trait that is strong.

in terms of core buffs its more tricky like I said. anet seems to be doing an alright job I guess, engis explosives rework was sweet altho explosive entrance is obviously out of whack. adding in a couple of little things at first seems like the best approach. by little things I mean buff mes domination line to add a 1 condi removed on interrupt. I like the idea of class unique buffs, short and powerful. eles stone heart being a 2-3 sec group buff, wars burst precision 1-2 sec group buff of 100% crit chance, rangs quick draw shared, all unstackable. its kind of lazy to just make things group buffs I admit but it would be effective lol. anyway those group buffs are just an idea the focus should be on small incremental buffs, not complete reworks altho some things do need them.

People do realize that an imbalanced amount of buffs OR nerfs can bring about power creep right?

Simplified example. You decide that cleanses are too available. You believe that players should put more thought behind when they cleanse. You nerf cleanses.You've just power crept every condition build in the game.

You decide that evades and blocks are too strong. You nerf them. You've just power crept burst oriented builds because they have an easier time baiting out your defensive options.

We've seen it happen. Anet's gamewide nerfs to damage have power crept Necro into unkillable tanks. Renegade's forgettable damage from life siphon looks OP. Burn Guard, which has been nerfed itself, has advanced from a noob killer build, to "new OP must be nerfed asap"

I'd argue that there are more clearly underperforming specs right now than there are clearly overperforming specs. Druid, Chrono and Warrior could all use some help. It's true that we could continue to nerf until these classes become playable again (which, I must remind everyone is still power creep) but do we really want every class to feel as clunky and unsatisfying as Druid or Chrono?

In this case, I'd say we've reached a point where we can focus on giving out some buffs. See how the meta shifts to accommodate Druid and Chrono, then if any major outliers arise, we can nerf accordingly.

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

The problem with these 50%-200% buffs is that they are often not addressing the actual problem. In your example PI the problem with PI was never the damage it was the availability and opportunity/cost of using it on DP with headshot, they addressed this by making PI so bad no-one would get any value from the trait. Non of this addressed that thief can headshot you whenever it is beneficial to do so and the counter of LoS ends up playing into the DP role of decap and go elsewhere.

This is something the game does a lot, they don't fix the cause of the problems they nerf the skill/trait so no-one will ever use it, then buff it a year or two later by an obscene amount but because they never fixed the problem it becomes oppressive again.

@apharma.3741 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

There wasnt really a problem with PI. It was weak before the nerf. Very weak. It was a "Solution" to a problem that didnt, and never existed.

This is something the game does a lot, they don't fix the cause of the problems they nerf the skill/trait so no-one will ever use it, then buff it a year or two later by an obscene amount but because they never fixed the problem it becomes oppressive again.

Again, there was no problem here to begin with. I also cant think of any examples of what youre describing happening.

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

This is something the game does a lot, they don't fix the cause of the problems they nerf the skill/trait so no-one will ever use it, then buff it a year or two later by an obscene amount but because they never fixed the problem it becomes oppressive again.

If you don't know why original PI was a problem then I guess you main thief or never played a class with a cast time on skills, it was a trait that enabled win/win/win conditions with DPMesmer phantasms, they nerfed most of them into the floor because of continuum split and chrono phantasma even after nerfing chrono phantasma. In fact these two traits have caused a lot of nerfs to everything on the class.Shattered Aegis nerfed into the floor because FB could spam aegis.Engineer turrets way back got pretty hefty nerfs to make sure no-one used them ever.

The balance team has a long history of doing this swing balance, ask anyone who's been playing the game since launch. There's even a term for ANet nerfing something to the point no-one will touch it https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Smiter%27s_Boon_(PvP)

@apharma.3741 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@apharma.3741 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:The two aren't mutually exclusive and both need to happen.

Otherwise Sigmoid is correct you need to do both at the same time but each should be done in moderation not 50%-100% nerfs/buffs wildly thrown around to try and make a bad skill used.

This is something the game does a lot, they don't fix the cause of the problems they nerf the skill/trait so no-one will ever use it, then buff it a year or two later by an obscene amount but because they never fixed the problem it becomes oppressive again.

I used to play thief, but dont anymore. And nah, Engineer has some looong cast times. I still dont think there is any problem with it, just like there isnt with powerblock or even Attack of Opportunity (well other than AoOs percentage being a bit too high). The thing is that, just like everything else, it comes with an opportunity cost. Any initiative spent on Headshot cant be used for, say, Shadowshot. And Shadowshot always did significantly more damage. So its a tradeoff. Thats fine.

Mesmer phantasms, they nerfed most of them into the floor because of continuum split and chrono phantasma even after nerfing chrono phantasma. In fact these two traits have caused a lot of nerfs to everything on the class.Shattered Aegis nerfed into the floor because FB could spam aegis.Engineer turrets way back got pretty hefty nerfs to make sure no-one used them ever.

I mean they got overnerfed, but they werent buffed back again.

The balance team has a long history of doing this swing balance, ask anyone who's been playing the game since launch. There's even a term for ANet nerfing something to the point no-one will touch it https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Smiter%27s_Boon_(PvP)

Yes overnerfing is a thing. But buffing back, Ive never heard of that becoming an issue.

Again this...When will you guys understand that HoT and PoF brought to the game such massive powercreep that even after latest big spank patch, there are still very strong outliners(sleepers) that need a nuke. Be happy that warriors hammer was hit with spank aswell, otherwise you would see some pepega cc-lock build.Some people complain that classes lost "identity" with these nerfs which is hilarious, because mechanics of some like chronomancer(double skills) or mirage(dodge while being cced) are simply bad design from the very start(just core+) and should be reworked from scratch.True "identity" elite speces that actually change how you play are: Scourge, Reaper, Holosmith, Weaver(to a degree), Druid(to a degree, should just replace pet and change skills f1-f4 to something else), Dragonhunter(to a degree) and that's about it, after all, most of e-speces are/were straight upgrades to core which was a mistake to begin with and it shouldn't happen.Sorry guys, but I can't take you seriously, there wouldn't be any kind of these topics if elite specializations were released as intended "possibility to play different" than "upgrade to core".Yes, there are still things that need nerfs.

@"TrollingDemigod.3041" said:Again this...When will you guys understand that HoT and PoF brought to the game such massive powercreep that even after latest big spank patch, there are still very strong outliners(sleepers) that need a nuke. Be happy that warriors hammer was hit with spank aswell, otherwise you would see some pepega cc-lock build.Some people complain that classes lost "identity" with these nerfs which is hilarious, because mechanics of some like chronomancer(double skills) or mirage(dodge while being cced) are simply bad design from the very start(just core+) and should be reworked from scratch.True "identity" elite speces that actually change how you play are: Scourge, Reaper, Holosmith, Weaver(to a degree), Druid(to a degree, should just replace pet and change skills f1-f4 to something else), Dragonhunter(to a degree) and that's about it, after all, most of e-speces are/were straight upgrades to core which was a mistake to begin with and it shouldn't happen.Sorry guys, but I can't take you seriously, there wouldn't be any kind of these topics if elite specializations were released as intended "possibility to play different" than "upgrade to core".Yes, there are still things that need nerfs.

I would add a few more to the list.

Firebrand changes virtues into tomesDaredevil changes how your dodges work. If running bounding dodger, you're encouraged to use them for damage, which creates a new dynamic of managing your endurance as well as your CDs for offensive pressure.DE changes steal into mark and gives different stolen skills all-together while adding the malice mechanic.Both Renegade and Herald give Rev a different legend to play with, intoducing entirely new playstyles and changing F skills.

I'd say, from a fun perspective, Anet did a good job on Elite specs. It's genuinely difficult to find a single class to main in this game because there are so many enjoyable options.

I understand why people miss the days of core, but games evolve, and developers must ask themselves if keeping things stagnant forever is truly what's best for the game. You can add power onto core specs and have it work well if you balance appropriately around that new standard of power. Conversely, you can shave power away and end up creating a balance nightmare, as we've witnessed with rampant CC following the stab and stunbreak nerfs, and Double Lich form in 2v2.

What I'd like to see is, not blanket nerfs, but rather more reworks to core traitlines. Similar to what we saw with the Explosives and the Corruption reworks. What these did is essentially turn these core traitlines into mini-elite specializations by introducing synergies and interesting skill interactions. Not only is this fun to play with, but it creates a real opportunity cost when dropping one of these lines in favor of an Elite spec.

It's no surpise that, following these reworks, Core engi and core rev began to see play. Both balanced and fun to play.

make dagger dagger great again on thief =P not the condition bull shit. and condition damage is to strong. all need is condition damage but for power I need power precision and ferocity ?

See how dota2 designers do it, biff everything, and keep adding new content

@Kuma.1503 said:

@"TrollingDemigod.3041" said:Again this...When will you guys understand that HoT and PoF brought to the game such massive powercreep that even after latest big spank patch, there are still very strong outliners(sleepers) that need a nuke. Be happy that warriors hammer was hit with spank aswell, otherwise you would see some pepega cc-lock build.Some people complain that classes lost "identity" with these nerfs which is hilarious, because mechanics of some like chronomancer(double skills) or mirage(dodge while being cced) are simply bad design from the very start(just core+) and should be reworked from scratch.True "identity" elite speces that actually change how you play are: Scourge, Reaper, Holosmith, Weaver(to a degree), Druid(to a degree, should just replace pet and change skills f1-f4 to something else), Dragonhunter(to a degree) and that's about it, after all, most of e-speces are/were straight upgrades to core which was a mistake to begin with and it shouldn't happen.Sorry guys, but I can't take you seriously, there wouldn't be any kind of these topics if elite specializations were released as intended "possibility to play different" than "upgrade to core".Yes, there are still things that need nerfs.

I haven't added Firebrand, Daredevil, DE or others, since they're straight-up upgrades aka core+. Firebrand giving additional 15 skills from F1-F3 skills is unbalanced and will be very difficult to bring it down to level of a Tempest/Druid support wise, forever. Thief elite speces are being extremes of either evasion or stealth which in long run is very unhealthy, same as Firebrand, it's core+ on steroids, it really doesn't change how you fight, you could go full stealth or full evasion with core as well, DE gives you a bit of a sniper vibe, but in the end it's unhealthy extreme core+ for the game in the long run. BTW. Tomes on Firebrand were previously elite skills to core which were reworked at some point.

You're correct and wrong at the same time. Reworks are fine and all as long they won't bring more powercreep, which in gw2 happened like phantasm rework(spam+), necros trait rework(which become a nuisaince after sleeper condi core popped up). scrapper(tankiness+), berserker(damage+, spammability+), etc.

Revenant is in kinda funny place though, since this class feels like it was created around Herald elite spec and not the other way, that's why you don't see many core speces, a rework to core was a mistake that brought more powercreep. Not really, both of elite speces don't change much how you play Revenant in the slightest, you pick between boon guardian+ or spirit ranger+ and that's all.

I dare to say that all traits/mechanics reworks that happened before big balance hit were unnecessary and unhealthy for the game that promote spammability.It's easier to fix/rework 1 elite spec with 1 traitline, 1 weapon, 1 mechanic than 5 traitlines with x weapons and their interactions between each other.

Another big problem is a-net never reverting stupid changes to it previous state and instead of doing that, they fix skills in a questionable way like Choking Gas, they need to fix their attitude as well, otherwise at this rate a lot of inflated skills will have 13596518 effects and 10min cd to use.

It's really fine to want something "woah" from elite speces that'll completely change your playstyle, but there is like 4-6 speces that truly does it, rest is just core+ on steroids.Don't forget, e-speces should be not only fun for you to play, but also for enemies to play against it.

@"Kuma.1503" said:I'd argue that there are more clearly underperforming specs right now than there are clearly overperforming specs. Druid, Chrono and Warrior could all use some help. It's true that we could continue to nerf until these classes become playable again (which, I must remind everyone is still power creep) but do we really want every class to feel as clunky and unsatisfying as Druid or Chrono?

In this case, I'd say we've reached a point where we can focus on giving out some buffs. See how the meta shifts to accommodate Druid and Chrono, then if any major outliers arise, we can nerf accordingly.Over/underperforming compared to what? The very top? You can't do balance if your baseline is constantly shifting; it invites power creep. If you balance against the top, then as soon as you buff a few things, the previous top becomes the middle and it repeats. That's how we got to the current state.

The better approach is to set a metric or example of what power level is considered appropriate for the game; i.e. what has the right level of damage/survival/CC? You'll want at least one example of each. Once you define that, you quantify everything else and compare it to your example. I'd argue that the ideal power level is pre-HoT or even pre-trait-rework. Based on that, we still need nerfs, but they need to be to specific traits/abilities and not across-the-board reductions.

It's also fallacious to think that everything can be useful at every role and that every trait or ability will be good. My ideal "good enough" is to revive the original core builds or at least the feel of them, as well as ensuring that each elite spec has a role.