When are the rest of elite spec trade offs? - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Professions

When are the rest of elite spec trade offs?

2>

Comments

  • Mini Crinny.6190Mini Crinny.6190 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zawn.9647 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @Zawn.9647 said:
    where are herald/renegade drawbacks?
    DH/firebrand?
    reaper?
    holo?
    tempest?

    Overloads bro, Staying in attunement to get the overload and if a tempest doesn't overload, are you even playing tempest? Core ele is designed to switch between attunements, not camp one for a long time

    Reaper shroud loses more life force than Core

    Holo loses elite toolbelt skill

    Dh and Firebrand are generally upgrades

    tempest just needs to cast an overload for a couple seconds then it can switch again... lol
    holo can use every weapon and utility...
    reaper shroud in stronger than core

    none of these seems a tradeoff compared to what soulbeast/druid/mirage and even Deadeye/Daredevil got

    if you gonna say "its still a tradeoff" then you can count DH and Firebrand as tradeoffs as well using that same genious logic :)

    You completely ignored my point, Core ele doesn't camp and sit in a attunement, it's constantly switching through them, Tempest Tradeoff IS overloads, waiting 5 seconds to use an overload and then 20 seconds of most likely not being able to go into the attunement unless you camp the attunement for 20 seconds (Which will never happen really) lots of times after overloading water and then switching to earth, you get hit straight after, you have to wait 20 seconds till you can go back into water and heal up again, that in itself is a tradeoff

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭

    @Turkeyspit.3965 said:
    I'll try to present my thoughts this way. Let's take a Power Guardian,

    Thanks for posting this. I think it's a really good detailed example of the main point I've been trying to hammer upthread: "since an elite spec is accessed by selecting a trait line, it's only competing for third best trait line for any build."

    With PvE builds especially, it's often just some damage bonuses or one tiny synergistic ability that make all the difference. Even hard nerfs to class mechanics may have no effect whatsoever if that mechanic wasn't already a central part of the rotation (e.g. you could take away Daredevil's Steal entirely and it would only affect the thief meta for maybe 3 raid bosses).

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Turkeyspit.3965 said:
    [...]

    Overally a solid post and I have absolutely no problem with trying to show anet in a similar way you've just did that some specs still deserve "tradeoffs".
    But to me it still seems you try to base a lot (but not all) of it on the case of simply "more dps" and as I wrote above, that's not exactly what "tradeoffs" are here for. It's more about opening (or in some cases forcing) a playstyle different than the core. Saying that an espec needs additional tradeoff because -for example- it has more dps than core misses the point.

    About soulbeast tradeoff, yes that is ONE of the possibilities and I think it was proposed a lot before, but the current iteration is still a solid (subjective, I know) tradeoff that targets "doing everything and more" (when compared to core) in competitive modes (pvp/wvw) as opposed to pve ones. Because in pve they don't exactly matter that much tbh. Like you said, there will be always "better option" to pick.

    @ASP.8093 said:
    With PvE builds especially, it's often just some damage bonuses or one tiny synergistic ability that make all the difference. Even hard nerfs to class mechanics may have no effect whatsoever if that mechanic wasn't already a central part of the rotation (e.g. you could take away Daredevil's Steal entirely and it would only affect the thief meta for maybe 3 raid bosses).

    I might easly be wrong, but I don't think tradeoffs target primarily pve content, so dps of each of the espec doesn't seem to be the main concern here.

  • I think espec uttility should work like revs legends stance you equipt espec in espec slot you can only use espec uttility on that espec

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 12, 2020

    @Laila Lightness.8742 said:
    I think espec uttility should work like revs legends stance you equipt espec in espec slot you can only use espec uttility on that espec

    That's terrible for build diversity and also would require to completely delete 1 utility skill from every elite spec entirely from the game.

    And it would likely also result in some e-specs being terrible at their intended role. Looking at engineer since this is my main: holosmith just has 1 damage oriented utility skill (laser disk), the other exceed skills are defensive (hard light arena, spectrum shield, photon wall).

    With this change, you are killing holosmith's damage in high end PvE and being a damage dealer is their intended role. We would no longer be able to use rifle turret and grenade kit for their damage spells.

    The change would hit engineer extremely hard. Engineer has no weapon swap and relies on kits as additional weapons, which you propose to take away for elite specs. Giving engineer elite specs weapon swap in exchange also doesn't work since engineer's weapon pool is way too small to give actual diversity. Our core class has just 3 weapon sets: rifle, pistol/shield, pistol/pistol. Just one of them works for power.

    This change should never happen, the classes are not designed to work in that way unlike revenant. Revenant has 2 utility sets available with their legends mechanic, others don't.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 15, 2020

    Frankly, we should all just accept that 'trade-offs' are just a cheap way that Anet attempts to balance e-specs .... so basically, don't expect trade offs for EVERY espec and don't expect trade offs to be based on comparisons of performance between different classes/especs either. It simply makes no sense to globally develop a trade off for every espec anyways, even if it's what Anet said they were going to do. I find that much of what happens around here is based on practical considerations, not theoretical ones on paper; like anyone really thinks Anet is going to trade off EVERY espec anyways? If they do, it's on the same timescale as 'performance balancing' lots of people are still waiting for ...

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap

  • Moradorin.6217Moradorin.6217 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 15, 2020

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Yasai.3549 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Holosmith loses the elite toolbelt skill. Reaper Shroud burns away twice as fast as regular shroud. Tempests get increased attunement cooldowns on overloads. Firebrand loses the instant-cast virtues for their books.

    Firebrand has no trade offs, just mechanic alterations.
    I don't know how anyone can see 15 extra spells as a tradeoff.

    The original virtues are instant-cast, while the books all have animations and are much slower.

    Make no mistake, these "tradeoffs" are not equal among all professions. Far from it. But they are still technically tradeoffs. Firebrands lose the original functions of the virtues.

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 15, 2020

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

  • Moradorin.6217Moradorin.6217 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2020

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

    Mirage doesnt get more dodge than other classes even in pve. It gets the same amount of endurance regen and 2 dodges that last the same duration, but they lose normal dodge in exchange for mirage cloak. (at one point mirage got vigor which gave it more dodges, this has not been the case for quite a while)

    What I was talking about about MC and tradeoffs relates to plans that CmC and the balance team have to make further changes to Mirage. You can see what Im talking about in another thread. Here

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2020

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

    Mirage doesnt get more dodge than other classes even in pve. It gets the same amount of endurance regen and 2 dodges that last the same duration, but they lose normal dodge in exchange for mirage cloak. (at one point mirage got vigor which gave it more dodges, this has not been the case for quite a while)

    What I was talking about about MC and tradeoffs relates to plans that CmC and the balance team have to make further changes to Mirage. You can see what Im talking about in another thread. Here

    Did you actually read what I wrote til the end?

    Mirage can potentially get more dodges than other classes. Mirage has deception utility skills, look what these skills are doing.
    False oasis, crystal sands and sand through glass leave behind a mirage mirror. Picking these up will grant you the mirage cloak, which is essentially your dodge mechanic.
    Sand through glass also additionally evades on cast on top of mentioned mirage mirror.
    Then there is illusionary ambush, which will grant you mirage cloak directly without the need to use the mirage mirror mechanic.

    Mesmer might have lost vigor on dodge, but they still have other sources for that boon.
    Like from the minor traits from dueling and mirage itself, one gives vigor when you score a critical hit, the other gives vigor for shattering.
    False oasis also provides vigor.

    Mirage definitely can chain more dodges than most other classes, especially in PvE. As I mentioned, daredevil might be an exception as another elite spec that is heavily focused on evading and dodging.

    Mirage had a trade off from the start by replacing the dodge with a new mechanic, that doesn't change even if mirage is getting more changes. It is actually not surprising, mirage's design was bound to cause trouble, I think many people were expecting that much. If they have to do more changes to mirage, then because of balancing reasons, but in general mirage already had a trade off installed. It just turned out that this trade off wasn't strong enough and mirage keeps to be a problem child.

  • Moradorin.6217Moradorin.6217 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 16, 2020

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

    Mirage doesnt get more dodge than other classes even in pve. It gets the same amount of endurance regen and 2 dodges that last the same duration, but they lose normal dodge in exchange for mirage cloak. (at one point mirage got vigor which gave it more dodges, this has not been the case for quite a while)

    What I was talking about about MC and tradeoffs relates to plans that CmC and the balance team have to make further changes to Mirage. You can see what Im talking about in another thread. Here

    Did you actually read what I wrote til the end?

    Mirage can potentially get more dodges than other classes. Mirage has deception utility skills, look what these skills are doing.
    False oasis, crystal sands and sand through glass leave behind a mirage mirror. Picking these up will grant you the mirage cloak, which is essentially your dodge mechanic.
    Sand through glass also additionally evades on cast on top of mentioned mirage mirror.
    Then there is illusionary ambush, which will grant you mirage cloak directly without the need to use the mirage mirror mechanic.

    Mesmer might have lost vigor on dodge, but they still have other sources for that boon.
    Like from the minor traits from dueling and mirage itself, one gives vigor when you score a critical hit, the other gives vigor for shattering.
    False oasis also provides vigor.

    Mirage definitely can chain more dodges than most other classes, especially in PvE. As I mentioned, daredevil might be an exception as another elite spec that is heavily focused on evading and dodging.
    Just by picking the deception skills, you get

    Mirage had a trade off from the start by replacing the dodge with a new mechanic, that doesn't change even if mirage is getting more changes. It is actually not surprising, mirage's design was bound to cause trouble, I think many people were expecting that much. If they have to do more changes to mirage, then because of balancing reasons, but in general mirage already had a trade off installed. It just turned out that this trade off wasn't strong enough and mirage keeps to be a problem child.

    Utility skill w MC n it is not gaining Mirage cloack on Dodge != At all. WHy? Because in order for MC to cause ambush dmage or anything other than an evade frame you ALSO have to have the ability to acually ambush attack which takes endurange and ONLY happens when you hit the dodge key it does NOT happen from utility skills that give MC. Having MC cloak just means u get an evade frame, and IF the MC was from hitting the dodge key you also get ambush attack. So no thats not more dodges. Only evade frames attached to utility skills that do little else beyond providing an evade frame. Thief also gets a utility bar full of evades potencially as does ranger and many others. So what. That isnt more dodges. Dodge is when you hit the dodge key, NOTHING ELSE.

    You should know better! Dodge = dodge, efade = evade dodge != evade its very similar. If you wana get technical then you need to talk about potetial evade frames per minute and you would learn mesmer gets average total evade frames.

    Also no one cares about pve balance beyond DPS and party/raid role. This has NOTHING to do with those things and everything to do with pvp/wvw balance NOT pve balance so you going back to pve to try and support you claim is pretty low. That is its not a valid argument.

  • Moradorin.6217Moradorin.6217 Member ✭✭✭

    Also the mirror mechanic is kitten, its too predictable. And no one uses most of those diversion utilities because they are pretty much all kitten. People are running signets for distortion (invuln) since they only get 1 dodge now. If diversions and mirror mechanics worked, and get mirage "more evades than anyone" mesmer would be owning thief still on side node and Mirage would be popular again, but we all know that isnt the case. I would say Im surprised you are even trying to assert Mirage is somehow good or even better than the rest, but Im so used to the delusional comments by the gw2 player base I now expect it. :o

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

    Mirage doesnt get more dodge than other classes even in pve. It gets the same amount of endurance regen and 2 dodges that last the same duration, but they lose normal dodge in exchange for mirage cloak. (at one point mirage got vigor which gave it more dodges, this has not been the case for quite a while)

    What I was talking about about MC and tradeoffs relates to plans that CmC and the balance team have to make further changes to Mirage. You can see what Im talking about in another thread. Here

    Did you actually read what I wrote til the end?

    Mirage can potentially get more dodges than other classes. Mirage has deception utility skills, look what these skills are doing.
    False oasis, crystal sands and sand through glass leave behind a mirage mirror. Picking these up will grant you the mirage cloak, which is essentially your dodge mechanic.
    Sand through glass also additionally evades on cast on top of mentioned mirage mirror.
    Then there is illusionary ambush, which will grant you mirage cloak directly without the need to use the mirage mirror mechanic.

    Mesmer might have lost vigor on dodge, but they still have other sources for that boon.
    Like from the minor traits from dueling and mirage itself, one gives vigor when you score a critical hit, the other gives vigor for shattering.
    False oasis also provides vigor.

    Mirage definitely can chain more dodges than most other classes, especially in PvE. As I mentioned, daredevil might be an exception as another elite spec that is heavily focused on evading and dodging.
    Just by picking the deception skills, you get

    Mirage had a trade off from the start by replacing the dodge with a new mechanic, that doesn't change even if mirage is getting more changes. It is actually not surprising, mirage's design was bound to cause trouble, I think many people were expecting that much. If they have to do more changes to mirage, then because of balancing reasons, but in general mirage already had a trade off installed. It just turned out that this trade off wasn't strong enough and mirage keeps to be a problem child.

    Utility skill w MC n it is not gaining Mirage cloack on Dodge != At all. WHy? Because in order for MC to cause ambush dmage or anything other than an evade frame you ALSO have to have the ability to acually ambush attack which takes endurange and ONLY happens when you hit the dodge key it does NOT happen from utility skills that give MC. Having MC cloak just means u get an evade frame, and IF the MC was from hitting the dodge key you also get ambush attack. So no thats not more dodges. Only evade frames attached to utility skills that do little else beyond providing an evade frame. Thief also gets a utility bar full of evades potencially as does ranger and many others. So what. That isnt more dodges. Dodge is when you hit the dodge key, NOTHING ELSE.

    Ambushes are available whenever you gain Mirage Cloak. It is not tied to specifically dodging but the mechanic of gaining Mirage Cloak and the evade frames it provides.

    The only reason why dodging provides the ability to use ambush skills is because the dodge roll ability is replaced by gaining Mirage Cloak.

    Though, splitting hairs on "Dodging" vs "Evade frames" seems like a terrible basis of arguments (For both of you...)

    Dodging is specifically using the dodge button and endurance. Its availability is only affected by Endurance gain (Vigor and certain traits can increase its regeneration rate, Weakness reduces its regeneration rate, some skills such as Ranger GS Auto Attack final hit or Deadeye's Sword stealth attack can also generate flat endurance while Sigils of Energy and Runes of Adventure generate percentage endurance)

    Evade frames is on a variety of skills, notably being most common for Mesmer, Thief and Ranger whom have evades built into their Sword skills as well as utilities that provide evasion frames (Such as Lightning Reflexes, Withdraw, Roll for Initiative, Sand Through Glass, Illusionary Ambush). With Mirage getting some additional potential evasion frames from utilizing their Mirrors (Though, they're clunky and awkward to utilize especially given how you use the actual skills that generate them. Even more so in PvP/WvW where enemy players can destroy them by walking through them)

    Cat: Meow.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Moradorin.6217 said:

    Sure, but by this exact logic that means that, for instance, Mirage had a trade off with Mirage cloak before the 1 dodge death-nail.
    (from another post)
    MC used to be 1s originally. It started out as 1 second because Mirage loses its ability to move away from danger when it dodges due to MC mechanic. In other words, MC has a build in trade off in which using MC as a replacement for dodge reduces mobility in the sense that normal dodge has a distance component (the roll distance) which in addition to providing 3/4 evade normal dodge also has the advantage of providing mobility (movement) away from combat range, AE ground rings, etc. However, MC is stuck in one place. It used to get super speed too to compensate for its lack of directional movement. People felt the longer evade frame was unfair so it was lowered to 3/4 (same as dodge) yet MC still lacks the movement component and also no longer gives super speed.

    Now they removed 1 entire dodge from Mirage's energy pool.

    Therefore, by the exact logic that you state gives FB a "trade-off" Mirage always has had the same type of trade off. That is Mirage gives up directional movement in its "dodge" being changed to a Mirage Cloak. Basically, Mirage loses being able to move out of danger as part of the combination of things that happen when it hits dodge key and gains the ability to ambush attack during its dodge, but loses the benefit of dodge roll being able to automatically move them away when they hit the dodge key.

    Sounds like the exact same thing.That is: lose the ability to dodge roll like core, but gain the ability to ambush attack.

    Only problem is we all know the "trade-off" for Mirage apparently didnt count cause they did the 1 dodge thing so in the end, although, I like your theory about "trade-offs", its either wrong or not being adopted correctly by he balance team. Either way its not working.

    The reduced endurance is not the trade off for mirage in Anet's sense.
    And this is pretty obvious if you look into it, the one dodge bar is just for PvP, but PvE is unaffected.
    Trade offs are supposed to be there in every game mode, not just one.

    You are right here, in Anet's sense mirage already had a trade off, since they were trading their "core dodge roll" for the mirage cloak.
    They didn't take 1 dodge bar away because mirage lacked a trade off, they took it away for balance reasons.

    It is basically the same situation like scrapper. Scrapper's trade off is that they are trading their elite spec toolbelt skill for the function gyro. They didn't give scrapper the vitality penalty because they lacked a trade off, they gave the vitality penalty for balancing reasons since the newly added mechanic to convert all power damage into barrier makes scrapper really tanky as long as they keep attacking. The vitality penalty was supposed to counterweight that a bit by making scrapper a little bit more vulnerable to burst, if you can put their barrier generation on stop (like with cc, for example).

    Mirage is the same thing. They thought that the offensive and defensive capabilities of mirage cloak was too much, hence why they took away a dodge bar to let mirage feel less "untouchable".
    And it also counterweights mirage's mechanics. If built for it, then a mirage can chain more dodges than core or other classes (maybe with the exception of daredevil), since they have the mirror mechanic, which also grants them additional mirage cloaks on top of their own dodge bar.

    Mirage doesnt get more dodge than other classes even in pve. It gets the same amount of endurance regen and 2 dodges that last the same duration, but they lose normal dodge in exchange for mirage cloak. (at one point mirage got vigor which gave it more dodges, this has not been the case for quite a while)

    What I was talking about about MC and tradeoffs relates to plans that CmC and the balance team have to make further changes to Mirage. You can see what Im talking about in another thread. Here

    Did you actually read what I wrote til the end?

    Mirage can potentially get more dodges than other classes. Mirage has deception utility skills, look what these skills are doing.
    False oasis, crystal sands and sand through glass leave behind a mirage mirror. Picking these up will grant you the mirage cloak, which is essentially your dodge mechanic.
    Sand through glass also additionally evades on cast on top of mentioned mirage mirror.
    Then there is illusionary ambush, which will grant you mirage cloak directly without the need to use the mirage mirror mechanic.

    Mesmer might have lost vigor on dodge, but they still have other sources for that boon.
    Like from the minor traits from dueling and mirage itself, one gives vigor when you score a critical hit, the other gives vigor for shattering.
    False oasis also provides vigor.

    Mirage definitely can chain more dodges than most other classes, especially in PvE. As I mentioned, daredevil might be an exception as another elite spec that is heavily focused on evading and dodging.
    Just by picking the deception skills, you get

    Mirage had a trade off from the start by replacing the dodge with a new mechanic, that doesn't change even if mirage is getting more changes. It is actually not surprising, mirage's design was bound to cause trouble, I think many people were expecting that much. If they have to do more changes to mirage, then because of balancing reasons, but in general mirage already had a trade off installed. It just turned out that this trade off wasn't strong enough and mirage keeps to be a problem child.

    Utility skill w MC n it is not gaining Mirage cloack on Dodge != At all. WHy? Because in order for MC to cause ambush dmage or anything other than an evade frame you ALSO have to have the ability to acually ambush attack which takes endurange and ONLY happens when you hit the dodge key it does NOT happen from utility skills that give MC. Having MC cloak just means u get an evade frame, and IF the MC was from hitting the dodge key you also get ambush attack. So no thats not more dodges. Only evade frames attached to utility skills that do little else beyond providing an evade frame. Thief also gets a utility bar full of evades potencially as does ranger and many others. So what. That isnt more dodges. Dodge is when you hit the dodge key, NOTHING ELSE.

    You should know better! Dodge = dodge, efade = evade dodge != evade its very similar. If you wana get technical then you need to talk about potetial evade frames per minute and you would learn mesmer gets average total evade frames.

    Also no one cares about pve balance beyond DPS and party/raid role. This has NOTHING to do with those things and everything to do with pvp/wvw balance NOT pve balance so you going back to pve to try and support you claim is pretty low. That is its not a valid argument.

    I just tested it: mirage mirrors all enable your ambush attacks for the duration of the evasion frames.
    To this point, I thought that you are a mesmer main, but maybe I have been mistaken?
    Anyway, I can confirm that mirage mirrors enable these ambushes and therefore work just like your dodge for all intents and purposes.

    So yes, these deception utility skills I mentioned all basically grant you an additional dodge which doesn't depend on your endurance bar.
    Which still means that mirage can generate more dodges than other classes, even in PvP. I just mentioned PvE since you don't lose the endurance in that environment, letting you chain even more dodges.

    But in total, you would be able to chain 5 dodges back to back with your endurance bar, false oasis, crystal sands, sand through glass and illusionary ambush.
    This is just counting the mirage cloaks (aka your actual dodge mechanic) which enables you to use ambush skills.
    Counting in evasion frames from other sources, you can up that number even further.

    There are not many classes which are able to match so many dodges in a row.
    Which has been my argument, mirage has the ability to dodge very often if they desire to, hence why they might have decreased the endurance bar to counterweight that a bit and not make mirage too overbearing at dodging attacks while attacking with ambushes.

  • Senqu.8054Senqu.8054 Member ✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    But in total, you would be able to chain 5 dodges back to back with your endurance bar, false oasis, crystal sands, sand through glass and illusionary ambush.
    This is just counting the mirage cloaks (aka your actual dodge mechanic) which enables you to use ambush skills.
    Counting in evasion frames from other sources, you can up that number even further.

    Ah yes, my heart cry’s while reading comments like this. This game is damned to die.

  • Leonidrex.5649Leonidrex.5649 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453
    If a "mirage player" doesnt know that gaining mirage cloak lets them ambush, they lose and and all credibility and they should be instantly ignored.
    If someone doesnt understand the very fundamental of the spec they play they should not even post about it.
    And pretending that mirage doesnt have a tradeoff since they can get mirage cloak from their utilities? isnt that literal meaning off trade off ?
    trading off core utilities to gain mirage utilities that let you ambush ? the actual definition of a tradeoff ?
    MC also covers much less ground then normal dodge, It wasnt that much of an issue when It gave superspeed but now with normal speed bonus you cant do some of the dodge-jumps if you are crippled/chilled.
    All in all this entire "trade-off" thing is stupid on fundamental level.
    First and formost they should make especs fun and balanced. If tradeoffs let you do that then awesome, but they dont.
    Soulbeast losing a pet didnt balance kitten, and made it worse to play.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 17, 2020

    @Leonidrex.5649

    Just to point that one out: I am not pretending that mirage doesn't have a trade off. If you look into what I said in this thread here, then I repeatedly state that mirage already had a trade off from the very start. Losing the baseline dodge mechanic for mirage cloak is a trade off in Anet's sense.

    I was pointing out that most likely Anet didn't take away 50 endurance in PvP as a trade off, since trade offs are supposed to be global (for all game modes, not just one).
    I was pointing out that I think they made this change to mirage to counterbalance the fact that mirage potentially could chain more dodges back to back if they take the skills associated with the mirage mirror mechanic.

    Just like the vitality penalty wasn't really supposed to be the trade off for scrapper, they already had a trade off by losing access to elite toolbelt skills for function gyro.
    They lost vitality to counterbalance the new barrier generation through strike damage, less vitality means that you can burst them down easier once their barrier generation stops (if they are cced or kited).

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The only elite specialisation without a tradeoff at the moment is tempest, and honestly, where elementalist is at the moment, I think it would be better to give the core elementalist something special rather than apply a tradeoff to tempest, although I guess they could do what they did with Weaver and put all attunements on a short cooldown after switching attunements (thus reinforcing that tempest is supposed to remain in a given attunement for a period rather than pulling off the oldschool core elementalist trick of switching attunement for one skill and then switching out).

    Everything else is quibbling over whether the thing that is given up matches what is gained. Yes, even with guardian. The irony is that, for all that people claim that core virtues aren't good enough compared to elite spec virtues (a problem which, if true, could be solved by buffing the core virtues, but that's never the proposal that is made because the people saying this are usually motivated by wanting to nerf guardian to death), guardian is actually one of the few professions where you can find a viable core guardian build in just about any mode (the only exception seems to be WvW roaming). There's even a core guardian build on Snowcrows, and they're not in the business of hosting pity builds for FTP players - literally the only other core build they have is boon thief.

    Speaking of...

    @Turkeyspit.3965 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Turkeyspit.3965 said:
    So stop heating up your respective brains trying to find the logic in the illogical or design in the random. Whatever you think about trade offs, if they are good, bad, or nonexistent, remains irrelevant, as we are all at the mercy and whims of the ANET dev team in their attempts to balance / toss darts at the balance board.

    Is it so random though?

    Implementing "tradeoffs" is just a way for the e-specs to not be direct upgrades over the core specs. And that doesn't mean they can't be stronger, because we know that's not exactly true -it just means that they can't be like core versions of the classes but obviously stronger because of the additional stats/mechanics/skills/whateverelse added.
    Due to the naming, it's mostly seen as some kind of "add 1, subtract 1" (hence "why does this espec gets this and this but only loses that?! NOT A TRADEOFF!"), but that's not the reason tradeoffs were added in the first palce.

    I'll try to present my thoughts this way. Let's take a Power Guardian, Greatsword + x/Focus, running Litany, Bane Signet, Sword of Justice, Stand your Ground, Feel My Wrath - pretty standard stuff for Fractals or just open world - , running Zeal + Radiance traitlines.

    A Core Guardian is able to run the Virtues traitline, which adds a ton of passively generated utility/boons to the player and allies.

    • Inspired Virtue
    • Virtue of Retribution (which synergizes with Radiance traitline for extra damage and crit chance; is refreshed by Renewed Justice)
    • Absolute Resolution
    • Indomitable Courage

    This is awesome stuff, and a benefit to the player and any group. Problem is, a Power Guardian is meant to do Pew Pew, and the only really DPS boost Virtues provides is Unscathed Contender, which if you don't have a support player to maintain your Aegis (like in a raid), you won't see much uptime on that damage boost except on a test golem, which is why Core Guards bench well.

    Contrast that with running Dragonhunter traitline instead of Virtues.

    • Zealot's Aggression (10% damage)
    • Pure of Sight (5% damage)
    • Big Game Hunter (15% damage)

    30% in damage modifiers, all easy to maintain, vs a 20% damage modifier that requires you to not ever get hit, though with better uptime on a 10% damage modifier for having higher Retaliation uptime.

    We're not talking about access to traps which are replaceable, or being able to use a longbow which is pretty much garbage. We're talking about the DH traitline alone just lets a Power Guardian do way more damage than running a third Core trait line, and that is why Dragonhunter is meta over Core in terms of Power DPS.

    You could make the argument that Core gives more utility at the cost of damage, but that utility is pretty minor compared to what you get from a support player, and the cost in damage is to significant to justify it.

    How it should work is that the damage output of both Core and DH would be comparable, and then it falls down to preferences in individual mechanics.
    eg:

    • I like AoE condition cleanse on Core F2 vs. I like the leap / escape of DH F2.
    • I like using Traps vs. using other Guard utilities.
    • I like using Longbow (lol)

    It will never be equal, and on a spreadsheet / benchmark, one will out damage the other, so min/maxers will always proclaim one to be 'meta'. But in real terms, and by which I mean, outside of very specific environments where Unscathed Contender actually works , Core Guardian isn't even in the ballpark with Dragonhunter in terms of Power DPS - they are outside serving hot dogs at the tailgate party. And to me that's a real shame, as I would much prefer to play Core Guardian over DH for content like Fractals, but it becomes a selfish choice.

    Looking at said Snowcrows build, it does seem that there are a few other damage boosts you're missing on Virtues:

    Power of the Virtuous gives you a 1% damage boost per boon on you. How much of a benefit this can grant depends on circumstances, but if you've got good supports, it's probably not unreasonable to consider it a consistent 10% or so. Inspiring Virtue gives you an extra 10% for a short duration after activating a Virtue - it's not going to be up all the time but, then, neither is the 15% from Big Game Hunter (I think it works out to 50% uptime without Alacrity, which goes to a little over 60% with Alacrity). It's long enough that you can time your burst skills with it, though. So, if you can maintain Aegis, you're getting a 30% bonus most of the time with bursts of 40%. Conversely, Dragonhunter gives you a 30% boost most of the time but it will drop to 15% for about six seconds out of every 16.

    Permeating Wrath can potentially add additional DPS through burning, but that's probably incidental.

    All things considered, I think what really makes Dragonhunter preferred (apart from the difficulty of not losing Aegis) isn't that Virtues doesn't offer much in the way of damage boosts trait-wise, it's that Dragonhunter offers more damage utilities in the form of traps and Spear of Justice.

  • Mini Crinny.6190Mini Crinny.6190 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @draxynnic.3719 said:
    The only elite specialisation without a tradeoff at the moment is tempest, and honestly, where elementalist is at the moment, I think it would be better to give the core elementalist something special rather than apply a tradeoff to tempest, although I guess they could do what they did with Weaver and put all attunements on a short cooldown after switching attunements (thus reinforcing that tempest is supposed to remain in a given attunement for a period rather than pulling off the oldschool core elementalist trick of switching attunement for one skill and then switching out).

    Already been explained but people just like to ignore it, Overloads are the tradeoff, it gives benefits if you manage to wait 5 seconds in attunement, get the full 5 second cast down and then you have to wait 20 seconds before using it again and probably being able to go into the attunement because Ele is always switching unless your using fresh air which would be some meme build in the competitive scene.

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @draxynnic.3719 said:
    The only elite specialisation without a tradeoff at the moment is tempest, and honestly, where elementalist is at the moment, I think it would be better to give the core elementalist something special rather than apply a tradeoff to tempest, although I guess they could do what they did with Weaver and put all attunements on a short cooldown after switching attunements (thus reinforcing that tempest is supposed to remain in a given attunement for a period rather than pulling off the oldschool core elementalist trick of switching attunement for one skill and then switching out).

    Already been explained but people just like to ignore it, Overloads are the tradeoff, it gives benefits if you manage to wait 5 seconds in attunement, get the full 5 second cast down and then you have to wait 20 seconds before using it again and probably being able to go into the attunement because Ele is always switching unless your using fresh air which would be some meme build in the competitive scene.

    People aren't ignoring it - it's not a tradeoff since you can always choose not to use it and play just like a regular elementalist. Doing so might not be the optimal way to play tempest, but you're never forced to overload, and therefore you're never forced to suffer the downside of longer cooldown after overloading.

    It's basically the same argument as with soulbeast - sure, merging means you suffer the downside of not having the pet out, but it wasn't considered a tradeoff because you could always choose just not to merge and play like a regular ranger... except that you have that extra option in the bank.

    All of the tradeoffs have the effect that there's something that the elite specialisation can't do that the core profession can (apart from simply having a third core specialisation). Every other elite specialisation has some tradeoff that means it can't behave exactly like core - warriors have their adrenaline mechanic changed, guardians have their virtues changed, revenants lose Ancient Echo, rangers have changes to their pet mechanics, thieves have changes to their steal mechanics, engineers lose their elite toolbelt skill, chronomancers have their shatters changed, mirages have their dodges changed, necromancers lose core Death Shroud, and weavers have a global cooldown on attunement swapping.

    Tempests are now the only elite specialisation that can still behave exactly like the core profession if they choose to. They have an additional option - overloading - and there's a drawback to using that additional option... but they've given nothing up just to have it. A tempest can always choose to behave exactly like a regular elementalist as long as it's advantageous to do so. Extended attunement recharge after overloading is a drawback to overloading, not a tradeoff to the tempest elite specialisation as a whole.

    Now, I don't think that tempests currently represent a balance issue that calls for a nerf in the form of a tradeoff (they're the dominant sPvP support build at the moment, but someone's always going to be - they don't have the "the enemy team has one and we don't, we're felined" effect that firebrand used to have). But they don't give anything up to have the option to overload, and having a drawback to using that ability is not a tradeoff in the sense being discussed here.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @draxynnic.3719 said:

    @Mini Crinny.6190 said:

    @draxynnic.3719 said:
    The only elite specialisation without a tradeoff at the moment is tempest, and honestly, where elementalist is at the moment, I think it would be better to give the core elementalist something special rather than apply a tradeoff to tempest, although I guess they could do what they did with Weaver and put all attunements on a short cooldown after switching attunements (thus reinforcing that tempest is supposed to remain in a given attunement for a period rather than pulling off the oldschool core elementalist trick of switching attunement for one skill and then switching out).

    Already been explained but people just like to ignore it, Overloads are the tradeoff, it gives benefits if you manage to wait 5 seconds in attunement, get the full 5 second cast down and then you have to wait 20 seconds before using it again and probably being able to go into the attunement because Ele is always switching unless your using fresh air which would be some meme build in the competitive scene.

    People aren't ignoring it - it's not a tradeoff since you can always choose not to use it and play just like a regular elementalist. Doing so might not be the optimal way to play tempest, but you're never forced to overload, and therefore you're never forced to suffer the downside of longer cooldown after overloading.

    It's basically the same argument as with soulbeast - sure, merging means you suffer the downside of not having the pet out, but it wasn't considered a tradeoff because you could always choose just not to merge and play like a regular ranger... except that you have that extra option in the bank.

    All of the tradeoffs have the effect that there's something that the elite specialisation can't do that the core profession can (apart from simply having a third core specialisation). Every other elite specialisation has some tradeoff that means it can't behave exactly like core - warriors have their adrenaline mechanic changed, guardians have their virtues changed, revenants lose Ancient Echo, rangers have changes to their pet mechanics, thieves have changes to their steal mechanics, engineers lose their elite toolbelt skill, chronomancers have their shatters changed, mirages have their dodges changed, necromancers lose core Death Shroud, and weavers have a global cooldown on attunement swapping.

    Tempests are now the only elite specialisation that can still behave exactly like the core profession if they choose to. They have an additional option - overloading - and there's a drawback to using that additional option... but they've given nothing up just to have it. A tempest can always choose to behave exactly like a regular elementalist as long as it's advantageous to do so. Extended attunement recharge after overloading is a drawback to overloading, not a tradeoff to the tempest elite specialisation as a whole.

    Now, I don't think that tempests currently represent a balance issue that calls for a nerf in the form of a tradeoff (they're the dominant sPvP support build at the moment, but someone's always going to be - they don't have the "the enemy team has one and we don't, we're felined" effect that firebrand used to have). But they don't give anything up to have the option to overload, and having a drawback to using that ability is not a tradeoff in the sense being discussed here.

    This guy here gets it.

    And I agree, tempest doesn't seem problematic to warrant a heavy handed nerf here which a trade off could most likely be.
    So giving elementalist something in core (like a new F5 ability) that tempest and weaver have no access to might probably be the better option here.

    Which also wouldn't be something new. They basically did the same already in the past by giving engineers an elite toolbelt skill and also ancient echo for revenants.

  • JTGuevara.9018JTGuevara.9018 Member ✭✭✭

    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

  • @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Or make spec as a class upgrade like nature magic will only let you use spirits and support pets on rangers, warrior in tactics could only use banners and so on
    Especs same rule

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Laila Lightness.8742 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Or make spec as a class upgrade like nature magic will only let you use spirits and support pets on rangers, warrior in tactics could only use banners and so on
    Especs same rule

    If you mean "only spirits and support pets", then I guess you mean that you have to slot spirits in your utility bar and nothing else?
    Which would basically kill all build diversity in this game.

  • Shiyo.3578Shiyo.3578 Member ✭✭✭✭

    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Shiyo.3578 said:
    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.
    Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

    And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.
    We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.
    Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

    I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 21, 2020

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 21, 2020

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

    Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

    What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

    Agreed that core ele should get something they can trade for tempest and weaver, they already did the same with engineer and revenant, so why not give ele something, too. And tempest is currently the only elite spec with no trade off in Anet's sense.

    I get where you are coming from with build diversity from the old system, but this goes both ways. Having the freedom to pick master traits in your grandmaster slot increased the available combinations, but that also means that it is way harder to balance as a system, since you have to consider way more possible combinations when making adjustments.

  • Shiyo.3578Shiyo.3578 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:
    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.
    Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

    And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.
    We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.
    Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

    I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

    That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 21, 2020

    @Shiyo.3578 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:
    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.
    Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

    And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.
    We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.
    Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

    I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

    That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

    It would actually be a fair complaint.

    Your statement has been:

    Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally become playable.

    And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

  • Ganathar.4956Ganathar.4956 Member ✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:
    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.
    Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

    And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.
    We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.
    Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

    I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

    That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

    It would actually be a fair complaint.

    Your statement has been:

    Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally become playable.

    And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

    Just make a set of elite specs for the core game as well. Core e-specs + Cantha e-specs would increase the number to 4 per profession. 4 e-specs would possibly double the amount of builds, whereas now the variety is kinda limited.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

    Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

    What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

    I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

    inb4 Spellbreaker reference on Attacker's Insight. Sure go for it, hit warrior some more while its down. The best thing is just to get rid of the stat penalties on the E-Specs that have them., but if two of them have to deal with that kitten then they all should.

    Agreed that core ele should get something they can trade for tempest and weaver, they already did the same with engineer and revenant, so why not give ele something, too. And tempest is currently the only elite spec with no trade off in Anet's sense.

    I don't think a 5th attunement would happen, although a core only Arcane attunement was a missed boat on their part at release. Perhaps an F5 that grants a single ability based on current attunement, that is independent of weapon choices? I guess a Glyph, whether it is boons/auras for the ele or a targeted spell is up for debate though.

    I get where you are coming from with build diversity from the old system, but this goes both ways. Having the freedom to pick master traits in your grandmaster slot increased the available combinations, but that also means that it is way harder to balance as a system, since you have to consider way more possible combinations when making adjustments.

    No, I totally get that it may have been harder to balance, and I am sure its why they moved to the current system, but how much has that really helped them maintain balance eh?

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

    Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

    What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

    I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

    I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While berserking, your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know, berserk) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @draxynnic.3719 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

    Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

    What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

    I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

    I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While berserking, your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know, berserk) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

    Except Beast mode gives stats, and many traits/skills that benefit the pet then benefit the Soulbeast so no losing a pet is not equivalent to a stat penalty, or even the lose of core F1 in their entirety.

    Eternal champion is meh for the other benefits it provides.

    I stand by my statement, either give every espec stat penalties, or remove the penalties altogether.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 21, 2020

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @draxynnic.3719 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:
    -shakes head-

    All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

    gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

    Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

    The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

    However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

    Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

    On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

    Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

    What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

    I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

    I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While berserking, your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know, berserk) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

    Except Beast mode gives stats, and many traits/skills that benefit the pet then benefit the Soulbeast so no losing a pet is not equivalent to a stat penalty, or even the lose of core F1 in their entirety.

    Eternal champion is meh for the other benefits it provides.

    I stand by my statement, either give every espec stat penalties, or remove the penalties altogether.

    Eh, it gains stats, but loses the pet by merging. It also permanently loses the incombat pet swap which affects its versatility. Classes have different mechanics, you'll never have 1:1 gained/lost mechanics/stats for their especs.

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭✭

    On a table, with so many other promises and ideas that will never come to fruition.

  • Mini Crinny.6190Mini Crinny.6190 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ganathar.4956 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Shiyo.3578 said:
    "Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.
    Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

    And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.
    We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.
    Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

    I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

    That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

    It would actually be a fair complaint.

    Your statement has been:

    Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

    If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally become playable.

    And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

    Just make a set of elite specs for the core game as well. Core e-specs + Cantha e-specs would increase the number to 4 per profession. 4 e-specs would possibly double the amount of builds, whereas now the variety is kinda limited.

    I highly doubt anet have the time or money to make 2 expansions, I do believe this next expansion will be their last since everything is becoming stale.